Weekend Football Thread *spoilers be inside*
- Thread starter Tummy
- Start date
They really didn't. Chelsea had 2 clear pens turned down (1 of which would have meant Sagna would have been off), where as Arsenal had a marginal decision go against them with the disallowed goal; any raised foot is clamped down on these days, let alone on a keeper.
Can't understand why people were saying Song played poorly, he mopped up almost everything and won nearly every 50/50 against a strong Chelsea team, what more could he have done? I personally thought he was good and was winning the midfield battle
Erm when did I say luck wasn't on Chelsea's side?
Bitter much by the way? You were outclassed. There's a lot more to defending than 'flooding the box' and yes there is something special about chelsea, we can defend. Something you could clearly do with a lesson in.
Much like drogba 'smacking' the ball.....Your post is quite funny actually, you start by saying Chelsea aren't special and then you go on to list reasons why we are superior to Arsenal.
Last edited:
If you think 1-1 would have been a fairer reflection of the play then I think you must have been watching a different match.
No, 1-1 would've been Arsenal hanging in by the skin of their teeth. 1-2 would actually be the fairer reflection of the two.
0-3 looks as if Chelsea had a walk in the park, and that is far from the reality of today's game. There's a reason why there was such tension on the field.
Bitter much? Do shut up Gustov - either talk about the game, or don't. Don't resort to irrelevent and false ad hominem attacks. We were marginally outclassed. Had Chelsea had a weaker defense or Arsenal had a machine like Drogba up front, there is no reason why Arsenal couldn't have took points away from today.
Last edited:
Christ, are you deliberately being fickle today?
You deserved that free kick. It was a great strike, but I've seen better strikes go awry due to chance. There is always an element of chance that strikes like that from outside the area will go in or not. That was the point about that.
And once again - before me and you have a falling out - I am not bitter. Bitter would imply that I'm actually sore in the tooth about losing; I'm not. You deserved the win, I haven't once argued against that. What I'm getting annoyed about is the bloody tide of arguments and now the ad hominem attacks.
I'm 'bitter' at your style of debate today, not the facts at hand. But yeah, now I remember why I avoid these ****ing threads. It's all about shouting other's down.
Ok, so you are saying Chelsea were lucky to score a free kick...
That's all I wanted to know. Me fickle? No, your comments are just absurd.
Shouting others down? Weren't you the one who told me to Shut Up? Seems to me you're just taking my style of debating personally. I.e
Something you could do with a lesson in.
Associate
Maybe Wenger isn't looking so stupid now for trying to sign Chamakh during the Summer if he's struggling to find decent finishers. All I read on these forums at the time was that a decent Vieira-esque defensive midfielder was needed in the first priority, but I've heard little of that since and everything about a Van Persie back-up capable of putting them away.
Last edited:
Caporegime
Barca vs Real sucks. Can't remember a single shot in that first half.
Ronaldo shot saved by Valdes's leg? But yea it has been pretty dull.
Man of Honour
More a case of people got tired of saying it and more prominant problems arose.
We still need somebody better than Song in my opinion. And to get rid of Denilson and Diaby.
I told you to shup up because you were resorting to calling me bitter. That's a lack of tack on your side, not mine. Read the sentance immediately after that statement - what does it say? Talk about the damn football.
Again, you're missing the point - so yes you are being fickle. Chelsea scored their free-kick, yes. It wasn't 'lucky' - a goal's a goal - but there was a large degree of chance (i.e. luck) involved - there always is.
I'm taking this personally because it doesn't matter what I say or how it holds true, you and others seem to deliberately be playing Devil's advocate when there is absolutely no need. You're simply doing it to try and undermine my opinion because it threatens your own - but alas, that is the nature of this sub-forum isn't it.
You're really clutching at straws, aren't you? There was good and bad fortune on both sides today, as with every football match, which makes it such a wonderful spectator sport. But to take your argument one tiny step further, you were unlucky that Chelsea's quality wasn't stymied by bad luck. Hummm....
I guess Chelsea were lucky to have better quality players on the pitch today.
Premiership title over by the end of November - anyone? Well, it's a two horse race at best.
I'm really not. I gave my opinion on your opinion.
I believe there's more to defending than 'flooding the box'
I believe Drogba did more than 'smash' the ball
I believe listing a 'cheeky' free kick to justify how Chelsea were lucky today is pretty pathetic.
Yes i understand what you're saying about luck but like I say above, it's hardly a justification as to how Chelsea were lucky.
What's your point anyway? Are you going to start calling every team who score against you lucky because there's a chance the ball could have gone elsewhere other than the back of the net. Like the above poster says, ''clutching at straws'
Last edited:
The Chelsea machine rolls on. :/
It will be very difficult to stop them winning the league now, I would have like a cheeky draw to just keep hold of Chelsea but I think that's the league done now pretty much.
Looking at the ACoN, it doesn't seem like Chelsea will have much problem.
It will be very difficult to stop them winning the league now, I would have like a cheeky draw to just keep hold of Chelsea but I think that's the league done now pretty much.
Looking at the ACoN, it doesn't seem like Chelsea will have much problem.
Now you're getting it. The point about luck is perhaps too philosophical for this thread - so you'll have to forgive me for thinking you lot able to comprehend it - it was included as part of the wider picture, not as a definitive statement in itself.
Yes, Chelsea were fortunate to have the better side today. Arsenal have been plagued since the international break, as I'm sure you're aware. However, that aside - based on the two teams that turn up - Chelsea played the stronger game - hence why it was 0-3! Decisions, etc. did however tend to go in Chelsea's favour, which actually equates to 'bad' luck on behalf of Arsenal. And to cut off any further straw-men: my earlier point about Arsenal missing players like Drogba is not down to luck or chance. That is simply the fact at hand.
Now, honestly - do you genuinely feel that based on what you saw today, if Arsenal had had that finishing touch, that the score would've stayed as it was? If Arsenal had had a full strength squad turn up, I really wouldn't be surprised if it had ended a draw. Call me delusional if you like, but that's subjectivity - it's how I see it and no shouting me down is going to make me see otherwise. Concrete reason however will, and none of you are even trying to provide that.
I said this at the beginning of the season that I thought Chelsea would walk with it. Arsenal however, are far, far from being written off. There's still all to play for.
Last edited: