Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Yep. Pointing out that you are talking BS.
you do nothing to contribute to this thread. you seem only to be bias and backing up your buddy AC. either say something useful..or piss off
at least ac is trying to point out why he thinks im talkin BS. while you are being an annoying idiot
Originally posted by Deano
you do nothing to contribute to this thread. you seem only to be bias and backing up your buddy AC. either say something useful..or piss offat least ac is trying to point out why he thinks im talkin BS. while you are being an annoying idiot
That's odd, you say I do nothing then you point out two things.
This is typical of your style, which the Romans called 'Bullshit'.
As for backing up AC, you might like to venture back through the thread and note who posted first.
The difference is, he attempts to argue with you. I just think you talk bullshit and aren't worth the effort, except for the humour value you provide when you attempt to string something rational together.
Here's something useful- you talk lots and lots of bullshit.
Originally posted by Deano
no mate, ive got nothing to weasel out of. you keep making stupid statements and i'll have to keep arguing with you to the death.
Didn't even counter what I said. Loss admission number one...
Originally posted by Deano
i enjoy watching brazil, doesnt mean i have to support them.
I don't have to either. I choose to. Like you don't have to support England, you chose to.
Originally posted by Deano
look i choose not to cheer a team simply because they are superior. thats an easy way out for simple people. i cheer for england because thats how it has always been, and always will.
It's very cheap and idiotic that after me telling you 5 times that this is not why I support them, you keep thinking it. Pointless bs.
Originally posted by Deano
no you was implying that they was lucky in the overall tournament but you could only use that goal incident to back up you weak once again pathetic claim. i was saying that overall they wasnt lucky in winning the tournament ok they was lucky once. one piece of luck doesnt give you the champions league title. liverpool had consistency.
If they never got that goal allowed they'd have had to play Chelsea again and they probably would have lost. They were only in the final because of it. To say they didn't get there because of luck is silly. They're a shit team who have no consistency, look at the league table for proof. Last time they met, Chelsea whooped them 4-1.
Originally posted by Deano
it is luck when you meant to cross the ball, and the ball goes in the net. i admit england was poor and brazil outclassed them. the point im making is that everyone gets some luck. i'll hold my hands up and say they were outclassed. why do you think im afraid to admit this?
There's a difference. The ball went in the net. Liverpool's wasn't luck, it was BS. It's arguable as to whether he meant to cross or not. It's not arguable as to whether the ball went in for Garcia.
Originally posted by Deano
you havent proven anything, i know better. you love brazil because they play the best football meaning they are the best side which is why you like them. i'll admit that im a hypocritical person who talks to much bullshit when you admit that you are clueless when it comes to football. And who talks to much bullshit. which i can prove, all i have to do is quote some of your earlier posts. stick to music
How about replying consistently rather than filling a post with "Hahaha you're clueless."? Again you've already gone back on yourself about 5 times in this post Deano. You're an actually stupid person, subject isn't relevent.
I don't "love" Brazil, this is one of your flaws. Making shit up and continuing to say it. Second, your ONLY claim to counter me is why I support Brazil, which is false. I've told you this 7 times now. 5 before this post, 2 in it.
Stick to shutting up, because you can't debate for anything. I'm not trying to point out that you talk shit. It's staring everyone in the face. You have contradicted yourself so much.
-AC
why does he have social issues? because hes getting a his point across? everyones entitled to their side of the arguement, to not have one is to be a sheep.
about consistancy, everyteam gets some luck at some point. whether its through the ball going in on a cross, the ref making a bad decision, or the other team having top players injured, its all luck. you have to deal with it, and get on with it. a team wins because they use luck to their advantage, the best team doesnt always win. if they did, wales would have won the world cp 10 times on the trot😄
everyone has a right to discuss, its not an argument as such. we have both said what we have to say. and now its time to stop.
yes darth you are right everyteam gets some luck. liverpool won the champions league fairly. you could argue that chelsea are lucky they have a rich russian billionaire as there chairman. without him they would be nothin.
That's stupid though. They had him when Ranieri was manager, what happened? Nothing. They bought Crespo, Mutu and Veron for about 40 million and did f*ck all.
Mourinho is why they're as good. Sure, they have had more resources and a fool would say it hasn't helped, but to say they would be nothing without Roman is stupid. He isn't making the team win. Mourinho is. Proof is Joe Cole. Joe Cole came out and said "I'm good." Mourinho said "You're not. You're shit. Play better or I'll drop you" and now the man is a very good winger. Who was Lampard before Mourinho? Money doesn't make a team, Real Madrid is proof of this.
Liverpool got lucky. They played shit throughout the tournament and only in the final did they do ok. That wasn't even because they were good, it was cos AC Milan were shit and threw their lead away. If they didn't beat Chelsea through the not-goal, they would have played them again and lost. Because Chelsea, as continually proven in the league, are the better team. Liverpool are struggling in the league, losing to shit teams by rather large margins. In the C.L you only have to scrape by the games and come out with the win, you don't have to keep it up. You do in the league, and Liverpool are shit in it.
So no, you couldn't argue any of the points you just raised. YOU could, because you'd argue paper over cardboard if you could. Realistically though, no you can't.
-AC
lampard has always been a good player... its just he hasnt been on a team where he could be able to show himself like where he is now at chelsea. mourinho is deffo a help, but its not just him. the players need credit too. thats why i think man utd are'nt doing as well, i think fergie needs to step down and some fresh minds come in. the team has changed and fergies tactics may not be suitable anymore.
you dont know for a fact chelsea would have beaten liverpool though. liverpool could have beaten chelsea and gotton through still. nothin is certain.
Yeah because to get through all you have to do is scrape through the game, even if it's unfairly.
Chelsea smash Liverpool in every sense of the word and even did so recently. Liverpool are a shit team (Deano disagrees so I'm assuming he doesn't watch the premiership where they're barely in the top half of the table). Chelsea are 10 points infront of everyone else and current holders.
-AC
yes chelsea are better then liverpool. liverpool cant seem to do well in the league. they are a good enough squad to be in the top 5 though.
yes liverpool deserved to win the champions league. 3-0 down to milan at half time, and they had the fight to pull it back. AC i didnt disagree that chelsea smashed liverpool. they played better in the 2nd leg of the game, but in the first leg liverpool perhaps played better football. EVERY team gets a stroke of luck.thats part of the game. it doesnt matter if you are not as strong as some teams in the champions league, if you play with fight and desire then anything is possible. and liverpool did just that.
chelsea are 10 points clear because the other rivals were not firing on all cylinders. things are hotting up now though and the table should hopefully get tighter
Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
That's odd, you say I do nothing then you point out two things.This is typical of your style, which the Romans called 'Bullshit'.
As for backing up AC, you might like to venture back through the thread and note who posted first.
The difference is, he attempts to argue with you. I just think you talk bullshit and aren't worth the effort, except for the humour value you provide when you attempt to string something rational together.
Here's something useful- you talk lots and lots of bullshit.
you know fack all. so just leave. u obviously agree that crouch is shit. so dont talk to me about bullshitting.
Originally posted by Deano
yes chelsea are better then liverpool. liverpool cant seem to do well in the league. they are a good enough squad to be in the top 5 though.
They're not though, are they? Because they're struggling to be in the top HALF of the table.
Originally posted by Deano
yes liverpool deserved to win the champions league. 3-0 down to milan at half time, and they had the fight to pull it back.
No they didn't. Milan ****ed up and made it easy. Shevchenko missed about 5 chances.
Originally posted by Deano
AC i didnt disagree that chelsea smashed liverpool. they played better in the 2nd leg of the game, but in the first leg liverpool perhaps played better football. EVERY team gets a stroke of luck.thats part of the game. it doesnt matter if you are not as strong as some teams in the champions league, if you play with fight and desire then anything is possible. and liverpool did just that.
They won, 1-0. It shouldn't have happened. How you can say that it's justifiable, them getting through on a wrong decision, is silly. If they didn't they'd have to play Chelsea again and chances are, given the two teams, that they'd lose. If it went to penalties, it's still a luck win.
Originally posted by Deano
chelsea are 10 points clear because the other rivals were not firing on all cylinders. things are hotting up now though and the table should hopefully get tighter
Doesn't refute my point though. Also, don't tell people they know f*ck all when you are an actual walking excrement talker. I don't mean that as an insult.
That plus the fact that he has an extremely good knowledge of football. You just say that people know "fack" all if they disagree.
-AC
since when has a team won a game simply because they're better than the other team they play? why play a game at all? why do the relegation favourites even bother? its a cup format, so team ratings and league placings mean nothing. liverpool could have upset chelsea in a rematch. they won the champions league so they must be capable of it. yes, chelsea are a better team, if they'd have hammered liverpool like they do normally then they'd have been in the final, but they didnt. alpha, you sound like a bitter chelsea fan. or a liverpol hater.
I'm an Arsenal supporter and I "hate" no teams.
Chelsea, had they got past Liverpool, would have more than likely won the cup. Liverpool winning the cup doesn't mean they are "able" per se. It means that through certain means, they got to the final. They scraped by their games, screwed Chelsea and then beat a team who, after smashing them in the first half, lied down and acted stupid.
Liverpool are a shit team. They consistantly do bad in the league, where REAL good teams are shown, not just one off wins to advance.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'm an Arsenal supporter and I "hate" no teams.Chelsea, had they got past Liverpool, would have more than likely won the cup. Liverpool winning the cup doesn't mean they are "able" per se. It means that through certain means, they got to the final. They scraped by their games, screwed Chelsea and then beat a team who, after smashing them in the first half, lied down and acted stupid.
Liverpool are a shit team. They consistantly do bad in the league, where REAL good teams are shown, not just one off wins to advance.
-AC
😱 I'm a Millwall fan and I hate all teams -
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
They're not though, are they? Because they're struggling to be in the top HALF of the table.
i didnt say they were did i. i said they are capable of being in the top 5.
No they didn't. Milan ****ed up and made it easy. Shevchenko missed about 5 chances.
if milan ****ed up then so did liverpool in the first half. all goals were fair. shevchenko missed an absolute sitter. but so did garcia. thats part of the game as ive said before.its all if's and buts with you.
They won, 1-0. It shouldn't have happened. How you can say that it's justifiable, them getting through on a wrong decision, is silly. If they didn't they'd have to play Chelsea again and chances are, given the two teams, that they'd lose. If it went to penalties, it's still a luck win.
so what? when terry headered the winner against barca, you could argue that carvalho fouled the keeper and the goal shoudnt of been allowed therefore barcelona should of went through. you cant keep moaning about things like this. move on please.
Doesn't refute my point though. Also, don't tell people they know f*ck all when you are an actual walking excrement talker. I don't mean that as an insult.
well why doesnt he do what your doing and talk about it, instead of just making random insults. walking excrement talker? hahaha comes from the guy who says liverpool are shit.
That plus the fact that he has an extremely good knowledge of football. You just say that people know "fack" all if they disagree.
Originally posted by Deano
i didnt say they were did i. i said they are capable of being in the top 5.
Clearly not capable or they would be.
Originally posted by Deano
if milan ****ed up then so did liverpool in the first half. all goals were fair. shevchenko missed an absolute sitter. but so did garcia. thats part of the game as ive said before.its all if's and buts with you.
How is it if's and but's with me? You're the one saying that "If Milan..." etc. No, Milan overpowered Liverpool. You can see by the way AC played. Liverpool couldn't get anywhere.
Originally posted by Deano
so what? when terry headered the winner against barca, you could argue that carvalho fouled the keeper and the goal shoudnt of been allowed therefore barcelona should of went through. you cant keep moaning about things like this. move on please.
Yeah, but you can't argue that Garcia's was fair because he it's been proven to not be a goal. Terry's header went in.
Originally posted by Deano
well why doesnt he do what your doing and talk about it, instead of just making random insults. walking excrement talker? hahaha comes from the guy who says liverpool are shit.
0-0 against Betis AGAIN tonight. Hmm.
I don't know why he does what he does, I don't care. He's not wrong though. Liverpool are shit and just because you love Crouch you're saying they're not. They got lucky in the C.L, they're shit in the league, they're currently doing shit in the C.L.
-AC