Dunno what all the fuss is about, really. I don't have a problem with "anti-football". If it makes tactical sense to play to avoid defeat then do so. It's then the opposing teams job to break you down and score, not to go ****in greetin to a newspaper because you didn't let them play to their strengths. Naw, let's allow you to play to your strengths so we can admire yer wonderful flowing football while we get pumped.
Agree with ye there gambol but to deny playing anti-football when it's there for everyone to see is laughable.
The problem is Gambol although your view is entirely sensible, entirely insensible people like Medro and Nev leap upon any chance to TRY and make comparisons. Not only are they unhappy about their team's tactics being branded "Anti Football", they could hardly wait until the end of the game the other night before saying "See, youse are Anti Football tae", even though no one connected to Barca even hinted as much. It seems only the drooling buffoons on here actually believe it, or even worse, have convinced themselves despite all the evidence that this was the case and that Celtic used exactly the same tactics as Rangers, when in actual fact they did no such thing. Whataboutery of the most childish and predicatable type.
to be far dev - i thought celtic did play in a relatively similar manner to rangers albeit with more of a counter attack threat against barca im not sure what else you do though - even real do a similar thing this "anti-football" this is all b/s - like defending isnt part of the game??? in conclusion..medro is a taig
You talk so much ****e russ. I said I had no problem with playing anti-football especially against barcelona in my very first WUM post on Tuesday night.
