Football (Soccer)

Originally posted by Neo_Version 7
While I do agree Beckham is past his prime, I'm probably one of the few that think England is better with him than without him.

Either way you cut it, it's a pretty unfortunate situation.

How can England be better with him? If Beckham is on the pitch and jogging about giving the odd good pass, then another players like Aaron Lennon, Theo Wallcott or SWP who can play in a similar position, can bomb down the wing and cause absolute mayhem, are sitting on the bench?

Maybe in the dressing room as a moral builder sort of role, ok. But he can do that without being put on in important game´s just so England sell a few Jerseys, or some sort of token gesture. Friendlies are for that sort of thing, not world cups.

Originally posted by Nihilist
Considerin AC banged on about Liverpool getting wins last season by late jiffing goals, yet Arsenal have done it 9 times already this season.

As Ive said before, there´s not such thing as luck or jiff, you make your own by putting pressure on the opponent. If you throw snow balls at a hole in the wall long enough eventually one will go through, that one going through isn´t "luck" it came about due to constant pressure on quantum possibility of it happening.

The whole point of luck is that it happens without any decided human involvement, so to say you make your own is dumb. If you make your own, it's not luck.

The Liverpool Beach Ball incident was luck.

Originally posted by Nihilist
Considerin AC banged on about Liverpool getting wins last season by late jiffing goals, yet Arsenal have done it 9 times already this season.

Still waiting on you telling me how Arsenal beat Hull by luck.

I'll direct you to my post:

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
How?

Campbell's tackles?

1. You got a goal from a penalty that shouldn't have been. Now, the TACKLE was a foul, so yes, that would have been a penalty had Vennegoor been onside. He wasn't, though, so play should have been stopped anyway. You got a penalty you shouldn't have.

2. Sol'd second tackle was perfect. He got the ball clearly on all replays.

Is it that Sol should've had a red because Phil Brown said? It wasn't a goal-scoring opportunity, the ball was literally resting on Vennegoor's neck...behind him when Campbell knocked him down.

Still, Phil Brown is an idiot and it's no surprise to hear him make such claims. Let's not forget his classic: "Fabregas shouldn't be on the pitch dressed like that." remark.

What else did you have beef with?

Was it Bendtner breaking your heart in stoppage time, or was it Arshavin ghosting two of your defenders and scoring a goal?

The only jiff in that game was your goal.

After constant replays nobody believes Sol should've got a red for the tackle on Zayette (Nor should it be a free kick, he got the ball), and the tackle on Vennegoor that lead to a pen was not a goal-scoring chance. Also, it was offside and play should have been stopped.

Let's examine Hull's best case scenario: Had play gone on, Vennegoor not gone down and Hull scored, that would have been a jiff goal because he was offside.

So, Mr. Scholar, tell me where I'm wrong. I love that you call me a bitter Arsenal fan when you're actually accusing Arsenal of jiff, despite Hull being the only team in that game who had fortune go their way.

Go on. Explain how Arsenal beat Hull by luck.

Is this another instance where I prove you know NOTHING? Yes.

-AC

Originally posted by Bicnarok
How can England be better with him? If Beckham is on the pitch and jogging about giving the odd good pass, then another players like Aaron Lennon, Theo Wallcott or SWP who can play in a similar position, can bomb down the wing and cause absolute mayhem, are sitting on the bench?

While I don't disagree with bringing in more young blood, Beckham has always been a specialist rather than a great all-around player. Considering that 40% of the goals in the last World Cup were scored on set plays, I say that having someone who is still one of the very best in the world at those types of plays is very valuable indeed.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

Is this another instance where I prove you know NOTHING? Yes.

-AC

I think you got it wrong. He "believes" nothing.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
The whole point of luck is that it happens without any decided human involvement, so to say you make your own is dumb. If you make your own, it's not luck.

The Liverpool Beach Ball incident was luck.

-AC

You just beat your argument with your own statement again🙂

"The whole point of luck is that it happens without any decided human involvement"

Football is played WITH human involvement so everything that happens on the pitch doesn´t have anything to do with luck.

The Liverpool beach ball event happened WITH human involvement. The goal came about because the referee wasn´t aware of the rule that the game had to be stopped and played from the point where the ball came onto the pitch, with a drop ball. Although its was a unique situation.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
You just beat your argument with your own statement again🙂

"The whole point of luck is that it happens without any decided human involvement"

Football is played WITH human involvement so everything that happens on the pitch doesn´t have anything to do with luck.

The Liverpool beach ball event happened WITH human involvement. The goal came about because the referee wasn´t aware of the rule that the game had to be stopped and played from the point where the ball came onto the pitch, with a drop ball. Although its was a unique situation.

That's what people mean by luck, though. You're just being ridiculous.

Liverpool were lucky to get the decision Chelsea in the Champions' League, you know, the goal that never was. There were no supernatural elements at play, but it was fortunate and not of their own doing. They were lucky that Gerrard's dive didn't get him a yellow and, instead, got him a penalty.

Like it the beach ball incident was bad luck. It doesn't matter if you can explain why.

People usually use "Luck" to mean unexpected or unlikely good or bad fortune that is out of the hands of whoever was on the receiving end.

Stop being dumb about it.

If someone's girlfriend dumps them and they happen to get hit by lightning the same day; bad luck. It's a saying.

You don't make your own luck, in any sense. By your rationale, Sunderland made their own luck with the beach ball. How? They didn't throw it on, they didn't influence the ref. It was just bad luck.

-AC

Bye bye Chelsea, Inter did a brilliant defending job on them and won 0:1 (3:1agg). Chelsea maybe could have had a couple of penalties in the first half but apart from that never looked dangerous imo.

Drogba met his match in Lucio and Maicon, not being able to use his size to his advantage and got sent of🙂

An interesting bunch of teams left now, CSKA getting through as well.

Oh how I loved the sweet irony that resulted when Mourinho's current team knocked out his old one.
I've had a certain amount of disdain for Mourinho, but my disdain for the Chelsea team is greater.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That's what people mean by luck, though. You're just being ridiculous.

Liverpool were lucky to get the decision Chelsea in the Champions' League, you know, the goal that never was. There were no supernatural elements at play, but it was fortunate and not of their own doing. They were lucky that Gerrard's dive didn't get him a yellow and, instead, got him a penalty.

Like it the beach ball incident was bad luck. It doesn't matter if you can explain why.

People usually use "Luck" to mean unexpected or unlikely good or bad fortune that is out of the hands of whoever was on the receiving end.

Stop being dumb about it.

If someone's girlfriend dumps them and they happen to get hit by lightning the same day; bad luck. It's a saying.

You don't make your own luck, in any sense. By your rationale, Sunderland made their own luck with the beach ball. How? They didn't throw it on, they didn't influence the ref. It was just bad luck.

-AC

Gerrard dived deliberately looking for the penalty though. So it wasn't entirely out of his hands. The outcome of the decision on his action was, though.

Originally posted by Demonic Phoenix
Oh how I loved the sweet irony that resulted when Mourinho's current team knocked out his old one.
I've had a certain amount of disdain for Mourinho, but my disdain for the Chelsea team is greater.

Did you notice how Mourinho was running about giving instructions and "tweeking" his team throughout the match, whereas Ancelotti just stood there like a statue. It was a strategic masterwork by Mourinho imo.

Originally posted by jaden101
Gerrard dived deliberately looking for the penalty though. So it wasn't entirely out of his hands. The outcome of the decision on his action was, though.

Don´t bother going down this road, you´ll just get loads of contradictory waffle with the odd insult thrown in from A.C, who judging by his unmovable "I´m perfect and always right" approach to debates, is probably a bot.

Jaden won't get any of that because he makes good points and doesn't dodge anything.

Also, he was agreeing. The ref giving Gerrard the pen was unlikely fortune.

I love how you dodged my last reply, Bic. I wasn't gonna say anything until you just came at me unreasonably.

Your claim: "As Ive said before, there´s not such thing as luck or jiff, you make your own by putting pressure on the opponent.".

Explain how Sunderland achieved this with the beach ball or explain how it wasn't extremely unlikely fortune, i.e: luck.

"If you throw snow balls at a hole in the wall long enough eventually one will go through, that one going through isn´t "luck" it came about due to constant pressure on quantum possibility of it happening.".

No, that's statistical chance. There's a hole, there's you, there are snowballs and there's you throwing them with intent to get them in the hole. There's learning how how or low to throw, with what degree of power or lack thereof. Lots of things prove that is nothing to do with luck.

The beach ball thing was luck. That didn't come about via constant pressure. Sunderland had no input.

Would you say: "If you play enough games eventually you'll score a goal via beach ball."? No. That was luck.

If you can't counter the point, then don't reply at all, dude. Don't be childish about it.

-AC

I didn´t dodge it, just didn´t fancy arguing the point for the umpteenth time with you. Until you can produce scientific evidence of "Luck" or "Jiff", your wrong!

Well Barcelona totally outplayed Stuttgart last night, they are on a different level than other teams in the CL. The only team I see beating them is Inter, they might be Barcelona´s Achilles heal, not because they are better but because of the strategic aspect of their game.

Watching Bremen V Valencia 1:3 half time what a game, very entertaining. Kamikaze football at its best, shot at goal every 3 minutes🙂

David Silva and Villa are absolutely brilliant.

Kamikaze football ahahahaha.

Originally posted by Liberator
Kamikaze football ahahahaha.

You should have seen it, it ended 4:4 an amazing game. The statistics said there was a shot at goal every two minutes!! And the Valencia goalkeeper Cesar Sanchez made some amazing saves.

This is the sort of football I like.

I see Fullham beat Juve 4:1 and went through, very surprising that.

And the Draw for the next round is

Arsenal v Barcelona:- bye bye Arsenal

Bayern Munich v Manchester United:- be good if Robben and Ribery are fit.

Lyon v Bordeaux :- Could be a good clash this.

Inter Milan v CSKA Moscow :- gotta fancy Inter taking this one.

I recon it´ll be a Bordeaux V Man united Final.

Europa League QUARTER-FINAL DRAW

Fulham v Wolfsburg

Hamburg v Standard Liege

Valencia v Atletico Madrid

Benfica v Liverpool

SEMI-FINAL DRAW

Hamburg/Standard Liege v Fulham/Wolfsburg

Valencia/Atletico Madrid v Benfica/Liverpool

O I hope Liverpool meat Valencia in the semi final🙂

Originally posted by Bicnarok
I didn´t dodge it, just didn´t fancy arguing the point for the umpteenth time with you. Until you can produce scientific evidence of "Luck" or "Jiff", your wrong!

Well Barcelona totally outplayed Stuttgart last night, they are on a different level than other teams in the CL. The only team I see beating them is Inter, they might be Barcelona´s Achilles heal, not because they are better but because of the strategic aspect of their game.

So then how did Sunderland orchestrate the beach ball?

If, of course, you make your own luck.

-AC

The beach ball event happened, the same way a chicken or whatever it was once ran on the pitch, not to mention various flashers. But on these occasions the ref stopped the game. On the beach ball event he didn´t.

So beach ball event = Fan making a mistake + Ref making a mistake + someone shooting at goal in an area common for shooting at goal * 2/ 11 = not lucky.

Or in other words B = F+R+S*2/ 11.

Not stop punching out of your league and comment on my "bye bye Arsenal" comment I made after noticing they are going to get annihilated by Barcelona in the CL🙂

Originally posted by Bicnarok
The beach ball event happened, the same way a chicken or whatever it was once ran on the pitch, not to mention various flashers. But on these occasions the ref stopped the game. On the beach ball event he didn´t.

So beach ball event = Fan making a mistake + Ref making a mistake + someone shooting at goal in an area common for shooting at goal * 2/ 11 = not lucky.

Or in other words B = F+R+S*2/ 11.

Not stop punching out of your league and comment on my "bye bye Arsenal" comment I made after noticing they are going to get annihilated by Barcelona in the CL🙂

So how did Sunderland have a hand in it? You still haven't answered my question.

You say everyone makes their own luck by playing a certain way. Sunderland didn't get the beach ball because they played a certain way. They got it because of a series of unlikely and fortuitious events, i.e: luck.

Stop weaselling, son. You're just wrong.

-AC

Its plainly obvious that one of the Sunderland players used Jedi powers to pull the beach ball on the pitch, not luck but The FORCE..