Something amusing? Fair enough konterman and possibly Walters... Walters?... Oh yeah, the fella your disgusting fans throw bananas at and made monkey chants to on his debut, poor sod Haha, what a fanny! That's not even how it went and how was I acting the hard man? Check you though, you want me to get you a straw so you can get a better sook at Devs arsehole?
Ah, confirmation! Quick to accuse beel over nothing but when your actually starting to look irate you can't take it, ****in standard! Hilarious.
You're just desperately on the wind up, don't know why, possibly to make you feel better about yourself but you've came to the wrong person. I don't get angry over the Internet. As I've said before, you're turning into the next Harry/super and as for your arse licking of Dev, well that's just embarrassing!
It appears you have realised you have made an dick of yourself and are desperately trying to deflect attention onto Dev's arse
Not at all, I've said it was a good result, lucky as **** but good result. Seems Walter was onto a good thing after all eh? Anti football? Pfft, not when Celtic do it Can you remember ever giving credit? Me too, cracking wee day liiiiike
That and the nou camp game. No different from the way rangers played against barca or man utd. You don't think it was ultra defensive with counter attacking where possible?
2 Strikers deployed Chapper, a huge difference. Celtic as far as I saw last night or at the Nou Camp did not continually give away fouls or attempt to intimidate Barca, the foul count would support that I think. Anyhoo, I wrote a thread the other week about "Anti Football" and what I personally think comes under that heading, and neither Rangers nor Celtic in my opinion played Anti Football against Barca. It was defensive certainly but only a madman would go hammer and tongs at sides like Barca and Barca in particular. Even managers like Ferguson and Mourhino realised that. Look at Chelsea in the CL final, that was awful and far more worthy of the epithet "Anti Football" than any side I have seen for a few years. I have never claimed that Rangers played Anti Football but I have said I found Walter's tactics sore on the eyes, but I also said that sometimes the end justifies the means, moreso if it's your own team who are getting a result.
mmm, I'm prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt as I don't know what you wrote at the time but generally speaking, Celtic fans were all over that, anti-football central.
It's just blether, I've supported Rangers in Europe in the past and I don't mind admitting it, i'm willing to bet there are posters on these boards that would support the other half given the right conditions. Not to say I don't have a laugh if Rangers got beat but that's human nature, although some do go overboard.
Here's what I wrote Chapper. [h=2]Anti Football? Not really[/h] Been a lot of talk the last few days about supposed anti football, who plays it and who played it first, the usual childish stuff, some even accused me of agreeing with Messi and that Rangers had played anti football against Barca. To be clear, I never have and I never will, because the style of football played by Rangers in Wattie's last spell was not actually anti football inmho, it was defensively minded to be sure, perhaps even overly cautious and boring to watch...if you were not a Gers fan, but that's the nature of football, an awful lot can be ignored if the results are good and to be fair to Rangers the results they got were good. Apprently the first time anyone used the phrase to describe a team was Cruyff in 2002 about Brazil. So what is it's definition? According to Wiki: "Anti-football" is a lethargic passing style of football that relies only on passing and an extremely defensive, aggressive physical, robust style of play of football where one team deploys their whole team, except the striker, behind the ball. In doing so, they try their best to stop the opposition from scoring, rather than trying to win the game themselves. It is also used to criticize the playing style of teams who have no intention to play properly and prevent the game from moving on with actions such as (but not limited to): shooting the ball forward without trying to reach any players, intentionally diving and stopping the play during several minutes or shooting the ball away when a free-kick is awarded, to win time (usually penalized with a yellow card if too flagrant). Seems pretty tame stuff to me? No suggestion of an overreliance on violence and constantly fouling the opposition, likewise no mention of playing the man more often than the ball. Interestly enough Cruyff also accused Holland of playing anti football against Spain in the 2010 WC final, on this occasion I tend to agree with him on the basis that the Dutch were simply brutal, more concerned with stopping Spain by any means necessary than trying to win, they were not necessarily very defensive, so on that basis alone I see no comparision with how Rangers or Celtic for that matter played against Barca. To me, the worst examples of what I would define as anti football were in european matches I watched as a kid, one in particular stands out, the infamous Celtic V Atletico Madrid match at Parkhead. As disgraceful a preformance as you are ever likely to witness. Atletico literally kicked Celtic (and Jinky in particular) off the park getting 3 reds in the process, and without exageration, if their whole team had been red carded it would not have been harsh. Another which springs to mind was Scotland v Uruguay at the world cup, same as Madrid, the Uruguayans were not interested in football, practically every tackle was a foul on a Scotland player, it was abhorrent. I saw plenty of games in Europe involving British teams and my abiding memory is of almost every Italian and Spanish team being willing to do almost anything to rile their opponents into an act of retaliation and sometimes it worked and British players were sent off, as planned by the opposition. During this era anti football was unheard of but no one ever talks about these teams' anti football, maybe it was'nt, it was far worse, it was simple cheating on an epic scale, and there is not much that annoys fans more than cheating, that is the very epitome of anti football, and should be reserved - like the much overused "Legend"- for teams who really deserve it, and nothing that Rangers, or Celtic did in their matches was anywhere near anti football, and to use the term is not only an insult to those clubs, it excuses or dilutes the seriousness of clubs like Aletico and Inter Milan and others, whose actions in going to any extrem to win, that is anti football.
