No offence, but there was one good goal in all those five. Three were decent punts from long range (with little to no build-up), and the last was a smart piece of poaching on a loose ball by Walters. Bolton were comically bad, they handed that game to you.
***SPOILERS*** Football 7 May - 10 May 2011
- Thread starter One More Solo
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 2,269
- Location
- Stoke-on-trent
i never stated they were good goals, i just stated they weren't from set plays.
Last Team to score 5 goals in a Wembley final ?
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 2,269
- Location
- Stoke-on-trent
Whenever stoke beat a team it's due to them playing badly, imagine that.
What about a team like Barca? They don't really have the "big man up top" I'd say they're all very skillful and just work very well together.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 2,269
- Location
- Stoke-on-trent
There is always an exception to the rule, personally i don't think they would be half as good if they played in the premier league every year.
How much would you value their team at?
Priceless. I don't think any club anywhere could afford the Barca team and manage to stay running.
Barca aren't "an exception" there are lots of clubs all over that don't have the mix and yet still function very well.
You're forgetting that this "mix" that Stoke have hasn't won you anything. Arsenal have a bit of a mix, but they're all mainly all very good skillful and technical players and they don't do badly.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 2,269
- Location
- Stoke-on-trent
Who's fans are happier at the moment, success is relative.
Stoke haven't won anything? They've finished lower then Arsenal and play much less attractive football.
While it is disapointing to get so close to a title and in a sense, be so close yet so far, I think Arsenal fans should be happy, another top 4 finish, they got to the League Cup final and (hopefully) aren't far away from being a League winning side.
Stoke got to the FA Cup final, and are at best a midtable side are they not?
No offence, I don't like Stoke, well the style of football but at times I do like it when they get the mix right, They've improved and are a much better footballing side this season tbh.
While it is disapointing to get so close to a title and in a sense, be so close yet so far, I think Arsenal fans should be happy, another top 4 finish, they got to the League Cup final and (hopefully) aren't far away from being a League winning side.
Stoke got to the FA Cup final, and are at best a midtable side are they not?
No offence, I don't like Stoke, well the style of football but at times I do like it when they get the mix right, They've improved and are a much better footballing side this season tbh.
You were using it to prove you had more to your game than just long throws. My point was that 3 long shots (every team takes long shots, even Arsenal try it now and again) and a poachers effort hardly proved that you're capable of mixing it up in Europe.
Don't get me wrong, I think Pennant's an ace player, he did well for your third that day, and there's absolutely no reason to assume you won't do well in the Europa League*, I just don't think that semi-final was the best example of any mythical Stoke Plan B.
*Contrary to popular belief, European football doesn't just consist of little Spaniards and Italians playing neat little passes to one another and falling over too easily, folks.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 2,269
- Location
- Stoke-on-trent
No offence taken, i don't like Arsenal and what i class as boring football.
The idea of a football club is to entertain, if stoke didn't entertain me i wouldn't be paying thousands of pounds each year to follow them.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2008
- Posts
- 26,303
That'd make one hell of a spaghetti western.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 2,269
- Location
- Stoke-on-trent
LOL.
we've also got
The good - Begovic
The bad - Diao
The ugly - Most of the team to be fair.
I think we have very different opinions on boring football 
I think teams like Arsenal, that play *almost* a style similar to that of the great Dutch side (total football and Cryuff), much like Barca do now (After his management at the club it really took off) just much more entertaining.
Fast, flowing, passing, positive, attractive football. Arsenal might be a bit "too" tippy tappy at times but when they get it right they get it right. Lots of teams are more then capeable of playing like this but opt for the more "rugged" English style. Which I don't enjoy as much.
'66 really didn't help the development of English football imho.
I think teams like Arsenal, that play *almost* a style similar to that of the great Dutch side (total football and Cryuff), much like Barca do now (After his management at the club it really took off) just much more entertaining.
Fast, flowing, passing, positive, attractive football. Arsenal might be a bit "too" tippy tappy at times but when they get it right they get it right. Lots of teams are more then capeable of playing like this but opt for the more "rugged" English style. Which I don't enjoy as much.
'66 really didn't help the development of English football imho.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 2,269
- Location
- Stoke-on-trent
I think we have very different opinions on boring football
.
Indeed we do.
But imagine if every team played like Arsenal, it would soon get boring - a bit like the French leagues.
I don't think it would tbh, I'd love to see two teams just openly attack each other with good football.
I get bored watching long ball lower league dross and I don't see why you should adopt it in the PL, or at least continue to use it, evolve.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 2,269
- Location
- Stoke-on-trent
I think you will find Stoke are evolving, give us £200M to spend on players and we would evolve a lot quicker.
I just hope we don't end up like Arsenal. A team who have a manager and boardroom that's happy with just qualifying for the champions league each year.
I don't think that's true though is it? Arsenal are clearly after winning things, in recent years they've gotten in to finals and ran United / Chelsea very close for the league title.
Well, they've done more then Stoke
I also, don't think *just* throwing money at teams is the right thing to do, develope players.
Well, they've done more then Stoke
I also, don't think *just* throwing money at teams is the right thing to do, develope players.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 2,269
- Location
- Stoke-on-trent
I don't think that's true though is it? Arsenal are clearly after winning things, in recent years they've gotten in to finals and ran United / Chelsea very close for the league title.
yeah, the highest price season tickets in the country and they run them close?
Well, they've done more then Stoke
Not if you base it on club size (fan base money available etc)
I also, don't think *just* throwing money at teams is the right thing to do, develope players.
So if Arsenal spent 200m next year the arsenal fans would mind? they'd also have a better chance of winning things
What do season ticket prices have to do with winning things? 
"Club size" ... wait what? Really? Arsenal *are* a big club. Arsenal were in a Champions League final not *that* long ago, Stoke ever been there? They have fans ALL over the World?
Arsenal don't need to spend 200m, Arsenal are known for the lack of money spent so they wouldn't spend that kind of money in one summer spree. They're already almost winning things *thinks back to League Cup final*
"Club size" ... wait what? Really? Arsenal *are* a big club. Arsenal were in a Champions League final not *that* long ago, Stoke ever been there? They have fans ALL over the World?
Arsenal don't need to spend 200m, Arsenal are known for the lack of money spent so they wouldn't spend that kind of money in one summer spree. They're already almost winning things *thinks back to League Cup final*