|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 8, 2015 0:07:38 GMT
Got to say I hurl abuse and vitriol every game on my own or with everyone else. I'm one of those cunts.
|
|
|
Post by passtheoatcakes on Nov 8, 2015 0:08:27 GMT
Yeah and it wasn't very good! I thought we were excellent today (in the second half) barring 3 players. I thought Chelsea were poor. Burn the witch! No we will just stick you in the ducking stool...can you swim? I think Chelsea played well, similar to the Cup game, they were not poor by any standard. I thought we played well in both halves against a very strong team. I thought the whole team played well, some even bled for the cause and we won. All my opinions of course and I maintain that today has been fantastic; a great team effort and a wonderful three points!!! UTP!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by thedeadlyshart on Nov 8, 2015 0:08:33 GMT
thanks. I'm referring to when he picked up the yellow by chasing costa 20 yards when he absolutely didn't have to. That was ill-disciplined IMO. It was but I don't think it was a yellow tbh. But that summed Costa up, he probably should have hurt us there after Ryan does leave a gap but he's too arsed about the battle. It was their issue all night. i don't know if they showed the replay on motd, but he put his forearm into costa around the neck area, could have been more than a yellow, but thankfully it wasn't. I looked at Charlie's and Glenn's stats btw and a couple this stood out to me. Glenn made more clearances, and had a more successful pass rate, and that is to be expected from him and the way he plays. But Charlie hardly passed the ball backwards all game, and he was on target for all but one in our own half. That's pretty good considering we spent large portions of the game pinned back in our own half. Also, until I saw it on the stat sheet I forgot about the chance he created in the first minute or two where Shaqiri attempted an acrobatic volley that went way off target. Regardless I'm pretty sure you're not going to change your tune about Charlie, but I was happy about his performance.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 8, 2015 0:14:49 GMT
Yeah and it wasn't very good! I thought we were excellent today (in the second half) barring 3 players. I thought Chelsea were poor. Burn the witch! No we will just stick you in the ducking stool...can you swim? I think Chelsea played well, similar to the Cup game, they were not poor by any standard. I thought we played well in both halves against a very strong team. I thought the whole team played well, some even bled for the cause and we won. All my opinions of course and I maintain that today has been fantastic; a great team effort and a wonderful three points!!! UTP!!!!!! Like a fish! I thought they were much better in the cup game and I thought we were lucky not be a few down at half time in that one. Butland was outstanding. He had to make one good save today. We were poor in the first half, way too stand offish and we couldn't keep the ball, we tried long ball bollocks to Walters against Terry and it resulted in bags of awfulness (as you'd expect). We won but even when we win, we can carry players, it can happen. That seems to be forgotten. And pointing that out isn't degrading the win. Nor is pointing out that I thought Chelsea were shite. That helped but in the second half until we scored I thought it was the best we've played at home for some time. It was how we should play, it's how we need to play. We also need to sign a central midfielder.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 8, 2015 0:17:56 GMT
It was but I don't think it was a yellow tbh. But that summed Costa up, he probably should have hurt us there after Ryan does leave a gap but he's too arsed about the battle. It was their issue all night. i don't know if they showed the replay on motd, but he put his forearm into costa around the neck area, could have been more than a yellow, but thankfully it wasn't. I looked at Charlie's and Glenn's stats btw and a couple this stood out to me. Glenn made more clearances, and had a more successful pass rate, and that is to be expected from him and the way he plays. But Charlie hardly passed the ball backwards all game, and he was on target for all but one in our own half. That's pretty good considering we spent large portions of the game pinned back in our own half. Also, until I saw it on the stat sheet I forgot about the chance he created in the first minute or two where Shaqiri attempted an acrobatic volley that went way off target. Regardless I'm pretty sure you're not going to change your tune about Charlie, but I was happy about his performance. Not in a million years. His passing was ok today but there were 1 or 2 moments where he got caught on it but again I expect that. That was good from him, it was about the only time he properly got forward, he needs to do that more and then get back and then go again etc. Well no I thought he was the same old, same old. But the midfield being overrun at home for the second league game in a row doesn't seem to bother too many people.
|
|
|
Post by lee1982 on Nov 8, 2015 0:18:56 GMT
Somebody needs a girlfriend asap
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 8, 2015 0:20:35 GMT
Oooh more insults, this is far too easy.
|
|
|
Post by The Red and White Baron on Nov 8, 2015 0:27:27 GMT
Jesus wept.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 8, 2015 0:29:17 GMT
So then what did he do?
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Nov 8, 2015 0:46:18 GMT
Have a day off Bayern, for fuck's sake.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 8, 2015 0:47:16 GMT
He was shite though and nobody has offered anything to suggest why he wasn't.
Other than stuff that actually didn't happen.
|
|
|
Post by sentinel1 on Nov 8, 2015 0:49:20 GMT
He was shite though and nobody has offered anything to suggest why he wasn't. Other than stuff that actually didn't happen.
|
|
|
Post by potterpaul on Nov 8, 2015 0:50:39 GMT
He was shite though and nobody has offered anything to suggest why he wasn't. Other than stuff that actually didn't happen. I repeat you have already answered it, so why should we bother. Move on, next player, Joselu?
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 8, 2015 0:53:58 GMT
He was shite though and nobody has offered anything to suggest why he wasn't. Other than stuff that actually didn't happen. I repeat you have already answered it, so why should we bother. Move on, next player, Joselu? And I have answered you, you've completely ignored like most of the points made. I like Joselu, he's clearly got something about him but needs more chances and needs Crouch to be sold. Was he needed? Not if you're giving Crouch a new deal, no. Should he be starting? No. Was he on the bench today? Weird signing but nowt to do with him. All my questions re Joselu are really at the manager.
|
|
|
Post by whatsashig on Nov 8, 2015 1:05:25 GMT
For me I thiught it was a difficult game for any of our midfield to look great offensively as hazard and Willian or so bloody good at sucking a player in and then excels rating in to space, any how's to keep the stooges thing going how about this
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Nov 8, 2015 1:07:40 GMT
There was frequently a black hole in front of our back four today, that's for sure. Harsh to shine a spotlight on it after such a great win, but it's true, and signing a CM remains the absolute #1 priority.
|
|
|
Post by eastyorksexile on Nov 8, 2015 1:09:17 GMT
He was awful! He might as well not have been on the pitch. He got run past way too easily and was bollocksed after 20 minutes. We had a one man midfield today, Whelan was excellent again. Adam though? Garbage. And before the "you can't carry a player and win vs Chelsea people start", you can they're absolutely awful and 16th for a reason. He did play as good a ball as you'll see to Shaq though in the first half which was a beaut but other than that he did sod all. were you at the same game as me, obviously not
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 8, 2015 1:10:27 GMT
He was awful! He might as well not have been on the pitch. He got run past way too easily and was bollocksed after 20 minutes. We had a one man midfield today, Whelan was excellent again. Adam though? Garbage. And before the "you can't carry a player and win vs Chelsea people start", you can they're absolutely awful and 16th for a reason. He did play as good a ball as you'll see to Shaq though in the first half which was a beaut but other than that he did sod all. were you at the same game as me, obviously not Go on then..............what did he do? If he played so well, explain what he did. I won't hold my breath.
|
|
|
Post by potterpaul on Nov 8, 2015 1:10:52 GMT
I repeat you have already answered it, so why should we bother. Move on, next player, Joselu? And I have answered you, you've completely ignored like most of the points made. I like Joselu, he's clearly got something about him but needs more chances and needs Crouch to be sold. Was he needed? Not if you're giving Crouch a new deal, no. Should he be starting? No. Was he on the bench today? Weird signing but nowt to do with him. All my questions re Joselu are really at the manager. For what it's worth Bayern, now that Ryan is back I think it would be well worth revisiting MVG alongside Whelan again. Whelan can now focus more on developing that understanding with his new partner rather than focusing on the captaincy. But I forget you got it in for him also.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 8, 2015 1:16:01 GMT
And I have answered you, you've completely ignored like most of the points made. I like Joselu, he's clearly got something about him but needs more chances and needs Crouch to be sold. Was he needed? Not if you're giving Crouch a new deal, no. Should he be starting? No. Was he on the bench today? Weird signing but nowt to do with him. All my questions re Joselu are really at the manager. For what it's worth Bayern, now that Ryan is back I think it would be well worth revisiting MVG alongside Whelan again. Whelan can now focus more on developing that understanding with his new partner rather than focusing on the captaincy. But I forget you got it in for him also. Van Ginkel? I thought he was playing shite...........he was. How is that having it in for him? You people baffle me.
|
|
|
Post by philm87 on Nov 8, 2015 1:17:26 GMT
I always said he couldn't play in a midfield two but he has adapted pretty well in the last few weeks.
Yes, we have slightly less protection in front of the defence and yes he often struggles to go the distance.
His passing over a distance is fucking incredible though. That ball to Shaqiri in the first half, another switch of player to Arnie in the second (on his weaker foot too). Very few players can pass it like that. This makes him a real asset in that deeper role, because he can switch play or starts counters so effectively.
He's also proved himself very calm in possession even when deep in our own half. Knows when to play it simple, when to play it long. Has another skill and technique to retain possession in difficult areas. And surely nobody can deny, that when he gets within range there are few better players in the world at shooting from distance.
He doesn't fit our system perfectly, but there is surely no denying Charlie Adam is a top player.
|
|
|
Post by potterpaul on Nov 8, 2015 1:24:35 GMT
For what it's worth Bayern, now that Ryan is back I think it would be well worth revisiting MVG alongside Whelan again. Whelan can now focus more on developing that understanding with his new partner rather than focusing on the captaincy. But I forget you got it in for him also. Van Ginkel? I thought he was playing shite...........he was. How is that having it in for him? You people baffle me. And this is where you let yourself down He played shit therefore he must be shit attitude Instead of looking for the possible reasons for poor or below standard performance, and with you being the guru of all things football should know there are many reasons.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 8, 2015 1:25:14 GMT
I always said he couldn't play in a midfield two but he has adapted pretty well in the last few weeks. Yes, we have slightly less protection in front of the defence and yes he often struggles to go the distance. His passing over a distance is fucking incredible though. That ball to Shaqiri in the first half, another switch of player to Arnie in the second (on his weaker foot too). Very few players can pass it like that. This makes him a real asset in that deeper role, because he can switch play or starts counters so effectively. He's also proved himself very calm in possession even when deep in our own half. Knows when to play it simple, when to play it long. Has another skill and technique to retain possession in difficult areas. And surely nobody can deny, that when he gets within range there are few better players in the world at shooting from distance. He doesn't fit our system perfectly, but there is surely no denying Charlie Adam is a top player. He doesn't do it often enough though does he? And tonight it had little or no real effect on the game. And I'll always disagree with that. There was at least one time where he got caught on the ball, that's one time too many. Shooting, I agree but he's not getting forward enough to bring that into play. The best Adam has played in a Stoke shirt was when Bojan was out and he had a free role with Fonzy dictating play. In that role I think he can be very decent and it brings his best assets into play and limits the Hollywood passes (I dislike the Hollywood balls it's got to be said). But deeper? I think we've been overrun in the last two league home games in there and against Bournemouth we couldn't keep the ball, he was a part of that. I'm just not convinced he's done a job in there. The results have got better, which is great but I think it's largely been in spite of this than because of it. This might sound patronising but good to have some actual decent points thrown at my bollocks rather than childish insults.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 8, 2015 1:28:36 GMT
Van Ginkel? I thought he was playing shite...........he was. How is that having it in for him? You people baffle me. And this is where you let yourself down He played shit therefore he must be shit attitude Instead of looking for the possible reasons for poor or below standard performance, and with you being the guru of all things football should know there are many reasons. What? I haven't said he's shit. What I said minus the brackets "I thought he was playing shit.......he was (playing shit)". Now if I said "I thought he was shit....he was/is" then you'd have a point, I didn't though. He might be a good player, he started to get better and then was dropped, will we ever find out? Who knows.
|
|
|
Post by philm87 on Nov 8, 2015 1:29:30 GMT
What's wrong with a Hollywood pass though?
If he gets it midway in our own half, spots Arnie's run out of the corner of his eye, and belts it forty yards, perfectly weighted, straight onto the guy's toe such that he barely breaks stride then that is a pretty useful player to have in your side. And its no fluke, he does that sort of thing on a regular basis.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 8, 2015 1:34:37 GMT
What's wrong with a Hollywood pass though? If he gets it midway in our own half, spots Arnie's run out of the corner of his eye, and belts it forty yards, perfectly weighted, straight onto the guy's toe such that he barely breaks stride then that is a pretty useful player to have in your side. And its no fluke, he does that sort of thing on a regular basis. They usually don't come off though? 1 in 3/4 at a guess. I think as we've shown in the past, we can easily live without that side of his game. His goals when he's playing higher up though are a different matter. And even as someone who I don't like how he plays the game, they have been vital to us in different times. His passing does and will always do my tits in with how hit and miss it is. 69.4% completion rate today, just for info. I like the way N'Zonzi plays it from deep (and that's just an easy example, not a harking back to him thing). I like the simplistic, metronomical game. That's how I like football.
|
|
|
Post by philm87 on Nov 8, 2015 1:37:15 GMT
What's wrong with a Hollywood pass though? If he gets it midway in our own half, spots Arnie's run out of the corner of his eye, and belts it forty yards, perfectly weighted, straight onto the guy's toe such that he barely breaks stride then that is a pretty useful player to have in your side. And its no fluke, he does that sort of thing on a regular basis. They usually don't come off though? 1 in 3/4 at a guess. I think as we've shown in the past, we can easily live without that side of his game. His goals when he's playing higher up though are a different matter. And even as someone who I don't like how he plays the game, they have been vital to us in different times. His passing does and will always do my tits in with how hit and miss it is. 69.4% completion rate today, just for info. I like the way N'Zonzi plays it from deep (and that's just an easy example, not a harking back to him thing). I like the simplistic, metronomical game. That's how I like football. I think that last sentence is a partial clue to where you are going wrong. How you ''like'' football and whether or not Charlie Adam is playing well are two separate things.
|
|
|
Post by potterpaul on Nov 8, 2015 1:37:49 GMT
And this is where you let yourself down He played shit therefore he must be shit attitude Instead of looking for the possible reasons for poor or below standard performance, and with you being the guru of all things football should know there are many reasons. What? I haven't said he's shit. What I said minus the brackets "I thought he was playing shit.......he was (playing shit)". Now if I said "I thought he was shit....he was/is" then you'd have a point, I didn't though. He might be a good player, he started to get better and then was dropped, will we ever find out? Who knows. Not just MVG, you have past history with 50% of the squad of summing up players on one off or a few games. This thread itself is proof enough of your nonsense and attitude and as you can fathom out most readers are placing you in the looney poster pile.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 8, 2015 1:44:32 GMT
They usually don't come off though? 1 in 3/4 at a guess. I think as we've shown in the past, we can easily live without that side of his game. His goals when he's playing higher up though are a different matter. And even as someone who I don't like how he plays the game, they have been vital to us in different times. His passing does and will always do my tits in with how hit and miss it is. 69.4% completion rate today, just for info. I like the way N'Zonzi plays it from deep (and that's just an easy example, not a harking back to him thing). I like the simplistic, metronomical game. That's how I like football. I think that last sentence is a partial clue to where you are going wrong. How you ''like'' football and whether or not Charlie Adam is playing well are two separate things. But if he's giving the ball away 30% of the time and I think we'd all agree we let them see too much of the ball? today then that's an issue no? If he's not making a tackle and indeed lost 4, when he's meant to be defending, isn't that an issue? It's got nowt to do with what I like to see, it's the basics of the role he's meant to be playing.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 8, 2015 1:45:16 GMT
What? I haven't said he's shit. What I said minus the brackets "I thought he was playing shit.......he was (playing shit)". Now if I said "I thought he was shit....he was/is" then you'd have a point, I didn't though. He might be a good player, he started to get better and then was dropped, will we ever find out? Who knows. Not just MVG, you have past history with 50% of the squad of summing up players on one off or a few games. This thread itself is proof enough of your nonsense and attitude and as you can fathom out most readers are placing you in the looney poster pile. But it's there in black and white, I haven't said it, you've made it up. Or are you ignoring that too?
|
|