Re: BT Coverage of the game
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lawnmower
Why all this crap about getting a grip and the rest of the pathetic cheap shots ?
Disagree by all means, but stop being a knob.
It’s just my opinion and you aren’t going to change it with comments like that. The very fact that you can only resort to insult just makes me think you’ve got a weak argument.
As your only case seems to be that anyone who doesn’t agree is biased, blind, drunk and stupid. Particularly as you want to ignore the game statistics as it doesn’t suit your agenda.
If you think 5-1 was a fair reflection of the game then were we flattered in all of the Man City, Liverpool, Chelsea games ( we definitely were at Watford who I reckon dominated more than Man U apart from the last 10 there)- haven’t we been lucky !
As for planning for the ref then yes, this is a valid strategy. Even in parks footy we knew which ones would allow you to get stuck in and which ones would have the card in their hand all game and if you don’t understand or appreciate that then that says more about you than me.
Did you really just compare parks football to the Premier League?
Wow. Just wow.
Re: BT Coverage of the game
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lawnmower
Why all this crap about getting a grip and the rest of the pathetic cheap shots ?
Disagree by all means, but stop being a knob.
It’s just my opinion and you aren’t going to change it with comments like that. The very fact that you can only resort to insult just makes me think you’ve got a weak argument.
As your only case seems to be that anyone who doesn’t agree is biased, blind, drunk and stupid. Particularly as you want to ignore the game statistics as it doesn’t suit your agenda.
If you think 5-1 was a fair reflection of the game then were we flattered in all of the Man City, Liverpool, Chelsea games ( we definitely were at Watford who I reckon dominated more than Man U apart from the last 10 there)- haven’t we been lucky !
As for planning for the ref then yes, this is a valid strategy. Even in parks footy we knew which ones would allow you to get stuck in and which ones would have the card in their hand all game and if you don’t understand or appreciate that then that says more about you than me.
“Get a grip man”
Hardly insulting. :hehe:
You called me a knob. Seems it’s you resorting to insults.
For someone who watches as much live football as you do you don’t seem to have much of a clue if you think a few corners and half hearted efforts from City when the game is done and dusted somehow flatters United.
Statistics do not take into account the flow and intensity of the game. As someone who watches a lot of football I thought you’d understand that. Clearly I was wrong.
Hey ho.
Re: BT Coverage of the game
Quote:
Originally Posted by
J R Hartley
“Get a grip man”
Hardly insulting. :hehe:
You called me a knob. Seems it’s you resorting to insults.
For someone who watches as much live football as you do you don’t seem to have much of a clue if you think a few corners and half hearted efforts from City when the game is done and dusted somehow flatters United.
Statistics do not take into account the flow and intensity of the game. As someone who watches a lot of football I thought you’d understand that. Clearly I was wrong.
Hey ho.
Knobs are useful, they can open up doors of opportunity .
Re: BT Coverage of the game
Quote:
Originally Posted by
J R Hartley
Anyone with half a football brain and two eyes who watched that match yesterday could not argue 5-1 did not flatter United.
To suggest 3-1 was a more fair result because XG says so is total and utter bollocks.
Agreed. After 10 minutes I said to myself if we could keep it down to 5 we'd have done well.
Re: BT Coverage of the game
It’s Christmas so maybe we can all compromise and agree that 1-4 would have been a fair result.
I’d never seen most of the Utd players in the flesh before last night but it was very clear to me after 20 minutes that Martial, Pogba and Rashford are all clearly world-class players whom Jose has stifled. Unleashed, they scented blood and we were the unlucky prey.
Re: BT Coverage of the game
Quote:
Originally Posted by
J R Hartley
That’s a no then.
If you think you have to tell a pal what you already know he knows, then you must be extremely boring company. Which I suspect you are.
:ayatollah:
Re: BT Coverage of the game
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rich munn
If you think you have to tell a pal what you already know he knows, then you must be extremely boring company. Which I suspect you are.
:ayatollah:
If he already knows then why tell him on here giving it the big in front of everyone then?
You needn’t suspect about my company. I remember your old profile picture and wouldn’t be seen dead with a nobody like you.
Re: BT Coverage of the game
Quote:
Originally Posted by
severncity
It’s Christmas so maybe we can all compromise and agree that 1-4 would have been a fair result.
I’d never seen most of the Utd players in the flesh before last night but it was very clear to me after 20 minutes that Martial, Pogba and Rashford are all clearly world-class players whom Jose has stifled. Unleashed, they scented blood and we were the unlucky prey.
No not having it, we deserved at least 1.4
Re: BT Coverage of the game
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rich munn
I enjoyed speaking to you in the pub last night, as I always do, but your agenda is quite pathetic.
Never any positivity about our club. I don't remember you saying anything positive about Cardiff City since your hatred of Tan (for me very odd considering your love, or at least liking of, Hammam) began.
Since you claim you don't care about Cardiff City any more, maybe you should stop contributing. What's in it for you?
Or maybe there's a hidden agenda which you won't admit.
What is 'quite pathetic' is accusing somebody of having an 'agenda' when they are simply discussing a football match and saying exactly the same sort of thing that most other people who watched the game are saying. You hint at a 'hidden agenda', so what could that possibly be? This is a football message board, on which I've been discussing a football match. If that's having an agenda, then I'm guilty as charged.
You told me last night you had enjoyed yesterday's game. To me, that seems really weird. In all the years I supported City, I never enjoyed seeing them get beaten, let alone get spanked like they did yesterday. But there we go, it takes all sorts I suppose.
Yet again you've suggested I should stop contributing to this board. How many times is that now? I've never understood why people like you get so irritated by those who hold opposing views to theirs, although to be honest I don't even know in this instance what I've said that you actually disagree with as you haven't taken issue with anything in particular. You've just talked bollocks about non-existent agendas.
What's in it for me? Well, I don't know if you've noticed this in all the years we've known each other, but I'm a bit of a football fan. I still enjoy watching the game very much and I still talk about it a great deal with a wide range of people. As much as I despise the club's owner, I've enjoyed my occasional visits to City games in recent years and I like to keep reasonably up to date with what's happening at the CCS as it's a regular topic of conversation with family, friends and colleagues. Apparently, my having an opinion on a team I supported for almost 40 years is some sort of a crime, but that's your problem rather than mine.
Re: BT Coverage of the game
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Lone Gunman
I've never understood why people like you get so irritated by those who hold opposing views to theirs
Opposing views are fine, surely. Welcome even. But imagine a right wing nut spending his free time on a left wing forum. You're clearly not a supporter of City. You're just here to argue. You enjoy pissing in our cornflakes and shitting on our parade.
Re: BT Coverage of the game
It’s all got a little bit arsey on this thread but I think some decent points have been made from both sides.
I’ve not seen any of the goals on TV but felt during the game that we were both mentally and physically much slower than the Utd players. However, the start of the game and the refs weird initial decisions seemed to unsettle us. Then the first goal was just weird and the second a fluke. After that the game was gone despite our penalty.
Their 3rd goal was excellent and showed what they were capable of but I was disappointed they didn’t have to work harder for their win. Bambas 2 rushes of blood to the head were disappointing and NW is going to have to remind him he’s not Backenbauer (again!)
The other players who disappointed me were Junior and Cunningham. We needed pace and power but neither could bring that and were basically spectators.
We got got what we deserved from the game ie nothing, but I’m hoping Zohore’s cameo presages that start of his season...
Re: BT Coverage of the game
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Lone Gunman
What is 'quite pathetic' is accusing somebody of having an 'agenda' when they are simply discussing a football match and saying exactly the same sort of thing that most other people who watched the game are saying. You hint at a 'hidden agenda', so what could that possibly be? This is a football message board, on which I've been discussing a football match. If that's having an agenda, then I'm guilty as charged.
You told me last night you had enjoyed yesterday's game. To me, that seems really weird. In all the years I supported City, I never enjoyed seeing them get beaten, let alone get spanked like they did yesterday. But there we go, it takes all sorts I suppose.
Yet again you've suggested I should stop contributing to this board. How many times is that now? I've never understood why people like you get so irritated by those who hold opposing views to theirs, although to be honest I don't even know in this instance what I've said that you actually disagree with as you haven't taken issue with anything in particular. You've just talked bollocks about non-existent agendas.
What's in it for me? Well, I don't know if you've noticed this in all the years we've known each other, but I'm a bit of a football fan. I still enjoy watching the game very much and I still talk about it a great deal with a wide range of people. As much as I despise the club's owner, I've enjoyed my occasional visits to City games in recent years and I like to keep reasonably up to date with what's happening at the CCS as it's a regular topic of conversation with family, friends and colleagues. Apparently, my having an opinion on a team I supported for almost 40 years is some sort of a crime, but that's your problem rather than mine.
Plus ca change...
Have a nice Christmas Dave.
:ayatollah:
Re: BT Coverage of the game
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Lone Gunman
What is 'quite pathetic' is accusing somebody of having an 'agenda' when they are simply discussing a football match and saying exactly the same sort of thing that most other people who watched the game are saying. You hint at a 'hidden agenda', so what could that possibly be? This is a football message board, on which I've been discussing a football match. If that's having an agenda, then I'm guilty as charged.
You told me last night you had enjoyed yesterday's game. To me, that seems really weird. In all the years I supported City, I never enjoyed seeing them get beaten, let alone get spanked like they did yesterday. But there we go, it takes all sorts I suppose.
Yet again you've suggested I should stop contributing to this board. How many times is that now? I've never understood why people like you get so irritated by those who hold opposing views to theirs, although to be honest I don't even know in this instance what I've said that you actually disagree with as you haven't taken issue with anything in particular. You've just talked bollocks about non-existent agendas.
What's in it for me? Well, I don't know if you've noticed this in all the years we've known each other, but I'm a bit of a football fan. I still enjoy watching the game very much and I still talk about it a great deal with a wide range of people. As much as I despise the club's owner, I've enjoyed my occasional visits to City games in recent years and I like to keep reasonably up to date with what's happening at the CCS as it's a regular topic of conversation with family, friends and colleagues. Apparently, my having an opinion on a team I supported for almost 40 years is some sort of a crime, but that's your problem rather than mine.
You really still despise VT? If you let the rebrand go like most have what’s the issue? Looking back he clearly saved us from going under
and down a few leagues, less another magic fairy was about to step in and save us like the Sullivan story.
I trust you prefer the lower league days hanging out with Newport and Chester etc with the other 3000 diehards?:xmashehe:
Re: BT Coverage of the game
Quote:
Originally Posted by
J R Hartley
Did you really just compare parks football to the Premier League?
Wow. Just wow.
Ironically Warnock regarded our defending as ‘Sunday League’ like!
Wow. Just wow😂😂😂
Re: BT Coverage of the game
Quote:
Originally Posted by
goats
You really still despise VT? If you let the rebrand go like most have what’s the issue? Looking back he clearly saved us from going under
and down a few leagues, less another magic fairy was about to step in and save us like the Sullivan story.
I trust you prefer the lower league days hanging out with Newport and Chester etc with the other 3000 diehards?:xmashehe:
I know a few of those die hard lads, some are hard , and dead from the neck up ,be careful though if you bump into the NP ones , there are well barmy.
I have to say the season of goodwill has
clearly shone through on this thread,its very up,lifting. .
