Tom Cleverley
- Thread starter matth_22
- Start date
ok .. what that tells you then darling?
you just compared the best side in world to england .. so if it works for Spain .. it must work for england .. isn't?
dear me.. it work for spain because they have specially gifted mid, Xavi, inesta, Silva, mata ..etc.
is comical you think just bcz it work for Spain it will work for england
ok .. what that tells you then darling?
you just compared the best side in world to england .. so if it works for Spain .. it must work for england .. isn't?
dear me.. it work for spain because they have specially gifted mid, Xavi, inesta, Silva, mata ..etc.
is comical you think just bcz it work for Spain it will work for england
Wow...
He didn't say that though did he Shwan?
You're on here again giving clear examples as to why people lay the **** into you, because you make **** up and then sit there trying to mock.
What you ACTUALLY look like is a right ****ing bell end. Not one single person on this forum falls for a single word you ever say.
You're on here again giving clear examples as to why people lay the **** into you, because you make **** up and then sit there trying to mock.
What you ACTUALLY look like is a right ****ing bell end. Not one single person on this forum falls for a single word you ever say.
ok .. what that tells you then darling?
you just compared the best side in world to england .. so if it works for Spain .. it must work for england .. isn't?
dear me.. it work for spain because they have specially gifted mid, Xavi, inesta, Silva, mata ..etc.
is comical you think just bcz it work for Spain it will work for england
No I didn't you monumental ****tard.
we were discussing that england need to play with 2 strikers and not only one .. then he give the Spain example to prove you don't strikers .. sure you don't need one when you have the classy mid of Spain (the world cup winner and Euro winner ) they pass the ball and can score too
I don't see the relevance tbh with England discussion.. spain can afford it do it because of their mid quality.. that is not the case of England, isn't?
ok .. what that tells you then darling?
you just compared the best side in world to england .. so if it works for Spain .. it must work for england .. isn't?
dear me.. it work for spain because they have specially gifted mid, Xavi, inesta, Silva, mata ..etc.
is comical you think just bcz it work for Spain it will work for england
hhh
He didn't though, he simply made a statement and you interpretted what he said how you saw fit. Which is a common theme and, I ain't going to lie to you, it can get irritating.
I don't see the relationship between discussing if England should play with one or two striker and your Spain example ...
England don't have the quality of spain mid .. so i see no points you putting that on the table tbh
The current England team are better than Brazil's side of 1970. Fact. No disagreeing allowed darling hhhhhhhh. Facepalm, facepalm, poshwank.
ok will give him the benefit of doubt (although i think he meant if spain can do it, england can afford to play with no strikers )
but fair enough
.. i could wrongly interpreted what he said as you saidok will give him the benefit of doubt (although i think he meant if spain can do it, england can afford to play with no strikers )
but fair enough
I've invented a new kind of football. Everyone who plays in it is a striker and there is NO passing. 6 year olds are BRILLIANT at it.
overall over the years i find england struggling for goals facing good sides.. could be wrong but that is my overall impression on the England side over the past years.
442 isn't our strongest formation, It's 433 or 4231.
Welbeck isn't good enough to lead the line for England before you ask.
