We haven't lost either, and we would have won but the ref gave a factually erroneous penalty.
One, English player.
Doesn't matter to me. The team I support made history.
Man U went there with more English players, they got whooped, despite leading the tie. It only took Flamini to have Kaka and Gattuso in his pocket.
Makes me happy, haha.
-AC
I think any team who goes to Milan needing to score does well to win, and to win 2:0 is impressive. Doesn´t matter who´s playing, or which team it is.
Having a go at a team just because their players were born in some other area of the earth is pathetic. The days of "town boys" playing for their club is over
in man u's defense, they were down to bare bones and it was the end of the season. feel kind of like im making excuses but i honestly feel if we were able to rest our best players for a week like milan did before the match last year it would have gone differently. it was just a tired performance.
not taking anything away from arsenal though, they deserve all the credit they get. they outplayed them probably 80 percent of the time over the course of the two games. i thought they would win when they were drawn against each other, but i didn't think they'd out play them as much as they did.
Originally posted by Phat J
in man u's defense, they were down to bare bones and it was the end of the season. feel kind of like im making excuses but i honestly feel if we were able to rest our best players for a week like milan did before the match last year it would have gone differently. it was just a tired performance.not taking anything away from arsenal though, they deserve all the credit they get. they outplayed them probably 80 percent of the time over the course of the two games. i thought they would win when they were drawn against each other, but i didn't think they'd out play them as much as they did.
Man Utd have bare bones anyway, they have the squad that's about as deep as an Avril Lavigne album, and when they beat Arsenal 4-0, who truly were on bare bones, Man Utd fans act like they were AS handicapped.
Man Utd just weren't good enough to beat them. They WON the first leg, that's the shit thing. Arsenal didn't have Eduardo, Toure, Van Persie or Rosicky either. Quite a sight worse than Man Utd missing O' Shea, Park, Fletcher or whoever else they have that's sub-par. Arsenal dominated the first game, didn't lose, didn't win. Worse result really. Man Utd won, then went to the San Siro ahead. Arsenal didn't.
80% over two games and you say you're taking nothing away?
Besides a few snapshots and glances, what did they give Almunia to worry about? Flamini had Gattuso and Kaka in his back pocket. Who could do that in any other team? Makelele maybe.
-AC
man, you are an arsenal fan boy, that sub par squad won the league last year. our squads decent this year actually, we just need another striker. you just made a jibe at man u so i thought id bring up the circumstances. you seem to always have an excuse for arsenal so i thought why not.
it was just a tired performance. milan had been waiting for two weeks to play that game. they rested all their players, and our squad of like 15 at the time played every game and had no energy. yeah, they beat us, but there was a good reason we played so badly. anyways, who did you go out to again? psv in the last 16? oh yeah. right.
so rvp was on the bench for that game eh? thats good news. lets hope he doesnt go down for another 3 months again, adebayor needs another striker to share the load with him.
Originally posted by Phat J
man, you are an arsenal fan boy, that sub par squad won the league last year.
No, the squad's best 11 won the league. I'm not an Arsenal fan boy, I just dislike it when people dislike excuses that happen to be true, and then try to weasel out the way of Man Utd f*cking up a lead that a team of their self-proclaimed calibre should have maintained.
"They needed rest.". You don't get rest given to you, and whilst it can affect games, you should have a team good enough to play without it. Arsenal have proven many times that they have lots of great talent and depth in their squad, some combinations work, others don't. Who do Man U have, outside of their first 11? I'm talking genuine, recognisable and promising talent. Not someone who's just a bit good.
Originally posted by Phat J
our squads decent this year actually, we just need another striker. you just made a jibe at man u so i thought id bring up the circumstances. you seem to always have an excuse for arsenal so i thought why not.
How was it a jibe? They went to Milan and got whooped three nil, despite having a lead. That's not a jibe, it's a fact.
There's a difference. People want to imagine every Arsenal excuse comes out of thin air. When Birmingham drew with Arsenal, I claimed it wasn't a penalty, it wasn't, was it? No. When Tottenham beat Arsenal, I claimed they had a second choice team (Bad combination) and a third choice goalie. Did they? Yes.
Originally posted by Phat J
it was just a tired performance. milan had been waiting for two weeks to play that game. they rested all their players, and our squad of like 15 at the time played every game and had no energy. yeah, they beat us, but there was a good reason we played so badly. anyways, who did you go out to again? psv in the last 16? oh yeah. right.
Yeah, because we played shit.
Arsenal just did something Man Utd couldn't do, with worse odds, and missing players. Big players. So you saying "Oh, you went out to P.S.V." makes no difference to me. Played shit, got knocked out, that's how it happened. There's a difference between being outplayed and just playing shit. Man Utd got out played.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriNo, the squad's best 11 won the league. I'm not an Arsenal fan boy, I just dislike it when people dislike excuses that happen to be true, and then try to weasel out the way of Man Utd f*cking up a lead that a team of their self-proclaimed calibre should have maintained.
"They needed rest.". You don't get rest given to you, and whilst it can affect games, you should have a team good enough to play without it. Arsenal have proven many times that they have lots of great talent and depth in their squad, some combinations work, others don't. Who do Man U have, outside of their first 11? I'm talking genuine, recognisable and promising talent. Not someone who's just a bit good.
How was it a jibe? They went to Milan and got whooped three nil, despite having a lead. That's not a jibe, it's a fact.
There's a difference. People want to imagine every Arsenal excuse comes out of thin air. When Birmingham drew with Arsenal, I claimed it wasn't a penalty, it wasn't, was it? No. When Tottenham beat Arsenal, I claimed they had a second choice team (Bad combination) and a third choice goalie. Did they? Yes.
Yeah, because we played shit.
Arsenal just did something Man Utd couldn't do, with worse odds, and missing players. Big players. So you saying "Oh, you went out to P.S.V." makes no difference to me. Played shit, got knocked out, that's how it happened. There's a difference between being outplayed and just playing shit. Man Utd got out played.
-AC [/B]
lets see, outside the starting 11?
fletcher, saha, silvestre, nani, anderson, hargreaves, pique and park.
anderson could probably be changed with carrick or scholes.
from arsenal id put these guys in there
walcott, gilberto, eduardo, diaby, senderos, denilson and eboue?
although i dont like denilson, senderos or eboue, they'd still probably be in there.
id take man u's squad personally, although im sure you'd disagree with me.
yes there is a difference and we did get outplayed in milan, its true. but theres a reason we got outplayed, they were prepared for the game and we werent. if we had the same advantages they had, i think the game would ahve been different.
it was a jibe because it had nothing to do with what we were talking about. im not imagining every arsenal excuse comes out of thin air, some people may be, but im not. i think they're reasonable excuses, as reasonable as i think my excuse for man u losing in milan is.
Originally posted by Phat J
you are an arsenal fan boy, listen to yourself. how am i trying to weasel my out of anything? im stating the facts man, we proved the game before we could beat them. the second game, if you watched it, you would ahve seen man u playing like shit and being visibly tired and milan being fresh and ready for the game.lets see, outside the starting 11?
fletcher, saha, silvestre, nani, anderson, hargreaves, pique and park.
anderson could probably be changed with carrick or scholes.
No, I said more than just "a bit good", which is debateable for Fletcher. Silvestre is past it, he isn't a back up player, he's someone like Gilberto who hasn't got the stuff anymore. He was relegated to the bench, not a back up FROM the bench. Nani and Anderson are first team quality, Anderson is much better than Carrick OR Scholes, who is also past it. Pique is shit, Park is some nobody.
Originally posted by Phat J
walcott, gilberto, eduardo, diaby, senderos, denilson and eboue?although i dont like denilson, senderos or eboue, they'd still probably be in there.
Walcott, Eduardo, Diaby, Senderos, Denilson, Gibbs, Djourou, Eboue, Vela, Bendtner etc.
These aren't mugs who got relegated down, or people who are "a bit decent to bring on". Diaby is probably going to be as formidable as Viera was, Walcott has already shown what he's capable of at a barely legal age, Gibbs has defensive quality so far beyond his years that it's ridiculous. Eduardo, Denilson and Senderos are all definite, constant first-teamers. Senderos if he overcomes his confidence crisis.
Vela is already making La Liga's best defenders look mediocre.
Originally posted by Phat J
id take man u's squad personally, although im sure you'd disagree with me.
Of course you would, you're a Man Utd fan. If you actually look at the names and talent, it's quite obvious who has the better squad, though.
Originally posted by Phat J
yes there is a difference and we did get outplayed in milan, its true. but theres a reason we got outplayed, they were prepared for the game and we werent. if we had the same advantages they had, i think the game would ahve been different.
I remember saying that about Arsenal Vs Man Utd, and I remember you not only playing it down, but suggesting Man Utd had losses as bad.
Originally posted by Phat J
it was a jibe because it had nothing to do with what we were talking about. im not imagining every arsenal excuse comes out of thin air, some people may be, but im not. i think they're reasonable excuses, as reasonable as i think my excuse for man u losing in milan is.
Fair enough.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriNo, I said more than just "a bit good", which is debateable for Fletcher. Silvestre is past it, he isn't a back up player, he's someone like Gilberto who hasn't got the stuff anymore. He was relegated to the bench, not a back up FROM the bench. Nani and Anderson are first team quality, Anderson is much better than Carrick OR Scholes, who is also past it. Pique is shit, Park is some nobody.
Walcott, Eduardo, Diaby, Senderos, Denilson, Gibbs, Djourou, Eboue, Vela, Bendtner etc.
These aren't mugs who got relegated down, or people who are "a bit decent to bring on". Diaby is probably going to be as formidable as Viera was, Walcott has already shown what he's capable of at a barely legal age, Gibbs has defensive quality so far beyond his years that it's ridiculous. Eduardo, Denilson and Senderos are all definite, constant first-teamers. Senderos if he overcomes his confidence crisis.
Vela is already making La Liga's best defenders look mediocre.
Of course you would, you're a Man Utd fan. If you actually look at the names and talent, it's quite obvious who has the better squad, though.
I remember saying that about Arsenal Vs Man Utd, and I remember you not only playing it down, but suggesting Man Utd had losses as bad.
Fair enough.
-AC [/B]
scholes isnt quite past it, giggs pretty much is but scholes still has a year or two in him. hes been playing really well lately actually. carrick is probably my favourite midfielder we have, along with anderson. but id still pick scholes because he controls the match better than either of them can. fletcher is actually really good, its just that we have a shitload of people that we paid 20 million for in his position.
when was the last time denilson played well in the first team? or even played in the first team? i wouldnt really put bendtner in there either, hes good, but hes not arsenal good. i have no idea who gibbs or vela are, so word. im sure you're right. i thought we were talking about recognizable guys here though, cuz i could bust out some more that just fall under the promising category... simpson, wellbeck, foster, evans.
im not sure i understand the losses as bad thing. the milan thing is similar to that though. i dont think man united would have beaten arsenal 4 nil if they had a fully fit squad, but then again we didnt play a full strength squad either, so its not exactly the same.
milans focus was entirely on that game and they prepared for that game by resting players which we couldnt do. as a result, they were fresh, we were flat.
Originally posted by Phat J
pique is better than senderos, who actually is shit. could be good, but is shit.
Silly.
Originally posted by Phat J
fletcher is actually really good
Sillier.
Originally posted by Phat J
park is [...] probably technically just a little bit worse than rosicky is, but id say they're on the same level.
What level? The Earth's crust? Rosicky is 30 times the player that mug is.
Originally posted by Phat J
fair enough for silvestre. pique is better than senderos, who actually is shit. could be good, but is shit. park is good, hes a different type of player than anyone else and gives us something different. hes probably technically just a little bit worse than rosicky is, but id say they're on the same level. park has just been out for a year so he needs some games.
Senderos is not a shit defender, he's an unreliable one. He has moments of brilliance and moments of match-costing idiocy.
How long has Park had to work at his ability so he reaches the level of "a little bit" worse than Rosicky (Giving him a lot of credit)? Ages. That's my point. He's simply not good enough to get the games he'd need to improve either.
Originally posted by Phat J
scholes isnt quite past it, giggs pretty much is but scholes still has a year or two in him. hes been playing really well lately actually. carrick is probably my favourite midfielder we have, along with anderson. but id still pick scholes because he controls the match better than either of them can. fletcher is actually really good, its just that we have a shitload of people that we paid 20 million for in his position.
I disagree that Fletcher is good, and Anderson is clearly much better than Carrick, who is a £18 million waste. That is simply not acceptable for the kind of player you can get for less, like Anderson. Then you have to factor in, what potential have they got to get better? Anderson? Lots, I think. Carrick? Not much, he's not going to get much better. Neither is Park, neither is Pique. Hargreaves might.
Originally posted by Phat J
when was the last time denilson played well in the first team? or even played in the first team? i wouldnt really put bendtner in there either, hes good, but hes not arsenal good. i have no idea who gibbs or vela are, so word. im sure you're right. i thought we were talking about recognizable guys here though, cuz i could bust out some more that just fall under the promising category... simpson, wellbeck, foster, evans.
How many of those last four have made a mockery of some of the world's best defenders at barely legal age? Sergio Ramos might as well not have been there when Osasuna played Real Madrid, Gibbs is tough midfielder for a kid, and he really is a kid. He stops people in their tracks, men.
Bendtner plays how Arsenal like to play, and with development he'll be brilliant if he doesn't leave. My argument was based around who has a more promising squad, a more effective squad. The answer is Arsenal.
Originally posted by Phat J
im not sure i understand the losses as bad thing. the milan thing is similar to that though. i dont think man united would have beaten arsenal 4 nil if they had a fully fit squad, but then again we didnt play a full strength squad either, so its not exactly the same.
Yes, but my point is; Man Utd with a few players missing isn't as devestating as it is for Arsenal. Whilst Arsenal have the more promising squad, they only work in certain combinations. Man Utd's benchwarmers are former first-teamers who can come on and fit right in. Arsenal can only do that with a few of the more experienced bench players. You couldn't really bring on Gibbs, but you could bring on Silvestre.
Man Utd do not play adventurously enough, or skillfully enough, that one WRONG change could throw it all out of whack. If Fergie plays Carrick, not Anderson, you're not going to start spazzing on the floor and get whooped. Why? Cos Man Utd play simple, unadventurous football, and they players are the same when playing for them. So the bench players, who aren't ex-first teamers, come on and fit in. So you could argue they're more safe, not necessarily better.
If Wenger takes a gamble and makes a mistake, Arsenal play far too openly and fluently for that to be just a hiccup. If he kept Almunia in goal instead of Fabianski, I think the Tottenham result wouldn't have been half as bad.
-AC
I made the mistake of watching the Porto v Schalke 04 game.
utter crap I fell asleep near the end. Schalke were pathetic, must have made a new record of passing errors, and must be favorites to go out next round. At least Porto had a crack.
Mind you the young keeper was good, only 21. Where do the Germans get all these top goalkeepers from?
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If he kept Almunia in goal instead of Fabianski, I think the Tottenham result wouldn't have been half as bad.
Keep on dreaming, Bucko. My boys were strolling past Fabregas et al. Alumnia wouldn't have made any difference.
Player for player, Man Utd have a better team than Arsenal.
Van der Sar > Alumnia
Wes Brown < Eboue
Ferdinand > Toure
Vidic > Gallas
Evra > Clichy
Ronaldo > Diaby/Whoever...
Hargreaves > Flamini
Anderson < Fabregas
Nani > Hleb
Tevez > Brendtner
Rooney = Adebayor
And, to add insult to injury, Tottenham's first eleven is better than both teams!
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Keep on dreaming, Bucko. My boys were strolling past Fabregas et al. Alumnia wouldn't have made any difference.Player for player, Man Utd have a better team than Arsenal.
Van der Sar > Alumni
(Most likely, although he's not great)
Wes Brown < Eboue (This would be Sagna, who is of course Wes' God)
Ferdinand > Toure (Arguable)
Vidic > Gallas (Arguable)
Evra > Clichy (No)
Ronaldo > Diaby/Whoever (Hleb. Depends if it's a big or regular game)
Hargreaves > Flamini (Hahahahahahahaha)
Anderson < Fabregas (Yep)
Nani > Hleb (AHAHAHAHAHAHA. It's Rosicky, so just Hahahaha)
Tevez > Brendtner (RvP. No)
Rooney = Adebayor (Arguable)And, to add insult to injury, Tottenham's first eleven is better than both teams!
This would be my mixed team.
But first, 'Nani > Hleb'. Hahahahahahaha.
Gk: Van der Sar
Rb: Sagna
Lb: Clichy
Cb: Toure
Cb: Rio
Rm: Cron
Lm: Hleb
Cm: Fabregas
Cm: Flamini
Fw: RvP
Fw: Tevez
Tevez is being generous.