If Celtic can beat Rangers easily and Barca can put 7 past Celtic, christ what does that say about the rest of the league!
Utter ****e
Match Day Thread 2016/17 Premier League, Cups & Euro Watch
- Thread starter astro
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
- Status
Utter ****e
On this evidence, Scot football should not have a place in the CL. Their champions should try to qualify for the Europa league.
Harsh but the reality.
Harsh but the reality.
Maybe we should have the same 16 teams competing every season and not bother with qualification and **** because we obviously don't want everyone to have a chance.
Celtic didn't have a chance tonight
Think the qualifying rounds needs a rethink. Celtic are clearly no where near good enough for CL.
Celtic didn't have a chance tonight
Think the qualifying rounds needs a rethink. Celtic are clearly no where near good enough for CL.
Don't you mean the qualifying rounds need a rethink so that they almost guarantee that the clubs from the big leagues will almost always make it through? That would be a great way of consolidating the fact that top clubs are so much richer than the smaller clubs in the CL struggle to compete at all.
People are overreacting to a single result against Barcelona. They put 7 past Valencia last season and 6 past Bilbao & Roma.
Sorry fella but saying a lad who's still only 23, who bagged 25 last season (despite having 3 poor months along with the rest of the side when they were collectively tanking to get rid of Martinez) has a 1 in 2 scoring ratio across 4 full seasons in the PL, and has bagged 64 in 131 for us, hasn't somehow provided value for a £28m fee, when we could have comfortably sold him for near double that had we made him available this summer, is absolute plums imoI don't agree mate. It wasn't the games you lost where his goals didn't get you the points - case in point you beat Sunderland 6-2 he scored the 4th goal. You beat Villa 4-0 he got the 4th goal. I just checked and in fact most of his goals were in games you won where his goals weren't the winners and of all the games you lost, he only scored in two of them and both games the opposition scored first.
Edit: just spotted the WH game, they beat you at Goodison an Lukaku scored first.
As for when his goals 'count' it's a ridiculous argument and always has been.
Man Utd put eight past Arsenal not too long ago too. Maybe arsenal should have been kicked out the PL
Man Utd put eight past Arsenal not too long ago too. Maybe arsenal should have been kicked out the PL
Its a ridiculous argument and its why we are heading toward a NFL style set up with the CL where its a closed shop with the same teams each year because the people in charge have the same mindset (though their thoughts are more driven by money than lack of competiton)
- May 22, 2011
- 73,297
- 25,358
- 113
Man Utd put eight past Arsenal not too long ago too. Maybe arsenal should have been kicked out the PL
I mean would anyone really miss them if they were?
Man Utd put eight past Arsenal not too long ago too. Maybe arsenal should have been kicked out the PL
There is 7-0 and 7-0. One is a training exercise and the other a match. Of course any team could lose 7-0 but this Celtic match was all one way traffic, men against boys stuff and if I were a Celtic fan, I wouldn't want to get into the CL just to be humiliated by the big clubs. Celtic is now in relative terms a small club.
I don't agree with Lukaku's goals not counting because of the final result because I think you were so ****e last season he couldn't have helped a lot of the results
I do think though that the goals 'counting' point can be relevant, especially when judging strikers that play for bigger clubs and come off the bench later on in games. I look at someone like Dzeko who had a fairly impressive record at Man City on the surface of it but I'd be interested to see how many of his goals came when City were comfortably up rather than when they were actually needing a goal. Finishing when your team is 4-0 up is a lot easier than when its 0-0 and in the last 10 minutes.
maybe they should try a couple of sides from the johnsons paint trophy in the CL
Yeah but we're not City and Lukaku starts when fit, so in his case your half sensible spin on 'goals counting' isn't relevant. The argument put up by Astro is and always was, absolute horse ****.
He's one of the best strikers in the PL and has been for a few years now, and he's still only 23.
All goals count, just ask any United supporter why they lost the league to City 2011/12 or why City are in the CL this season and United are in the EL.
A goal may not earn your team a point in that game but, it may earn you a higher place in the league.
Winning a penalty doesn't mean it wasn't a one way traffic. And they couldn't score it.
I didn't say at any point that goals didn't count. I was simply saying that some goals are more important than others. As an example 1 player could score 3 hat tricks and do nothing for the other 35 games of the season. 1 player could score 9 goals in 9 separate games, all 1-0 wins yet at the end of the season their goal tally would be exactly the same, would you attribute exactly the same value to those players' 9 goals? Or would you accept that the 2nd players goals were more valuable to his team?
That's what I said it can be relevant, not that it is relevant. Plus I specifically said I don't agree with the argument about Lukaku's goals not counting.
- Status