Conquer Club

betiko wrote:lol!

so basically winning them in friendly games doesn't mean shit, but losing vs them would mean WE are shit? did i say the results are spectacular? no! I said they were decent. also you are telling me we have beaten no decent team, are germany, england and brazil not decent teams? (england is in your list of decent teams we haven't faced and beaten, how could we if friendly games don't count for you?)

well ireland beat italy(2-0) in a friendly and drew against brazil , do you really think we'd do the same in a competitive game? its simple we wouldnt and france wouldnt replicate those results they had in friendly games against the likes of england or brazil in competitive games.

[quote="betiko"]

also, whatever, if you want i let you win that game to participate in the world cup from 3 years ago that i don't give a flying f*ck about, i understand it's the paramount for ireland to participate in a world cup, not for us; we would've better stayed home in 2010. (it just makes me laugh how all irish are able to predict the end of that game, also to know for sure they would've won in penaltys in case it would ve gone that far)

dude do you even remember that game, i do vivdly and we totally owned france that night if we had someone other than robbie keane who could finish a ball then we would have scored more , the momentum of the game was with us completly up until henry's handball. yes we would have won in penalties we have shay given on top form who is arguebly one of the best goal keepers in the last decade.

Originally posted by Dominique Foxworth Head of NFLPA

“Instead of transparent and fair due process for the four suspended players, the NFL chose news media leaks, character assassinations, PR campaigns and legal manipulation to mislead the public,” Foxworth writes.

Foxworth also takes issue with the suggestion that the NFLPA is protecting wrongdoers at the expense of those who were targeted.

“Over the years, it has been the players who’ve fought the league to make changes to the prevailing attitudes about health and safety in football,” Foxworth writes. “We led the change in the way concussions are addressed; successfully opposed 18-game seasons; demanded a change in the NFL’s leadership on brain trauma research and prevention; created new benefits for cognitive injury; shortened and limited contact in practices; created a better injury protection benefit and a $100 million health and safety research fund. We continue to fight the NFL in 500 workers compensation cases.”

To those who laughed when I said the NFL don't have evidence that the Saints put bounties on people. IF THE SAINTS WANTED TO TAKE SOMEONE'S KNEE OUT THEN THEY WOULD HAVE. It's that simple and yet we didn't have an alarming number of flags on the field that would indicate we were putting bounties on people. Where is the justice

xeno wrote:

Originally posted by Dominique Foxworth Head of NFLPA

“Instead of transparent and fair due process for the four suspended players, the NFL chose news media leaks, character assassinations, PR campaigns and legal manipulation to mislead the public,” Foxworth writes.

Foxworth also takes issue with the suggestion that the NFLPA is protecting wrongdoers at the expense of those who were targeted.

“Over the years, it has been the players who’ve fought the league to make changes to the prevailing attitudes about health and safety in football,” Foxworth writes. “We led the change in the way concussions are addressed; successfully opposed 18-game seasons; demanded a change in the NFL’s leadership on brain trauma research and prevention; created new benefits for cognitive injury; shortened and limited contact in practices; created a better injury protection benefit and a $100 million health and safety research fund. We continue to fight the NFL in 500 workers compensation cases.”

To those who laughed when I said the NFL don't have evidence that the Saints put bounties on people. IF THE SAINTS WANTED TO TAKE SOMEONE'S KNEE OUT THEN THEY WOULD HAVE. It's that simple and yet we didn't have an alarming number of flags on the field that would indicate we were putting bounties on people. Where is the justice

You are probably right........but GTFO!

Sniper08 wrote:

betiko wrote:lol!

so basically winning them in friendly games doesn't mean shit, but losing vs them would mean WE are shit? did i say the results are spectacular? no! I said they were decent. also you are telling me we have beaten no decent team, are germany, england and brazil not decent teams? (england is in your list of decent teams we haven't faced and beaten, how could we if friendly games don't count for you?)

well ireland beat italy(2-0) in a friendly and drew against brazil , do you really think we'd do the same in a competitive game? its simple we wouldnt and france wouldnt replicate those results they had in friendly games against the likes of england or brazil in competitive games.

betiko wrote:
also, whatever, if you want i let you win that game to participate in the world cup from 3 years ago that i don't give a flying f*ck about, i understand it's the paramount for ireland to participate in a world cup, not for us; we would've better stayed home in 2010. (it just makes me laugh how all irish are able to predict the end of that game, also to know for sure they would've won in penaltys in case it would ve gone that far)

dude do you even remember that game, i do vivdly and we totally owned france that night if we had someone other than robbie keane who could finish a ball then we would have scored more , the momentum of the game was with us completly up until henry's handball. yes we would have won in penalties we have shay given on top form who is arguebly one of the best goal keepers in the last decade.

well you guys beating italy and doing a tie vs brazil is definitely a good sign right? don't tell me you don't take it into consideration. "friendly games" are friendly just by name. there are still lots of expectatives in friendly games, and no one wants to lose them. Also, you were talking about fifa rankings; friendly games are counted in your fifa coeficient. and I think a game played a few month ago has more value to compare teams than one played 4 years before in an official competition.

regarding the france-ireland: yes, i do remember that you guys had a psychological ascendant and were dominating the game in the over times. But I know you know football and it doesn't guarantee a win.
For example, can i be certain that france would've won the 2006 world cup hadn't zidane got a red card for a head butt? (seen by the 4th refere on video by the way, which is illegal). can I be certain that given the domination we had, zidane on the pitch would've made us be world champions in penalty shootouts? of course it gave a negative psychological ascendant to the team, but doesn't mean trezeguet would've converted his penalty that bounced just on the line...

Gypsys Kiss wrote:

xeno wrote:

Originally posted by Dominique Foxworth Head of NFLPA

“Instead of transparent and fair due process for the four suspended players, the NFL chose news media leaks, character assassinations, PR campaigns and legal manipulation to mislead the public,” Foxworth writes.

Foxworth also takes issue with the suggestion that the NFLPA is protecting wrongdoers at the expense of those who were targeted.

“Over the years, it has been the players who’ve fought the league to make changes to the prevailing attitudes about health and safety in football,” Foxworth writes. “We led the change in the way concussions are addressed; successfully opposed 18-game seasons; demanded a change in the NFL’s leadership on brain trauma research and prevention; created new benefits for cognitive injury; shortened and limited contact in practices; created a better injury protection benefit and a $100 million health and safety research fund. We continue to fight the NFL in 500 workers compensation cases.”

To those who laughed when I said the NFL don't have evidence that the Saints put bounties on people. IF THE SAINTS WANTED TO TAKE SOMEONE'S KNEE OUT THEN THEY WOULD HAVE. It's that simple and yet we didn't have an alarming number of flags on the field that would indicate we were putting bounties on people. Where is the justice

You are probably right........but GTFO!

The fact is I AM RIGHT! This is a huge fucking deal... the commissioner is likely going to lose his job over this scandal.

xeno wrote:

Gypsys Kiss wrote:

xeno wrote:

Originally posted by Dominique Foxworth Head of NFLPA

“Instead of transparent and fair due process for the four suspended players, the NFL chose news media leaks, character assassinations, PR campaigns and legal manipulation to mislead the public,” Foxworth writes.

Foxworth also takes issue with the suggestion that the NFLPA is protecting wrongdoers at the expense of those who were targeted.

“Over the years, it has been the players who’ve fought the league to make changes to the prevailing attitudes about health and safety in football,” Foxworth writes. “We led the change in the way concussions are addressed; successfully opposed 18-game seasons; demanded a change in the NFL’s leadership on brain trauma research and prevention; created new benefits for cognitive injury; shortened and limited contact in practices; created a better injury protection benefit and a $100 million health and safety research fund. We continue to fight the NFL in 500 workers compensation cases.”

To those who laughed when I said the NFL don't have evidence that the Saints put bounties on people. IF THE SAINTS WANTED TO TAKE SOMEONE'S KNEE OUT THEN THEY WOULD HAVE. It's that simple and yet we didn't have an alarming number of flags on the field that would indicate we were putting bounties on people. Where is the justice

You are probably right........but GTFO!

The fact is I AM RIGHT! This is a huge fucking deal... the commissioner is likely going to lose his job over this scandal.

dude we don't know and don't want to know about this, i'm sure there is a post where you can comment about your troll NFL stuff and have people interact with what you are saying.

xeno please keep to talking about the European definition of Football only here.

Thank you

nagerous wrote:xeno please keep to talking about the European everyone outside the U.S definition of Football only here.

Thank you

fixed

Sniper08 wrote:

nagerous wrote:xeno please keep to talking about the European everyone outside the U.S definition of Football only here.

Thank you

fixed

Aussie rules football?

nagerous wrote:

Sniper08 wrote:

nagerous wrote:xeno please keep to talking about the European everyone outside the U.S definition of Football only here.

Thank you

fixed

Aussie rules football?

he talking american football so everyone outside us knows the real one also i havent met an austrailian who doesnt call football by its proper name.

Guys, guys, guys, get back on topic. Falcao stole the show last night!!

An incredible, record breaking season ends on Sunday, and I for one, am peeing my pants with excitement. As long as we pick up our last 3 points, I'll be happy.

with mr Rooney unable to play the first 2 group games do you think England will get out of our group?

Pedronicus wrote:with mr Rooney unable to play the first 2 group games do you think England will get out of our group?

as long as it's not in spite of france i wouldn't mind. who would take his place in the meanwhile though?

Pedronicus wrote:with mr Rooney unable to play the first 2 group games do you think England will get out of our group?

Considering the pathetic lack of impact he had in SA World Cup; yep no probs, it's the stupidly high expectations that, inevitably, he'll not fulfill upon his return that'll cause probs as no doubt he'll be put straight back in the team regardless of how well others may have done in his absence.

Give it to Defoe! Surely most under-rated striker ever...

betiko wrote:
as long as it's not in spite of france i wouldn't mind. who would take his place in the meanwhile though?

A bloke at work thinks Roy Carroll looked a right handful when Liverpool beat Chelsea.

Pedronicus wrote:

betiko wrote:
as long as it's not in spite of france i wouldn't mind. who would take his place in the meanwhile though?

A bloke at work thinks Roy Carroll looked a right handful when Liverpool beat Chelsea.

Guessing this bloke doesn't watch much footy then. The new manager Andy Hodgson might give him a go.

Lord+Master wrote:

Pedronicus wrote:

betiko wrote:
as long as it's not in spite of france i wouldn't mind. who would take his place in the meanwhile though?

A bloke at work thinks Roy Carroll looked a right handful when Liverpool beat Chelsea.

Guessing this bloke doesn't watch much footy then. The new manager Andy Hodgson might give him a go.

Pedronicus wrote:with mr Rooney unable to play the first 2 group games do you think England will get out of our group?

Maybe if Woy has some balls and doesn't pick the same ol England team then yall should get out, but him talking about Rio and JT playing together in the back is disastrous. Any team with a little pace and those two are gonna be left for dead.

Soccer is boring - why do people even watch it?

Nola_Lifer wrote:

Pedronicus wrote:with mr Rooney unable to play the first 2 group games do you think England will get out of our group?

Maybe if Woy has some balls and doesn't pick the same ol England team then yall should get out, but him talking about Rio and JT playing together in the back is disastrous. Any team with a little pace and those two are gonna be left for dead.

big names but clearly going downhill. is it true that lampard and jt are 2 of the most hated as persons? and in general players from the englishteam don't get along too well right?

last question; in the olymipcs, will there be a UK team in football?? never seen that yet.

betiko wrote:

Nola_Lifer wrote:

Pedronicus wrote:with mr Rooney unable to play the first 2 group games do you think England will get out of our group?

Maybe if Woy has some balls and doesn't pick the same ol England team then yall should get out, but him talking about Rio and JT playing together in the back is disastrous. Any team with a little pace and those two are gonna be left for dead.

big names but clearly going downhill. is it true that lampard and jt are 2 of the most hated as persons? and in general players from the englishteam don't get along too well right?

last question; in the olymipcs, will there be a UK team in football?? never seen that yet.

JT and Lamps (aka Fat Frank) are pretty much disliked across the board, except for Chelski fans.
Yep, there'll be a Team GB footy team, who sadly will perform just as badly as I anticipate England to!

Lord+Master wrote:

betiko wrote:

Nola_Lifer wrote:

Pedronicus wrote:with mr Rooney unable to play the first 2 group games do you think England will get out of our group?

Maybe if Woy has some balls and doesn't pick the same ol England team then yall should get out, but him talking about Rio and JT playing together in the back is disastrous. Any team with a little pace and those two are gonna be left for dead.

big names but clearly going downhill. is it true that lampard and jt are 2 of the most hated as persons? and in general players from the englishteam don't get along too well right?

last question; in the olymipcs, will there be a UK team in football?? never seen that yet.

JT and Lamps (aka Fat Frank) are pretty much disliked across the board, except for Chelski fans.
Yep, there'll be a Team GB footy team, who sadly will perform just as badly as I anticipate England to!

i was telling this because i heard that even chelsea fans think they are both assholes in real life, and assholes with their fans. if they hadn't given all they hace given to the club they would be long gone for their attitude, or so i heard.

betiko wrote:

Lord+Master wrote:

betiko wrote:

Nola_Lifer wrote:

Pedronicus wrote:with mr Rooney unable to play the first 2 group games do you think England will get out of our group?

Maybe if Woy has some balls and doesn't pick the same ol England team then yall should get out, but him talking about Rio and JT playing together in the back is disastrous. Any team with a little pace and those two are gonna be left for dead.

big names but clearly going downhill. is it true that lampard and jt are 2 of the most hated as persons? and in general players from the englishteam don't get along too well right?

last question; in the olymipcs, will there be a UK team in football?? never seen that yet.

JT and Lamps (aka Fat Frank) are pretty much disliked across the board, except for Chelski fans.
Yep, there'll be a Team GB footy team, who sadly will perform just as badly as I anticipate England to!

i was telling this because i heard that even chelsea fans think they are both assholes in real life, and assholes with their fans. if they hadn't given all they hace given to the club they would be long gone for their attitude, or so i heard.

f*ck off Lampard and Terry are legends. Hate for Terry at least I can kinda get, even though the whole Wayne Bridge scenario was way overblown. Terry sleeps with an ex-teammates exgirlfriend and the press pillories him forever, Giggs has a 7 year affair with brother's wife and everyone forgets within a month or so.


Lampard is criminally underrated by non Chelsea fans. He's the top scoring midfielder in the Premier League, 10+goals in each of the last 10 seasons, only player to ever do that. You won't find a chelsea fan who hates Lampard. For Terry there might be some, but he's also true captain material and you really can't blame his on-pitch effort.


The truth is, no-one knows Terry or Lampard, only the press's impression and story they decide to spin about them. Parker is brave and gutsy, Giggs and Scholes are hardened veterans, Terry and Lampard are apparently washed up and should be shipped off according to the media.

Yeah, but Giggs vs Terry. C'mon.

Anyhoo, City to win today!

Cannot wait for today, last day of the season. Must secure 3rd. Considering we were sitting just above relegation zone after the first 4 or 5 games, I'd say this has been a pretty successful season by our standards.