Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Dream » Fri Apr 20, 2012 5:07 pm UTC

Garm wrote: No one seems to want to talk about the fact that Barca's center backs were all confused on Drogba's goal (at least none that I've seen) and how that was a saveable ball (didn't think that Valdes transitioned across the face of goal very well and Drogba almost muffed that shot.

No one's really questioning that it was a good goal. Yes the defence was a bit confused, but that was because Chelsea's break was so decisive. Yes, Drogba should really have broken the back of the net, but he did enough, and that's fine.

Amie wrote:I don't have a problem with being critical of a game in all fairness but defending a team when they do the exact same things you're accusing the other team of? That I have a problem with.

No, you have a problem distinguishing fouling, which is part of the game, from deliberate cheating, which isn't. Or are you going to suggest that Chelsea didn't foul anyone? Both teams committed fouls, as all teams do. One team stopped the game regularly to allow themselves catch up. The other didn't.

Somehow, when Chelsea win Barca are always the better team.

That's because they are. Barca are better than Arsenal too, dodgy sending off in Champions league matches notwithstanding. I can admit that, but you can't admit it about Chelsea.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Amie
Posts: 910
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:34 am UTC
Location: in Somnia.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Amie » Fri Apr 20, 2012 5:39 pm UTC

Um, I did say Barca are the current best in the world. I have a problem with calling them the better team in reference to one game as a stand out.

Also, yes my point as well is that all teams commit fouls. Thank you. Deliberate cheating is what I'd call two consecutive handballs and acting hit to have a player sent off for a red. I made that distinction when I said those things.

You're stating that I said some things that I never did say. Like me saying Barca weren't better "for" playing the passing game. I didn't say that. I merely said that it's not always enough. I never said that them playing like they normally do is not good.

Garm: Yes possession is extremely important and that's WHY it was so vital for everyone in Chelsea to stick to their gameplan. Whether it will work again or not I don't know but I am not concerned with that right now. The point that was to be made is made... it's okay to prefer a particular style of play over another. It's not okay to state as a universal truth that one is inarguably better than the other. That's a bit distasteful. I know Barca are better but I don't just say that because of that one aspect of their game. I'm sure nobody else does either. So why call them the better team in a particular match when they were quite "shockingly" defeated? Yes, our playing style was a risk but it was a calculated risk. No Chelsea are definitely not as pacey as Barca and that's exactly why the only way to win games is taking such calculated risks. That's why I am not calling Barca the better team in this one game.
Summer is miles and miles away, and no one would ask me to stay.
And I, should contemplate this change... to ease the pain.
And I, should step out of the rain... turn away.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Dream » Fri Apr 20, 2012 5:53 pm UTC

Amie wrote:Deliberate cheating is what I'd call two consecutive handballs and acting hit to have a player sent off for a red.

I haven't seen reference to that anywhere. Can you like to a video?
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Amie
Posts: 910
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:34 am UTC
Location: in Somnia.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Amie » Fri Apr 20, 2012 6:27 pm UTC

Sure, here you go. Ignore the text in the video and stuff :/ It pisses me off too.
Summer is miles and miles away, and no one would ask me to stay.
And I, should contemplate this change... to ease the pain.
And I, should step out of the rain... turn away.

User avatar
Amie
Posts: 910
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:34 am UTC
Location: in Somnia.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Amie » Fri Apr 20, 2012 6:28 pm UTC

Sure, here you go. Ignore the text in the video and stuff :/ It pisses me off too.
Summer is miles and miles away, and no one would ask me to stay.
And I, should contemplate this change... to ease the pain.
And I, should step out of the rain... turn away.

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Heisenberg » Fri Apr 20, 2012 6:36 pm UTC

Garm wrote:Having now watched highlights I agree fully with Dream. A total of 6 inches of difference (about 3 inches lower and 3 inches to the side) and we'd be talking about how Chelsea got dominated by Barca.

I agree that if Barca had scored twice, they would've won. But since they spent over an hour not scoring, I can't see how anyone would say they were the better side. As far as the last shot, 3 inches to the side and it would've hit the goalkeeper's hands instead of the far post, so that's not even a good 'what if?'

If it wasn't for Cole they would've scored. If not for the keeper they would've scored more. If their shots were better... if, if, if. If Barca had played better than Chelsea, they would've won the game. They didn't.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Dream » Fri Apr 20, 2012 6:38 pm UTC

Amie wrote:Sure, here you go. Ignore the text in the video and stuff :/ It pisses me off too.
I'd thought you were referring to two handballs and an attempt to buy a red in the Chelsea match, sorry.

Heisenberg wrote:If Barca had played better than Chelsea, they would've won the game.

That is a hilariously naive view of sport.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Heisenberg » Fri Apr 20, 2012 6:45 pm UTC

It's an incredibly simple sport. Get the ball into the net. Barca didn't do that. At all. How the hell are they the better side if they can't score a single goal?

User avatar
Amie
Posts: 910
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:34 am UTC
Location: in Somnia.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Amie » Fri Apr 20, 2012 6:48 pm UTC

I think Heisenberg was making a funneh to mean to say that what everyone has been saying sounds like "If Barca had played better they'd have won".
Summer is miles and miles away, and no one would ask me to stay.
And I, should contemplate this change... to ease the pain.
And I, should step out of the rain... turn away.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Dream » Fri Apr 20, 2012 7:46 pm UTC

I think the post above yours says he's dead serious. And wrong too.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Heisenberg » Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:07 pm UTC

If the game was "Who can possess the ball the longest?" I wouldn't watch. Goals are how you win, and how Barca lost.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Dream » Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:48 pm UTC

The game is "who's better at football", and goals are how you keep score. If the game was "who's better at scoring goals" then only teams with fantastic striking talent would ever win. The fact is, as Aime will doubtless agree, that Drogba's goal was important, but Chelsea's defence was more so. You win matches by winning matches. Scoring goals is only one small part of that.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Jesse
Vocal Terrorist
Posts: 8635
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:33 pm UTC
Location: Basingstoke, England.
Contact:

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Jesse » Fri Apr 20, 2012 9:21 pm UTC

Right, it's also important to not let your opponents score goals. The mechanic known as 'scoring more goals than your opponents do'.

User avatar
Garm
Posts: 2241
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:29 pm UTC
Location: Usually at work. Otherwise, Longmont, CO.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Garm » Fri Apr 20, 2012 9:41 pm UTC

We've now devolved into straight up sportscaster talk. Next to post in this thread: Tim McCarver or John Madden. :D
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
- JFK

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Dream » Fri Apr 20, 2012 10:00 pm UTC

Jesse wrote:'scoring more goals than your opponents do'.

Which is not a function of scoring goals, but one of how the entire team plays the whole game. And once you complicate things beyond kicking the ball across that line under the posts, it becomes less about how good you are at scoring, and more about how good you are at playing the entire game. To argue that Barcelona's absolutely tiny inaccuracies in their shooting that night somehow negates every other thing about their performance is to misunderstand football.

The fact is that Chelsea played a game that required Barcelona to miss their shots or they'd have lost by a very wide margin, something Chelsea had absolutely zero control over. Barcelona played a game that gave Chelsea (officially, not my opinion) just a single effort on target in 95 minutes. That Barca didn't manage to finish well does not make Chelsea's game better. The better game was the one that gave more chances, more opportunity to score, and more control of the play.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Negated
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 6:31 am UTC

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Negated » Fri Apr 20, 2012 11:41 pm UTC

Dream wrote:The better game was the one that gave more chances, more opportunity to score, and more control of the play.

That's a very narrow definition that favours possession football over every other kind of play style. While it is fair to say Chelsea did not play better than Barca as they had luck on their side, this is not a true statement in a general sense. The Inter-Barca tie in 2010 CL was the classic example. But even as recent as last week, Levante denied Barca a clear sight on goal for most of the game. Only a moment of brilliance from Messi and a dubious penalty saved Barcelona the three points. I find it hard to justify that Barca outplayed Levante or 2010's Inter, even if they had lion's share of possession and far more chances on goal.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Dream » Sat Apr 21, 2012 12:22 am UTC

Negated wrote:that favours possession football over every other kind of play style.

No, not at all. A defensive style can equally satisfy, but it has to keep the opposition from having more chances. No team can guarantee it will score whenever it gets the chance. But maximising the available opportunities is necessary. They need only be relatively maximised, perhaps by defending all day and attempting on the break. But they do need to be maximised. Otherwise the plan involves a large dose of "and we just pray they'll blast them all over the bar". A plan that says "we'll have one on target and they'll have eight" is not a good plan. An execution that delivers that is not a good match, even if it does so happen that not one of the eight actually go in.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Amie
Posts: 910
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:34 am UTC
Location: in Somnia.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Amie » Sat Apr 21, 2012 5:40 am UTC

They had six and we defended all. Even if the two shots that hit the crossbar and the sidepost would have been further into the net, Cech had it covered for the first and Ashley Cole for the second. Them having more shots on target is an extension of them having more possession which is why I also think that you're essentially (perhaps inadvertently) saying one style of football is better than the other. Yes, it's technically possible to create tons of chances in the 30% of possession time that you have but it doesn't work that way. They had the ball more and consequently more shots on target. No surprises there.

Barca are the most difficult team to play against right now and winning against them requires carefully considered, sometimes unconventional styles of play. Like I said before, maybe some people will call that a gamble but you can't win against a team as good as Barcelona without that. That Barca didn't finish well is a result of us thwarting them.
Summer is miles and miles away, and no one would ask me to stay.
And I, should contemplate this change... to ease the pain.
And I, should step out of the rain... turn away.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Sat Apr 21, 2012 5:56 am UTC

Amie wrote:Them having more shots on target is an extension of them having more possession which is why I also think that you're essentially (perhaps inadvertently) saying one style of football is better than the other.

Yes. A kind of football that, within the boundaries of the Laws of the Game and of sportsmanship, causes you to take more shots on target and, in the long run, score more goals, is a better kind of football. Football is, for lack of a better term, a goal-directed activity, and good, skilled, successful football is the kind that most reliably reaches its goal.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
Amie
Posts: 910
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:34 am UTC
Location: in Somnia.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Amie » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:08 am UTC

Most of the EPL (and I) disagree with you. Goal directed, yes. But hogging the ball and retaining possession alone doesn't always win you games. Chances to score aren't successful all the time if the opponent's defense is solid. If the opponent manages to score using the chances (which may well be few) that they get and defend well, no matter how much possession you have or no matter how much you try to score, you don't. Because the defense is always on top of you. A defensive style of play is just as good as possession style, if not better.
Summer is miles and miles away, and no one would ask me to stay.
And I, should contemplate this change... to ease the pain.
And I, should step out of the rain... turn away.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:11 am UTC

Amie wrote:But hogging the ball and retaining possession alone doesn't always win you games.

No. But shots on target generally do, so long as your strikers are capable of hitting the ball with force, not directly at the keeper, at least some of the time. You were explicitly talking about strategies that get you more shots on target, not just strategies that get you a lot of possession.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
Amie
Posts: 910
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:34 am UTC
Location: in Somnia.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Amie » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:21 am UTC

No I was saying that them having more shots on target was a result of them having more possession. Also, they did hit the ball hard a lot of the time but it still didn't go in because, defense.
Summer is miles and miles away, and no one would ask me to stay.
And I, should contemplate this change... to ease the pain.
And I, should step out of the rain... turn away.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:25 am UTC

Amie wrote:No I was saying that them having more shots on target was a result of them having more possession.

Right. The style of football which they play leads to their taking more shots on target. This tends to lead to their scoring more goals.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
Amie
Posts: 910
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:34 am UTC
Location: in Somnia.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Amie » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:32 am UTC

No, it doesn't necessarily generally lead a team to have that many shots on target because normally taking possession from the attacking team is also instrumental in winning a game. Chelsea did try that but this was Barca. The toughest team that you can go up against. And this was the only way to beat them. Also, my point is that they can only score if they can get past the last man in the line of defense which they obviously couldn't do. We didn't dominate possession and only had the one shot on target. Their defense was terrible. That's why they lost.
Summer is miles and miles away, and no one would ask me to stay.
And I, should contemplate this change... to ease the pain.
And I, should step out of the rain... turn away.

User avatar
Garm
Posts: 2241
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:29 pm UTC
Location: Usually at work. Otherwise, Longmont, CO.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Garm » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:34 am UTC

Amie wrote:Most of the EPL Serie A (and I) disagree with you.


FTFY :D

You're fooling yourself if you thought that Cech could have covered the chip that hit the crossbar. He was way off his line... which is what forced the chip in the first place. So he did prevent the goal by charging hard and relying on the inaccurate nature of a chip shot to save him. And save him it did. So really, he did his job. But he wasn't going to save the ball if it didn't hit the bar.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
- JFK

User avatar
Amie
Posts: 910
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:34 am UTC
Location: in Somnia.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Amie » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:44 am UTC

He was right under the ball... well on the line :/ I'm talking about the first one here, not the second.

EDIT: Oh crap wait, I was thinking of a different time in the match where he was under the ball when it went over the crossbar. Garm, you're right about the chip off the crossbar shot... sorry, I was thinking of a different one.

EDIT2: Also, here's some lolwut from 'Arry Redknapp:

1: "I want to see an English team win it anyway and I think they can do it."
2. "...I still couldn't see them winning it."
Last edited by Amie on Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:15 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Summer is miles and miles away, and no one would ask me to stay.
And I, should contemplate this change... to ease the pain.
And I, should step out of the rain... turn away.

User avatar
Garm
Posts: 2241
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:29 pm UTC
Location: Usually at work. Otherwise, Longmont, CO.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Garm » Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:13 am UTC

Amie wrote:He was right under the ball... well on the line :/ I'm talking about the first one here, not the second.

EDIT: Oh crap wait, I was thinking of a different time in the match where he was under the ball when it went over the crossbar. Garm, you're right about the chip off the crossbar shot... sorry, I was thinking of a different one.


Well like I said, he forced that chip so he gets some credit for the ball coming off the bar. If he doesn't come rocketing off his line the ball probably ends up in the back of the net.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
- JFK

User avatar
Amie
Posts: 910
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:34 am UTC
Location: in Somnia.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Amie » Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:16 am UTC

Yep.

I'm still laughing over Redknapp lols.
Summer is miles and miles away, and no one would ask me to stay.
And I, should contemplate this change... to ease the pain.
And I, should step out of the rain... turn away.

User avatar
charliepanayi
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 7:26 pm UTC
Location: London, UK

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby charliepanayi » Sat Apr 21, 2012 9:11 am UTC

Dreading today's game, we've really put ourselves in a difficult position with the results against QPR and Wigan.
"Excuse me Miss, do you like pineapple?"

"I don't want to achieve immortality through my work, I want to achieve it through not dying"

User avatar
Amie
Posts: 910
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:34 am UTC
Location: in Somnia.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Amie » Sat Apr 21, 2012 10:04 am UTC

Dreading it just as much as you. Less than a couple of hours to go. Hardly ever do I get to watch a game this early over here.
Summer is miles and miles away, and no one would ask me to stay.
And I, should contemplate this change... to ease the pain.
And I, should step out of the rain... turn away.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Dream » Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:35 pm UTC

The draw probably suits Arsenal better than Chelsea. We now have a four point buffer in third, which Spurs can't over take this weekend. Chelsea on the other hand need two teams above them to lose if they want fourth, and they have to win. Not easy.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Amie
Posts: 910
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:34 am UTC
Location: in Somnia.

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Amie » Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:50 pm UTC

Dream wrote:The draw probably suits Arsenal better than Chelsea. We now have a four point buffer in third, which Spurs can't over take this weekend. Chelsea on the other hand need two teams above them to lose if they want fourth, and they have to win. Not easy.

Correct. Top four is a long shot for us apparently.
Summer is miles and miles away, and no one would ask me to stay.
And I, should contemplate this change... to ease the pain.
And I, should step out of the rain... turn away.

User avatar
raike
Posts: 236
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 10:25 pm UTC

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby raike » Sat Apr 21, 2012 3:22 pm UTC

That was a very forgettable game (Arsenal-Chelsea)...
"When your work speaks for itself, don't interrupt." - H.J. Kaiser
رات دن گردش میں ہیں سات آسماں
ہو رہیگا کچھ نہ کچھ گھبرائیں کیا
(غالب)

User avatar
charliepanayi
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 7:26 pm UTC
Location: London, UK

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby charliepanayi » Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:09 pm UTC

As they say, a good compromise leaves nobody happy.

We're running on fumes at the moment, especially poor Van Persie who has done so much this season. I think we might still sneak third, especially with Newcastle still to play Man City and Chelsea, but it's going to be very dicey and anything but a win at the thugs, I mean Stoke, next weekend will not be good news.

At least Spurs have completely fallen apart.
"Excuse me Miss, do you like pineapple?"

"I don't want to achieve immortality through my work, I want to achieve it through not dying"

User avatar
raike
Posts: 236
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 10:25 pm UTC

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby raike » Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:44 pm UTC

charliepanayi wrote:As they say, a good compromise leaves nobody happy.

We're running on fumes at the moment, especially poor Van Persie who has done so much this season. I think we might still sneak third, especially with Newcastle still to play Man City and Chelsea, but it's going to be very dicey and anything but a win at the thugs, I mean Stoke, next weekend will not be good news.

At least Spurs have completely fallen apart.


I do wonder what's going on with the Spurs... I first thought that it was the whole 'Redknapp for England' thing that sparked a decline in morale and form, but it's gone on for a good while now...
And QPR really do have quite a discipline problem, I must say (though today's second yellow for Taarabt may have been a bit unjustified)
"When your work speaks for itself, don't interrupt." - H.J. Kaiser
رات دن گردش میں ہیں سات آسماں
ہو رہیگا کچھ نہ کچھ گھبرائیں کیا
(غالب)

User avatar
charliepanayi
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 7:26 pm UTC
Location: London, UK

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby charliepanayi » Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:53 pm UTC

Spurs wanted to emulate Arsenal so much, they emulated our tendency to stop winning games from February onwards :D
"Excuse me Miss, do you like pineapple?"

"I don't want to achieve immortality through my work, I want to achieve it through not dying"

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Dream » Sat Apr 21, 2012 8:41 pm UTC

Which Chelsea player was it who collided with Sagna and both their heads split open? He turned around to Sagna who was on the deck holding his head and made an "oh come on" gesture, like it wasn't even a thing. Then someone pointed out that his own head was bleeding, and he had to spend five minutes on the sideline getting rugby style stitches and vaseline treatment. I was thinking the whole time that he needs to give Drogba staying up lessons.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
raike
Posts: 236
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 10:25 pm UTC

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby raike » Sat Apr 21, 2012 9:00 pm UTC

Dream wrote:Which Chelsea player was it who collided with Sagna and both their heads split open? He turned around to Sagna who was on the deck holding his head and made an "oh come on" gesture, like it wasn't even a thing. Then someone pointed out that his own head was bleeding, and he had to spend five minutes on the sideline getting rugby style stitches and vaseline treatment. I was thinking the whole time that he needs to give Drogba staying up lessons.


Was it Kalou?
"When your work speaks for itself, don't interrupt." - H.J. Kaiser
رات دن گردش میں ہیں سات آسماں
ہو رہیگا کچھ نہ کچھ گھبرائیں کیا
(غالب)

sdkelso
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 5:39 pm UTC

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby sdkelso » Sat Apr 21, 2012 9:20 pm UTC

Missed the match. Disappointing, but if we win the rest of our matches I think we've got fourth. How did Romeu do?

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Actual (Association) Football Talk.

Postby Dream » Sat Apr 21, 2012 10:12 pm UTC

Junoir Hoylett, ladies and gentleman! Goal of the day, though I didn't watch the Clasico.

EDIT: Scott Sinclair!Practicaly identical, but closer in and faster.

raike wrote:Was it Kalou?

No, though he bears mentioning for a blatant dive in the box. I think it was Malouda.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ivnja, Tirear and 13 guests