Cassilla made a fantastic save and I'm excited to have him on board, but let's not ignore how dodgy he looked flying off his line! LL is you keep the comparisons objective I think by the end of the season everyone will agree Cassilla is the better keeper
It means, from everything BPF has been through, and what's been said about him on his road to LUFC first team, he should've made the decision about what level of football he wants to play, and what he has to do to achieve it. Always rated by the club? who did he have behind him pushing him for top spot? Bielsa's a great coach / manager, but he's not infallible to making mistakes. Bielsa won't slate any player off to the press or public, he's more professional than that. Forget average age, forget stats, BPF is 22 yrs old, he should be a lot better than he has shown at his age. Look at Clark and a couple of the other teens breaking through, they've made their decisions about which road they want to take, and they're doing something about it to achieve their goals. I get you like him, I get you don't like agreeing with me, but either way, there's a reality, and at moment BPF is not good enough for the level of keeper we need to achieve promotion, if he was, Bielsa wouldn't have dropped him and brought Kiko in. Bielsa hit nail on head when he said BPF was better in training, that statement tells you everything, it also tells you Bielsa doesn't rate him as highly as you and some others do.
If he was christened bialli peacocko-farrelli he may have been higher thought of. Although there would be even less room on his shirt. Swings and roundabouts eh. Seriously, i’m happy we have Casilla... he has the shirt, let’s hope he’s error free and helps us to promotion
Let's face it, you don't really know what you're talking about when it comes to keepers..............see my recent reply to Milkyboy. I've never hated BPF if that's what you're saying, in beginning I liked him, but most players play on adrenalin and enthusiasm to begin with, then, as they say, the honeymoon is over and it's down to reality. BPF is simply not good enough, and Bielsa has said the same thing by bringing in Casilla.............that's reality. Write a letter to Bielsa telling him he's wrong. So, you didn't give me a reply to why you chose to attack me earlier, why not?
Nationalities got nothing to do with it, he's simply not good enough, and Bielsa has said the same thing. We have Hernandez, Alioski, Klich, Berardi, Jansson, we had Saiz, all loved by most leeds fans, I can't see your point in bringing nationality into it.
What attack ? From your postings, it is fairly obvious that you have a strong dislike of BPF, ( or at least in your opinion his lack of goalkeeping abilities) and thus in my opinion it was also fairly likely that when we eventually signed a new goalkeeper and played him, then he would get a positive response from yourself. However despite making a report on the game, and how those players did out on the pitch against Rotherham, you still couldn't resist having a dig or two against BPF, even though he didn't actually play in that game. Your report consisted of 27 lines( or 2280 letters) and despite your own comments of" Cassilla didn't really have a busy day as busy days go" 9 of those lines (734 letters ie 1/3 rd of your report) all related to the goalkeeping position. I found your OP and subsequent replies to be fairly predictable when it comes to anything to do with our goalkeeping situation, and whilst I don't disagree with your overall sentiment, I do disagree on occasion with how you try and express your point concerning the same matter. Given how dismissive I feel you are when it comes to other posters views concerning BPF that don't entirely agree with your own thoughts, I felt my post was a good way of demonstrating the fact that it is pointless to enter into any discussion concerning BPF with yourself. If you wish therefore to consider my post as an "attack" on yourself, then by all means do so, I of course consider that I was just expressing an opinion
I have a feeling WCD never replied to your question of why did he "attack" you earlier, because it was myself that you asked that question too, not WCD
ok, my apologies to WCD, so why haven't you replied to my question then. I couldn't see any reason for the attack, so the question remains same, WHY? Obviously not, which also means, Bielsa talks a load of bollocks too, according to your statement. You have my apologies for getting you mixed up with Morbid, an error on my part........
Errr I answered at about 12:50 this afternoon, it was the post before the one you quoted So my answer to your repeated question of "WHY" is read the thread
I just love the way you've gone into such detail, and to such lengths to slate me in a technical way, those figures you come up with, would you call them stats? Did you actually count those lines and words?.................wow, such dedication, and obsession in an attempt to belittle me in front of all those on forum. I like your first lines where you're claiming to have worked everything out before it actually happened, you have so much insight you remind me of Glory. As a keeper who played competitive football for a few decades, I think it would be fairly obvious I would have my eye on the present, and any new keeper we bring in. You aimed your post at me, you used my name, it could've been any ones name; and either way, you drew the battle lines, no one else. Regarding having a dig or two at BPF "While it's only Casilla's first game for us, it seems the fans have taken to him straight away, but BPF would do himself a favour by watching Casilla, and learning from him."...................That's all I wrote about BPF, just solid advice that most would agree with. There's no warrant or depth to your accusation..................by the way, that's 136 letters, 1 sentence, 1 and a bit lines, 3 commas, 2 apostrophes and a full stop.
He has a point, Morbid. No need for all the effort to belittle him - he's quite capable of belittling himself with ease, and manages it almost every time he hits the keypad.
I was going to respond in detail but you would no doubt object to this and then you would reply in detail further and the discussion would go on and on and on. Given that you think we are in some kind of battle, then by all means declare yourself the victor. I made a one line comment, you took offence and asked for an explanation, and then didn't like the fact that I thought you deserved the courtesy of a full and detailed explanation, so on this occasion I will keep my reply short. By the way in the red line quoted above, there are only 32 words not 135, and not including punctuation there are 136 characters. The word count feature in modern Word Processing programs is so useful don't you think.
Correct, 136 letters, not words, my error. I've changed it as I don't want people to read it wrong. Word processing program containing word count is usefull, however, I have no need of it myself as I don't attack people for their opinions, I only reply to those whose intent is to draw battle lines. You drew the battle lines by wording your post the way you did, and included my name. You purposely highlighted your post to be aimed at me. Seeing as you like to play "let's see who has the best command of the English language" may I suggest you think about the way you're going to word a sentence / reply / post before typing it. The way you word your posts / replies shows your exact intent. By the way, I wouldn't take white jocks like as solid, he gives one to everyone who feels like having a go at me. That's cos I have him on mute, and he hates it, and I like that.
Also Word Processors contain spell checking tools, which I also find useful Are we going to don armour and draw swords and meet on some grassy knoll at dawn or is this going to be some kind of trench warfare like in World War One. Hey if you want to believe that this is some kind of battle then please feel free to do so. I'll just continue to consider it as being differing opinions on a football forum If however it's a fight you are looking for, then I'm probably the wrong person for you, as I am not interested. I gave you my opinion, did I expect you to agree with it, not at all. I've no need to argue or justify my own personal opinion, although I did give you the courtesy of a detailed explanation as to why. I'm sure I will have plenty of disagreements with many other posters on here, some will respond by answering the issues raised or showing me why my reasoning is incorrect, others will take exception and ignore the issues and just spout rhetoric. Its not up to me how those people will respond in the future, same as its not up to any other poster, as to how I choose the style of my posts. Just as a final clarification, do I have an issue with some unknown person that I know only by a chosen nickname, not at all. Do I have an issue with their general posts, not really, although I do find some of those posts/points repetitive in respect of one particular subject. Do I disagree with the view that our new goalkeeper will be an asset to the club, no I think it's a very good signing, and I wish we had made it earlier. Do I regret posting a one line comment that amused me, not one bit. Do I regret having to give a detailed explanation of my opinion, then yes, as I had been more than happy to keep that to myself since before I even registered on the board, but you asked and as I said previously it was only courteous to then reply. So if you wish to continue to make your war/battle speeches then feel free to do so, its no skin off my nose, I'll just carry on posting my opinions as I see fit when and where I like. My opinion on the subject remains however unchanged and I will be more than happy to say so in future posts if I consider it relevant or I think of a comment that amuses me at the time
What. A. Fanny! Again. Hate it? Au contraire! I absolutely love it. The very fact that s/he keeps mentioning me so often demonstrates how easily I get under her/his skin. And that really makes my day, the sad old fool that I am. Being 'muted' (sic) means that I do not have to wade through her/his rambling, ill-conceived diatribes, only to find that s/he's yet again failed to respond to whatever question was originally framed. S/he'd simply pose 37 questions of her/his own in reply, which had to be responded to in full before s/he would deign to address the original question. Only s/he wouldn't, as it would mean that s/he'd yet again have to concede that s/he was talking pish - the reason the original question was posed in the first place! I see that s/he's chosen a number of new victims, but no-one has persisted enough to be granted the Royal Ignore. Keep at it, chaps - it's worth it! Perhaps someone could 'reply' to this so that AdolfLover can learn that if someone still has a voice, then they haven't been muted. I think s/he meant that s/he's put me on ignore, which is something altogether different. Then again, perhaps not in her/his little meds-controlled mad world. No malice, of course!
For what it's worth, I'm sure Casilla will be a great signing (and that save from Vaulks was class) but **** me, he was coming way off his line in an attempt to reach crosses he was never going to get near. That kind of ill-conceived judgement of the flight of the ball reminds me of a certain poster's assessment of BPF... I wonder who posted that...
