Printable View
We've only won back to back games once this season, that was at the start of September. 15 points on paper looks attainable but we all know it rarely works out like that. We don't hammer teams like we used to these days, wins are a lot more narrower and harder to come by.
Stereotypes :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by fakeyank
:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshGooner
So what part you from?
From the western partsQuote:
Originally Posted by Olivier's xmas twist
Ok. But I think you took my post way too serious.Quote:
Originally Posted by fakeyank
No chance of winning 5 games in a row. We might win a couple and draw another. And that's if we are lucky
:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshGooner
shisha smokers :bow:
Fale yanks :bow:
Which is why WE all know that even if we signed Zeus this January (with thunderbolts being allowed) this AW's Arsenal (and last years one and the year before that.... blah blah) has no chance of finishing above even a schizophrenic Chelsea. Its the same way we all knew if not for Harry being Harry (i.e. being easier to flatter than a fillipino 14 year old), the Spuds would have deservedly finished above us last season.Quote:
Originally Posted by McNamara That Ghost of Christmas
No it doesn't, the truth remains the truth. Seriously, you lot really do my head in- I remember you Maccy going on for years about how we seem never to be able to finish above the Chavs with all their different managers and the rest of you crying daily how we can't compete with that kind of money. Then last season we finish above them (despite Chelsea still outspending us) and instead of you lot to be consistent and say it was probably a fluke, we were helped by the fact that we crashed out of all competitons early or that the league table doesn't tell the whole story- or honourably admit that you have always been wrong about money being the main reason we can't compete-you eat your cake and have it, do a song and dance and celebrate 2 irrelevant months where we are supposedly the third best team in the country. WTF!!! Do you guys really want me to bring back the old posts?? Where last season most of you accepeted we wouldn't finish above spuds, where everybody thought we'd be in shitcreek when RVP would get his annual injury in January or when in the summer we all suspected that AW making those early signings meant we were going to have serious outgoings??Quote:
Originally Posted by McNamara That Ghost of Christmas
I just don't get it- you all know the truth, you say it most of the time but then you get pissed off when the only guy who's doesn't flip-flop and says it in his usual dour way utters a word. Most of the time you dimiss his views with flippant arrogance when he's been the one that has been right the majority of the time since the inception of this forum (old and new). I mean most of you tow the company line, playing it safe like fans tend to do, while he's always been known for unbelievably unpopular but true declarations like "we will never win a thing again under this manager" "this player won't make it(even before he's kicked a ball for us!)" and so on. I don't think there is anyone of us who'd like to be the uncool kid in class for so long, but he does it over and over again providing something you lot can never seem to value-BALANCE- something we old 606ers cherished so much before those idiots hijacked that board. AFAIC you lot should be sucking him off, or at least if you can't stand his sourness (like I accept most gooners who didn't know him would find it hard to), I'd expect that after six years you would have learnt how to live with it by ignoring but still respecting it. There is no need to undermine him with pettiness (GB especially nowadays); debate him or ignore him with the respect a gooner deserves- so I can go back to staying silent.
Sorry but this is an Internet forum. And a fan site at that. Fighting and taking the piss is at least 50% of the game. Debate is good every now and again but who the fuck wants a dedicated debating society? Everyone would piss off if that happened or was enforced. This is a pub not a lecture theatre. And because we're fans we can be wrong yesterday and not admit it today, it's allowed. It's just as much fun, if not more, to jump on every now and then and post shit as it is to engage in the detailed debate than probably nobody reads anyway. GW is a consumer item, snort it don't study it. There are posters on here who like to wind people up. It's a laugh. But they have to take the shit that comes with it, that's the other side of the coin. It's not personal, it's just GW FFS! Take Joker, for instance. He's a city fan so he gets a bit of stick. It's all fair game. Life out there is shit enough as it is. I like GW because you can have a punch up and then a laugh. I'd post with those ****s on the Guardian football section if I wanted to be all serious about it.
Well, I don't think Chelsea are particularly great and if history tells us anything it will take them a while before they put a consistent run of results together whilst they are in this 'bad moment' and compounded with the waning influence of those that were always able to get them back up to that 80 point level, it's no coincidence to me they have progressively been falling back in the league. It's not about staying rigid and saying the same things like you seem to think I should because it has been obvious for a while Chelsea are not getting up to those kind of point levels, whereas before they were, so I said something different. It's really not difficult to understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by 21_GOONER_SALUTE
In any case, it doesn't really matter what I may or may not have thought from years ago because...that was years ago. Did you think Chelsea would ever finish sixth again under Abramovich as they had done before Abramovich? Probably not. However I've been consistent over the last few seasons in saying they can't rely on those same guys forever which is what they have been doing (or rather being forced to by those same players). I've also been able to recognise they still have enough to win cup competitions, lamentably.
What truth are you talking about? I really don't get it because if it's based on them being balanced as the rest of that paragraph talks about, then how can you also say in the first paragraph they don't 'flip-flop', a balance would require noting the good and bad, wouldn't it? I'm not saying there is anything neccesarily wrong with not being 'balanced' but if that's your premise then your defence is being formulated in completely the wrong way.
You can bring up old posts from an age gone by if you want but I don't think the majority will really care.