|
Post by GoBoks on Sept 23, 2017 19:49:06 GMT
Can't blame Hughes for today. Shocking errors. Digraceful refereeing. Crap finishing. Played well. One of the most unfair 4-0 results I've seen. Andy Townsend just said Chelsea should have had 8 it was that one sided! I Oh c'mon! Last 10 minutes , yes they creamed us. Before then we gave almost as good as we got. Whe 1 player costs more than the entire starting line-up of our team, what do you expect. And that 1 player scored 3 goals. They had half the number of shots we had. We had more corners, more free kicks, a penalty and a red card appeal turned down. They had 4 shots on target and scored 4 times. Stupid errors. The casual approach by some players is astounding. Almost as if they think they are too good to be tackled or have a pass intercepted. Jesse needs to go take care of his kid and come back rearing to go. Fletcher needs to wake up. Allen needs to have some reason behind his running and Ramadan needs to be told to show off his skills instead of trying to be "a premier league" footballer. Johnson needs to be taken out back and dealt with! All in all, we probably deserved to lose by a goal or 2. 4-0 is not a fair reflection of the game I watched.
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on Sept 23, 2017 19:59:11 GMT
Yeah obviously. I even said they would beat us 5-0 and they manage to get 4. Who's the one talking shit here? It's painfully obvious we were going to get spanked. We haven't addressed the areas where we are weak and now it's another season of Mark Hughes and his daft ideas. He really needs to leave, no good will come from him staying. TRUST ME on this. You must be sooo proud of yourself. "Look at me, I said we'd get beaten 5-0 and I was almost right." 3 gifted goals from stupid errors, resulted in a 4-0 score-line, but apart from the last 10 minutes we gave them a decent game. A Penalty shout at 2-0 could have changed the game. Their tosspot defender who should have been sent off could have changed the game. Hughes gambling to bring on Affelay got punished, but rather that than trying to defend a 2-0 losing scoreline. I think this game was much much closer than you think and some pundit that says they could have scored 8 ... Crap. They only had 4 shots on target. Finally, Why the hell would we TRUST YOU?????? MArk Hughes has proven himself to be an excellent manager at the top level over and over. You have proven yourself to be a moanbag of note that doesn't know his backside from his elbow. Trust you? No bloody way! Ever!
|
|
|
Post by foxysgloves on Sept 23, 2017 20:01:21 GMT
Wouldn't a Hughes out outburst be a good thing?
Two negatives make a positive.....so a Hughes out outburst would actually be a Hughes inburst.
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on Sept 23, 2017 20:04:58 GMT
We was expected to lose not get destroyed Weez distroid wer not. Jus bad luk!
|
|
|
Post by StatesideStokie on Sept 23, 2017 20:05:50 GMT
We've replaced Johnson with Diouf. The only reason Johnson got a sniff today was because Zouma, Shawcross, Zimmer and Cameron were out. To blame Hughes for that is pathetic. And there's no reason to replace Peiters. We've brought in a promising young left back who may eventually replace him, but Peiters (despite a rough patch last season) is one of most dependable, consistent defenders. Replacing a right-back with our best goal scorer. Yes I can blame Hughes for that, and I will. But you just said we didn't replace Johnson. Now you're contradicting yourself. Which one s it?
|
|
|
Post by milky on Sept 23, 2017 20:13:39 GMT
Replacing a right-back with our best goal scorer. Yes I can blame Hughes for that, and I will. But you just said we didn't replace Johnson. Now you're contradicting yourself. Which one s it? [br I honestly wouldn't waste your time mate.. Agendas .
|
|
|
Post by riccyfuller93 on Sept 23, 2017 20:16:34 GMT
Yeah obviously. I even said they would beat us 5-0 and they manage to get 4. Who's the one talking shit here? It's painfully obvious we were going to get spanked. We haven't addressed the areas where we are weak and now it's another season of Mark Hughes and his daft ideas. He really needs to leave, no good will come from him staying. TRUST ME on this. You must be sooo proud of yourself. "Look at me, I said we'd get beaten 5-0 and I was almost right." 3 gifted goals from stupid errors, resulted in a 4-0 score-line, but apart from the last 10 minutes we gave them a decent game. A Penalty shout at 2-0 could have changed the game. Their tosspot defender who should have been sent off could have changed the game. Hughes gambling to bring on Affelay got punished, but rather that than trying to defend a 2-0 losing scoreline. I think this game was much much closer than you think and some pundit that says they could have scored 8 ... Crap. They only had 4 shots on target. Finally, Why the hell would we TRUST YOU?????? MArk Hughes has proven himself to be an excellent manager at the top level over and over. You have proven yourself to be a moanbag of note that doesn't know his backside from his elbow. Trust you? No bloody way! Ever! It wasn't close and if you think it was then I'm sorry, but you're just very biased. All of your "Could have, should have, would have" can be applied to Chelsea as well and that's why the pundit said "They could have scored 8" so with your logic I will reply to your "Could have, should have, would have" with your very own reply. "Crap." Have a nice evening!
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Sept 23, 2017 20:16:59 GMT
Bye Hughes. 2 years of being absolutely shit at the back. And now we are absolutely shit going forward. Bollocks So we're not ropey at the back and pedestrian going forward then?
|
|
|
Post by riccyfuller93 on Sept 23, 2017 20:17:42 GMT
Replacing a right-back with our best goal scorer. Yes I can blame Hughes for that, and I will. But you just said we didn't replace Johnson. Now you're contradicting yourself. Which one s it? We haven't. I'm using your quote in saying that we replaced him with Diouf which is fucking laughable because he's our striker. Come on use your brain lad. Diouf is not a right-back and Johnson needs replacing.
|
|
|
Post by werrington on Sept 23, 2017 20:17:47 GMT
Replacing a right-back with our best goal scorer. Yes I can blame Hughes for that, and I will. But you just said we didn't replace Johnson. Now you're contradicting yourself. Which one s it? Brilliant mate Ricci lad doesn't know his arse from his fucking elbow
|
|
|
Post by riccyfuller93 on Sept 23, 2017 20:18:17 GMT
But you just said we didn't replace Johnson. Now you're contradicting yourself. Which one s it? [br I honestly wouldn't waste your time mate.. Agendas . Delusional.
|
|
|
Post by riccyfuller93 on Sept 23, 2017 20:20:13 GMT
But you just said we didn't replace Johnson. Now you're contradicting yourself. Which one s it? Brilliant mate Ricci lad doesn't know his arse from his fucking elbow You're not very bright if you failed to understand my quote.... He clearly said "We replaced Johnson with Diouf" which is a joke because Diouf is not a right-back. We haven't replaced Johnson at all, I was being sarcastic that he think's it's acceptable to say we replaced him with our own fucking striker. Embarrassing from you pal.
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on Sept 23, 2017 20:21:44 GMT
You must be sooo proud of yourself. "Look at me, I said we'd get beaten 5-0 and I was almost right." 3 gifted goals from stupid errors, resulted in a 4-0 score-line, but apart from the last 10 minutes we gave them a decent game. A Penalty shout at 2-0 could have changed the game. Their tosspot defender who should have been sent off could have changed the game. Hughes gambling to bring on Affelay got punished, but rather that than trying to defend a 2-0 losing scoreline. I think this game was much much closer than you think and some pundit that says they could have scored 8 ... Crap. They only had 4 shots on target. Finally, Why the hell would we TRUST YOU?????? MArk Hughes has proven himself to be an excellent manager at the top level over and over. You have proven yourself to be a moanbag of note that doesn't know his backside from his elbow. Trust you? No bloody way! Ever! It wasn't close and if you think it was then I'm sorry, but you're just very biased. All of your "Could have, should have, would have" can be applied to Chelsea as well and that's why the pundit said "They could have scored 8" so with your logic I will reply to your "Could have, should have, would have" with your very own reply. "Crap." Have a nice evening! Your response misses one vital element - As Stoke fans we are SUPPOSED to be biased. If we as Stoke Fans don't stick up for our team, Match of the day, your precious pundits and you sure as hell aren't going to.
|
|
|
Post by riccyfuller93 on Sept 23, 2017 20:24:57 GMT
It wasn't close and if you think it was then I'm sorry, but you're just very biased. All of your "Could have, should have, would have" can be applied to Chelsea as well and that's why the pundit said "They could have scored 8" so with your logic I will reply to your "Could have, should have, would have" with your very own reply. "Crap." Have a nice evening! Your response misses one vital element - As Stoke fans we are SUPPOSED to be biased. If we as Stoke Fans don't stick up for our team, Match of the day, your precious pundits and you sure as hell aren't going to. It's not about sticking up for Stoke just because I'm a Stoke fan. I'm not a biased person I fucking hate it to be honest with you. I'm just saying it how it is and how I see it. I'm not going to just lie for the sake of "Sticking up" for my team. What good is there in being biased?
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Sept 23, 2017 20:30:28 GMT
It wasn't close and if you think it was then I'm sorry, but you're just very biased. All of your "Could have, should have, would have" can be applied to Chelsea as well and that's why the pundit said "They could have scored 8" so with your logic I will reply to your "Could have, should have, would have" with your very own reply. "Crap." Have a nice evening! Your response misses one vital element - As Stoke fans we are SUPPOSED to be biased. If we as Stoke Fans don't stick up for our team, Match of the day, your precious pundits and you sure as hell aren't going to. No but you can't stick your head in the sand and pretend that everything is rosey because it isn't. 3 wins from our last 17 games and one of those was Rochdale. One away win since January. People turned on Pulis for form like that (and I'm no TP fan, far from it, but shit form is shit form whoever the gaffer is).
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on Sept 23, 2017 20:32:29 GMT
You must be sooo proud of yourself. "Look at me, I said we'd get beaten 5-0 and I was almost right." 3 gifted goals from stupid errors, resulted in a 4-0 score-line, but apart from the last 10 minutes we gave them a decent game. A Penalty shout at 2-0 could have changed the game. Their tosspot defender who should have been sent off could have changed the game. Hughes gambling to bring on Affelay got punished, but rather that than trying to defend a 2-0 losing scoreline. I think this game was much much closer than you think and some pundit that says they could have scored 8 ... Crap. They only had 4 shots on target. Finally, Why the hell would we TRUST YOU?????? MArk Hughes has proven himself to be an excellent manager at the top level over and over. You have proven yourself to be a moanbag of note that doesn't know his backside from his elbow. Trust you? No bloody way! Ever! It wasn't close and if you think it was then I'm sorry, but you're just very biased. All of your "Could have, should have, would have" can be applied to Chelsea as well and that's why the pundit said "They could have scored 8" so with your logic I will reply to your "Could have, should have, would have" with your very own reply. "Crap." Have a nice evening! Besides, a penalty not given and the rules being bent so that a player is not sent off, are concrete things that should have occurred. A player skying a shot or failing to run on to a pass are things that happen dozens of times in a game. If you count those as "significant events", every game could have 10-15 goals. Why not name the occasions when you think Chelsea could have scored 4 more goals?
|
|
|
Post by riccyfuller93 on Sept 23, 2017 20:35:38 GMT
It wasn't close and if you think it was then I'm sorry, but you're just very biased. All of your "Could have, should have, would have" can be applied to Chelsea as well and that's why the pundit said "They could have scored 8" so with your logic I will reply to your "Could have, should have, would have" with your very own reply. "Crap." Have a nice evening! Besides, a penalty not given and the rules being bent so that a player is not sent off, are concrete things that should have occurred. A player skying a shot or failing to run on to a pass are things that happen dozens of times in a game. If you count those as "significant events", every game could have 10-15 goals. Why not name the occasions when you think Chelsea could have scored 4 more goals? I don't think they could've scored 4 more, but it could've ended 5 or 6. Morata had another chance after a Moses shot that came in just a bit too fast, Moses could've even just squared it. At the end of the day they put 4 past us pretty comfortably and we failed to even test Courtois. That's just the facts and they fully deserved to win.
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on Sept 23, 2017 20:38:17 GMT
Your response misses one vital element - As Stoke fans we are SUPPOSED to be biased. If we as Stoke Fans don't stick up for our team, Match of the day, your precious pundits and you sure as hell aren't going to. It's not about sticking up for Stoke just because I'm a Stoke fan. I'm not a biased person I fucking hate it to be honest with you. I'm just saying it how it is and how I see it. I'm not going to just lie for the sake of "Sticking up" for my team. What good is there in being biased? So you think we should not have had a penalty and Alonso should not have been sent off, Chelsea should have scored 8, and that we did not have any attacks of note? Glad to know you're not biased. Here's a clipping form ESPN who obviously must be very biased towards Stoke .... "That was hard on Stoke, who had the champions on the back foot for much of the first half without really troubling goalkeeper Thibaut Courtois and arguably enjoyed the better of the second half up until Morata's late double." But hey, you know better, as long as you're not sitting on your elbow.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2017 20:43:01 GMT
It's not about sticking up for Stoke just because I'm a Stoke fan. I'm not a biased person I fucking hate it to be honest with you. I'm just saying it how it is and how I see it. I'm not going to just lie for the sake of "Sticking up" for my team. What good is there in being biased? So you think we should not have had a penalty and Alonso should not have been sent off, Chelsea should have scored 8, and that we did not have any attacks of note? Glad to know you're not biased. Here's a clipping form ESPN who obviously must be very biased towards Stoke .... "That was hard on Stoke, who had the champions on the back foot for much of the first half without really troubling goalkeeper Thibaut Courtois and arguably enjoyed the better of the second half up until Morata's late double." But hey, you know better, as long as you're not sitting on your elbow. How can you have your head up your arse, and sit on your elbow at the same time?
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on Sept 23, 2017 20:43:20 GMT
Besides, a penalty not given and the rules being bent so that a player is not sent off, are concrete things that should have occurred. A player skying a shot or failing to run on to a pass are things that happen dozens of times in a game. If you count those as "significant events", every game could have 10-15 goals. Why not name the occasions when you think Chelsea could have scored 4 more goals? I don't think they could've scored 4 more, but it could've ended 5 or 6. Morata had another chance after a Moses shot that came in just a bit too fast, Moses could've even just squared it. At the end of the day they put 4 past us pretty comfortably and we failed to even test Courtois. That's just the facts and they fully deserved to win. I don't think anyone has claimed that we should not have lost. Just that it was closer than the score line suggests. Which you obviously disagree with. Apart from the one chance you mentioned "after a Moses shot that came in just a bit too fast", where would there other 3 goals have come from? Have you taken into account that Diouf and Fletcher could also have scored? And you still haven't commented on the penalty not called or the leniency shown to Alonso. Biased? I think you are mate and it's absolutely not towards Stoke. Is there such a thing as an Anti-fan?
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on Sept 23, 2017 20:44:22 GMT
So you think we should not have had a penalty and Alonso should not have been sent off, Chelsea should have scored 8, and that we did not have any attacks of note? Glad to know you're not biased. Here's a clipping form ESPN who obviously must be very biased towards Stoke .... "That was hard on Stoke, who had the champions on the back foot for much of the first half without really troubling goalkeeper Thibaut Courtois and arguably enjoyed the better of the second half up until Morata's late double." But hey, you know better, as long as you're not sitting on your elbow. How can you have your head up your arse, and sit on your elbow at the same time? Only possible if .... You don't know your ...
|
|
|
Post by riccyfuller93 on Sept 23, 2017 20:49:15 GMT
I don't think they could've scored 4 more, but it could've ended 5 or 6. Morata had another chance after a Moses shot that came in just a bit too fast, Moses could've even just squared it. At the end of the day they put 4 past us pretty comfortably and we failed to even test Courtois. That's just the facts and they fully deserved to win. I don't think anyone has claimed that we should not have lost. Just that it was closer than the score line suggests. Which you obviously disagree with. Apart from the one chance you mentioned "after a Moses shot that came in just a bit too fast", where would there other 3 goals have come from? Have you taken into account that Diouf and Fletcher could also have scored? And you still haven't commented on the penalty not called or the leniency shown to Alonso. Biased? I think you are mate and it's absolutely not towards Stoke. Is there such a thing as an Anti-fan? I never said they should have scored 8, that was some pundit... I never once said they should have scored 8.... And no I don't think it was a red card.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2017 20:50:55 GMT
I don't think anyone has claimed that we should not have lost. Just that it was closer than the score line suggests. Which you obviously disagree with. Apart from the one chance you mentioned "after a Moses shot that came in just a bit too fast", where would there other 3 goals have come from? Have you taken into account that Diouf and Fletcher could also have scored? And you still haven't commented on the penalty not called or the leniency shown to Alonso. Biased? I think you are mate and it's absolutely not towards Stoke. Is there such a thing as an Anti-fan? I never said they should have scored 8, that was some pundit... I never once said they should have scored 8.... But as regards the "anti fan" bit - you are ok with that?
|
|
|
Post by riccyfuller93 on Sept 23, 2017 20:52:33 GMT
I never said they should have scored 8, that was some pundit... I never once said they should have scored 8.... But as regards the "anti fan" bit - you are ok with that? I don't care what you call me. I'm not any less of a fan as you just because I speak the truth about a game of football.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2017 20:53:23 GMT
But as regards the "anti fan" bit - you are ok with that? I don't care what you call me. I'm not any less of a fan as you just because I speak the truth about a game of football. I didn't call you that.
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on Sept 23, 2017 20:54:12 GMT
Your response misses one vital element - As Stoke fans we are SUPPOSED to be biased. If we as Stoke Fans don't stick up for our team, Match of the day, your precious pundits and you sure as hell aren't going to. No but you can't stick your head in the sand and pretend that everything is rosey because it isn't. 3 wins from our last 17 games and one of those was Rochdale. One away win since January. People turned on Pulis for form like that (and I'm no TP fan, far from it, but shit form is shit form whoever the gaffer is). Oh for goodness sake. No one is saying everything is rosey, but it's not melt-down crisis either. We lost 4-0, but the game was a lot closer than the score suggests. Chelsea are a brilliant team with brilliant players. So do we all commit suicide because we lost? The ONLY form that counts is this season. We have beaten Arsenal and drawn with United and WBA. We have lost by 1 goal away to Everton and an unlucky 4-0 loss at home to the Champions. Some of you "Hughes Out" brigade predicted we would be on ZERO, 0, nil, points at this stage of the season. We are on 5. Seems like you are trying to engineer a crisis out of a better than expected (for the moanbags) return of points? Hey, if that's what you want, have at it - enjoy your neuroses. Me? I'm enjoying the rest of my weekend and looking forward to the Mighty Potters taking on Southampton. We'll be with you, be with you, be with you, every step along the way! (not just when things go the way you think they should)
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Sept 23, 2017 20:54:34 GMT
I never said they should have scored 8, that was some pundit... I never once said they should have scored 8.... But as regards the "anti fan" bit - you are ok with that? And you're fan of the year with your live streams and no actual attendance I assume?
|
|
|
Post by riccyfuller93 on Sept 23, 2017 20:55:03 GMT
I don't care what you call me. I'm not any less of a fan as you just because I speak the truth about a game of football. I didn't call you that. Then I don't care what he thinks of me, at the end of the day I'm just giving my honest assessment of the game.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2017 20:57:04 GMT
But as regards the "anti fan" bit - you are ok with that? And you're fan of the year with your live streams and no actual attendance I assume? I've seen many more games than you sunshine.
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on Sept 23, 2017 20:57:36 GMT
But as regards the "anti fan" bit - you are ok with that? I don't care what you call me. I'm not any less of a fan as you just because I speak the truth about a game of football. And your "truth" is they should have beaten us 6-0? I see you also neglect to comment on the penalty call. Why not just support your team? Is it so hard to say "Crap. We were beaten. Next week we're going to win?" Does it make you feel good to go on and on and on and on and on about how crap we were? (even when we weren't really)
|
|