Football 2010-2011

[eFestivals]

I see that stating the obvious is contageous today.

while only you are afflicted by stating the stupid.

[The Nal]

[olliet101]

As much as we can say perhaps Arsenal and Wenger have been entitled to not spend as much as the clubs around them until making their debt manageable, this really is the make or break season for Arsenal because they could easily miss out on the Top Four and make massive losses as a result.

Chelsea, Man Utd and Man City will almost certainly be in the mix, if more funds are pumped into the transfer kitty, Liverpool could be a major force next season and Tottenham will be thereabouts as well, massive season for Arsenal.

[The Nal]

Chelsea, Man Utd and Man City will almost certainly be in the mix, if more funds are pumped into the transfer kitty, Liverpool could be a major force next season and Tottenham will be thereabouts as well, massive season for Arsenal.

[eFestivals]

.... and Tottenham will be thereabouts as well

not sure about that.

Spurs have started to make a loss (under 'Arry? Who'd have thought it ), and I'm again starting to doubt they'll have any Euro footie next season - Liverpool are starting to look good again for 5th place instead of Spurs. Those goals at the weekend have given Liverpool better goal difference (that's worth an extra point!), and Spurs have trouble scoring goals.

But even if Spurs do hang onto 5th, I think they're going to be a team on the way down again - they've missed the opportunity to get some of the very best players (in the one year they've been in the Chumps League), and they'll have trouble holding onto their better players .... which really only amounts to two of them anyway.

If they want to maintain themselves in the fight for the top 4, they'll have to spend VERY big - which I don't think the club will allow (I can't see them even re-investing what they get for who they sell) - or they'll have to get rid of 'Arry and start again with someone else who knows how to build a team without constant spending.

[ampersand]

Players on the post is one of those things which if you do you waste a player, and if you don't you wish you'd risked wasting a player.

While a player on the post hasn't worked for the instances you're thinking of, there's a huge number of examples where it has done.

[worm]

Which is a matter of opinion, not fact.

Edited April 26, 2011 by worm

[worm]

while only you are afflicted by stating the stupid.

Edited April 26, 2011 by worm

[worm]

Haven't got time for the bicthfest you so desperately crave though sweety. I know you've missed me this weekend, but you'll have to crack on without me.......

[eFestivals]

Why are you parroting what I say when it isn't relevant? Arrogance douced with stupidity? Lack of intellect?

No, just a parody of your own stupidity. Why did you think it was anything else? Perhaps your own lack of intellect?

It's a fact that the Sunderland fans think that, just as what you stated as fact is only what you think.

it's a fact that I think what I think, just as it's a fact that S'land fans think what they think. And the fact of both our thinkings is only opinions.

However, one of those opinions is based solidly on a fair appraisal of the S'land squad, and one isn't.

The one that isn't is the one where fans of a team with a record spend of just £13M and where the majority of the rest of the squad is worth less than half that amount think that they have a squad of players in the £12M+ bracket.

The fact is that Sunderland are going to finish the season with around the same number of points as the other teams with squads of similar value. That's no coincidence.

They know what they're talking about, you spout ignorant shite, as you prove in your rationale here.

yeah, that's right. A squad with an average player value of around perhaps £6M is always going to hugely out-perform those teams with similar values - or else the manager is shit, not the squad.

The one spouting ignorant shite is the person who wrongly thinks they're worth hugely more and under-performing.

[eFestivals]

Oh, you've more than cornered that market Chief.

You give even the most insecure of people confidence when you get going.

PMSL ....

yeah, the smart are the people that don't even know the most basic rules of the game, and the stupid are those that do.

And yeah, the smart are the people that hugely over-value their squad, while the stupid are those that don't.

And yeah, the smart are the people that confidently predicted a finish of 6th, and the stupid are those that predicted things just about right.

[brighteyes]

I hate being the player on the post, you look like a right tit when it goes in past you. However, it's a good place to put people who are shit at heading, short wingers and the like.

What the f**k is a wing-nut?

[ampersand]

I hate being the player on the post, you look like a right tit when it goes in past you. However, it's a good place to put people who are shit at heading, short wingers and the like.

What the f**k is a wing-nut?

[eFestivals]

see, if nasri is shite at heading, why not have him round the d, ready to spring a counter attack. he's not short of pace last i checked.

it's no good just putting the short guy on the post. surely if you've to be on the post you need shit hot reactions as the only way you're stopping it going in is with a very quick header or quick reactions with the leg. obviously it can hit you on the torso, but it's not much use that happening if you're going to allow the attacker to set up his header like sturridge was allowed to.

the thing is, is that poor defending or good attacking? That's a question that can be looked at either way, and both answers are right to some extent.

But when the attacker is Sturridge, who's one of the hottest goal-scorers of the moment, then I reckon it's fair to give him the greater credit for his reactions than to heap the blame on a defender.

And in the particular circumstances of that goal, there's not many defenders of any standard who would have stopped it unless his header had come right at the defender (which it didn't).

[eFestivals]

What the f**k is a wing-nut?

someone who'll wing it on any subject, and pretend to the nth-degree that he knows what he's talking about even when it's 100% clear that he doesn't have the first idea.

Now, somethings are subjective and don't have a definitive right or wrong, but some things - such as many of the rules of football - are beyond dispute and beyond interpretation.

So when wing-nut has posted that a foul is not a foul unless there's intent to foul, and then bangs on about only his opinion of football is good and resorts to attempts at ridicule to shout down fair-but-opposing views, then you know that that person is beyond laughable.

[ampersand]

the thing is, is that poor defending or good attacking? That's a question that can be looked at either way, and both answers are right to some extent.

But when the attacker is Sturridge, who's one of the hottest goal-scorers of the moment, then I reckon it's fair to give him the greater credit for his reactions than to heap the blame on a defender.

And in the particular circumstances of that goal, there's not many defenders of any standard who would have stopped it unless his header had come right at the defender (which it didn't).

[llcoolphil]

someone who'll wing it on any subject, and pretend to the nth-degree that he knows what he's talking about even when it's 100% clear that he doesn't have the first idea.

Now, somethings are subjective and don't have a definitive right or wrong, but some things - such as many of the rules of football - are beyond dispute and beyond interpretation.

So when wing-nut has posted that a foul is not a foul unless there's intent to foul, and then bangs on about only his opinion of football is good and resorts to attempts at ridicule to shout down fair-but-opposing views, then you know that that person is beyond laughable.

[The Nal]

Christ Shalke were awful. Roll on Wembley.

[strummer77]

The fact is that Sunderland fans calling for his head do not believe that they're average players. They're right as well. I don't know anyone with knowledge of them who'd say that they were.

The rational counter to this, rather than the tabliod bullshit that you like to post, is that they've been dessimated by injury. Again, correct. I haven't come across a more injury prone team in my life, and that's not intended as hyperbole. I mean it quite literally.

Edited April 27, 2011 by strummer77

[Cardboard Box City]

Christ Shalke were awful. Roll on Wembley.

[strummer77]

Still don't think United would turn over either of the Spanish sides. I said when the draw was made that you could toss a coin between Schalke and Inter and whoever won the English quarter would be in the final - Inter's fall from last season is f**king insane - and the other half was always going to be El Clasico in the semi.

It'll be intriguing tomorrow night if nothing else.

[worm]

No, just a parody of your own stupidity. Why did you think it was anything else? Perhaps your own lack of intellect?

[worm]

PMSL ....

yeah, the smart are the people that don't even know the most basic rules of the game, and the stupid are those that do.

And yeah, the smart are the people that hugely over-value their squad, while the stupid are those that don't.

And yeah, the smart are the people that confidently predicted a finish of 6th, and the stupid are those that predicted things just about right.

[worm]

What the f**k is a wing-nut?

[worm]

Now, somethings are subjective and don't have a definitive right or wrong, but some things - such as many of the rules of football - are beyond dispute and beyond interpretation.

Edited April 27, 2011 by worm