Enzo
International
Guess what? He is more stupid than average person, have you noticed football pitch intellect often have something to do with general intellect
-
Major upgrades completed! Please report any issues you spot in here
Champions League 2012/13
- Thread starter cfdh_edmundo
- Start date
Guess what? He is more stupid than average person, have you noticed football pitch intellect often have something to do with general intellect
we7god
Kreisklassen-Profi
I have a proposition:
For strikers it is good to be stupid: too much thinking in front of the goal is not good, just simply shoot and score !!!
Luiz Adriano seems to be a good "prove" of my proposition...
For strikers it is good to be stupid: too much thinking in front of the goal is not good, just simply shoot and score !!!
Luiz Adriano seems to be a good "prove" of my proposition...
gerd
Retired Footballer
I have a proposition:
For strikers it is good to be stupid: too much thinking in front of the goal is not good, just simply shoot and score !!!
Luiz Adriano seems to be a good "prove" of my proposition...
Excellent post.
lo zio
International
- 24 October 2005
- Team
- Palermo
wow! what a dirty little piece of shit! i'm surprised the danish players allowed to leave the pitch with both his kneecaps intact. 
gerd
Retired Footballer
It now seems as if the Danish player who went down was feigning a much more serious injury than he would have had. He acted as if the impact was on his head...
So on second thought one could blame on both sides, it's just that the Danish player acted less stupid.
Football is such an unfair sport.
So on second thought one could blame on both sides, it's just that the Danish player acted less stupid.
Football is such an unfair sport.
- Thread starter
- #306
cfdh_edmundo
Maverick
- 30 December 2002
Yeah from what I saw the Danish player collided with the Shakhtar player around the wast/stomach area. Yet the Danish player rolled around clutching his head and intimated that he had been elbowed by the Shakhtar player. In the meantime Shakhtar had broken away in a 3 vs 3 situation - it wasnt at that moment a very good goal scoring chance but Shakhtar did have possession and the pace and numbers to potentially threaten the Danish goal and potentially equalise. Anyway within a few seconds the ref blew the whistle to stop the game (he had to as the player pretended to have a potential head injury) - and legally the only way the game could restart was with a drop ball.
What Adriano did was poor, but the Danish team trying to pretend to be saints is a bit disingenuous too. Watching football I've often been frustrated at players going down to delay the game and break up play, this is exactly what the Dane was doing, and sometimes I've just wanted the players to play on instead of the game stopping. I personally think if the game is stopped for an injury, the injured player should have to sit out for at least 90 seconds, as I'm sick of seeing teams using this faking injury tactic. To be honest there needs to be a better way of dealing with these situations other than an arbitrary drop ball. For instance in the scenario the other night, shouldn't the Danish team have kicked it back to Shakhtar keeper (since the Ukrainians were in possession of the ball at the time, they should keep possession) - there is no set rule on this and this uncertainly can always create these situations.
What Adriano did was poor, but the Danish team trying to pretend to be saints is a bit disingenuous too. Watching football I've often been frustrated at players going down to delay the game and break up play, this is exactly what the Dane was doing, and sometimes I've just wanted the players to play on instead of the game stopping. I personally think if the game is stopped for an injury, the injured player should have to sit out for at least 90 seconds, as I'm sick of seeing teams using this faking injury tactic. To be honest there needs to be a better way of dealing with these situations other than an arbitrary drop ball. For instance in the scenario the other night, shouldn't the Danish team have kicked it back to Shakhtar keeper (since the Ukrainians were in possession of the ball at the time, they should keep possession) - there is no set rule on this and this uncertainly can always create these situations.
gerd
Retired Footballer
Very good post edmundo. Completely agree.
Enzo
International
Edmundo I am more concerned about lies of Mhitaryan, Srna and Luchesku.
Mhitaryan said - Nordsjaelland scored second goal because we let them score.
Srna said - second goal was scored by Nordsjaelland, it wasnt goal allowed by us.
Luchesku said - Stepanek didnt understand us so he attacked the ball instead of letting Nordsjaelland score.
Mhitaryan said - Nordsjaelland scored second goal because we let them score.
Srna said - second goal was scored by Nordsjaelland, it wasnt goal allowed by us.
Luchesku said - Stepanek didnt understand us so he attacked the ball instead of letting Nordsjaelland score.
- Thread starter
- #309
cfdh_edmundo
Maverick
- 30 December 2002
Well I didnt listen to any players interviewed. But it seems only Mkhitaryan's account differs from Srna and Lucescu.
Lucescu says that Stepanenko kicked the ball away from the Danish team, and he didn't understand that Shakhtar was meant to conceed a goal to counter balance Adriano's goal. This is obviously correct, as if you watch the replay, once the Danish team kick off after the Adriano goal a lot of the Shakhtar players are standing around waiting for them to score this counter-blance goal. However Taras Stepanenko doesnt understand this and he tackles the Danish player and clears the ball.
Srna said that the Danish teams goal was genuine goal and Shakhtar didn't deliberately conceed it - this looks to be true, if you look at the goal it's 3 mins after the Adriano controversial goal. It was scored by a Danish player who scores from the edge of the area on the diagonal. The Shakhtar marking isnt great - but that is nothing surprising, but it looks like a genuine goal. So I think Srna is correct.
About Mkhitaryan, I dont know exactly what he said but it seems to be that Shakhtar deliberatly conceeded this second Danish goal, which seems wrong. Without seeing the interviews it's hard to judge what each player was saying. But if Mkhitaryan's got confused I'm not that concerned about it. Given the owner, Rinat Akhmetov, has said he was dissapointed by the goal I dont think it's some sort of conspiracy.
Lucescu says that Stepanenko kicked the ball away from the Danish team, and he didn't understand that Shakhtar was meant to conceed a goal to counter balance Adriano's goal. This is obviously correct, as if you watch the replay, once the Danish team kick off after the Adriano goal a lot of the Shakhtar players are standing around waiting for them to score this counter-blance goal. However Taras Stepanenko doesnt understand this and he tackles the Danish player and clears the ball.
Srna said that the Danish teams goal was genuine goal and Shakhtar didn't deliberately conceed it - this looks to be true, if you look at the goal it's 3 mins after the Adriano controversial goal. It was scored by a Danish player who scores from the edge of the area on the diagonal. The Shakhtar marking isnt great - but that is nothing surprising, but it looks like a genuine goal. So I think Srna is correct.
About Mkhitaryan, I dont know exactly what he said but it seems to be that Shakhtar deliberatly conceeded this second Danish goal, which seems wrong. Without seeing the interviews it's hard to judge what each player was saying. But if Mkhitaryan's got confused I'm not that concerned about it. Given the owner, Rinat Akhmetov, has said he was dissapointed by the goal I dont think it's some sort of conspiracy.
lo zio
International
- 24 October 2005
- Team
- Palermo
that's a brilliant idea!edmundo said:
btw i'm a bit late on this, but how about abramovich sacking di matteo!
classic roman! seriously can u believe this guy?! i actually thought roberto was doing quite well, given what he had to work with. sure mata and hazard are sublime players and that oscar kid seems very promising, but when u got only 1 good midfielder (ramires) and 1 good defender (ivanovic) there's only so much u can do.
roman kinda reminds me of zamparini
Last edited:
gerd
Retired Footballer
It seems Hazard is now getting lots of stick from his team mates because he is lazy and does not defend enough.
I'm afraid he does have an attitude problem. I like him very much, but our national team is also playing better without him...
I'm afraid he does have an attitude problem. I like him very much, but our national team is also playing better without him...
I actually think players that are that talented should be tolerated. Gary Neville just wrote a brilliant piece about Ronaldo changed his whole view on a 'team player' - that there are occasionally such talents that they contribute more by being 'selfish' than trying to track back and hold formations.
This is obviously only for a very select group of special players (Ronaldo, Ibramhimovic and such)
The issue at Chelsea is that there are 3 of them - the other players, no matter how defensive and disciplined, can't make up that 'slack'.
This is obviously only for a very select group of special players (Ronaldo, Ibramhimovic and such)
The issue at Chelsea is that there are 3 of them - the other players, no matter how defensive and disciplined, can't make up that 'slack'.
- Thread starter
- #313
cfdh_edmundo
Maverick
- 30 December 2002
I think Di Matteo was very unlucky to get sacked. Chelsea were on a little bit of a blip, but they had been playing very good football. If you look at the Di Matteo's domestic record they had been doing very well in terms of results. All the way to the West Brom away match on 17th November they were undefeated except the 3-2 to Man Utd - and in that match they were far and away the better team, and only losing 3-2 despite having 9 men is an indication of the strength of the team. If you look at the teams they had beaten in that time you've got big ones like Tottenham, Arsenal which were both away, and he won tricky matches like Newcastle and Stoke.
They had been on a bit of a wobble with the performances against Liverpool and West Brom and in both of the Shakhtar matches they had been a bit slack (although against a very good team), and in some ways they should closed the first match against Juventus out and won it instead of letting a 2 goal lead slip. However the squad he had was very disjointed. Torres is off form and Sturridge isnt even a proper striker so they have no options upfront. In the last few years they've got rid of players like Drogba, Anelka and Kalou and they havent really replaced them. A lot of emphasis is placed on the midfielders getting the goals and again injures started to take their toll, once a few players like Lampard get injured you have a big amount of pressure on the more defensively minded midfielders like Mikel.
I dont think Di Matteo had much input in the make up of the squad. If he did, then there is a case for him being to blame. For instance the way AVB pushed Alex and Anelka out of the team last year, and nearly did the same with Drogba, left the squad unbalanced. But I dont think Di Matteo really did this, so I think it's very harsh as he did well in terms of results, and (this season) in terms of style and it wasnt his fault that the squad was very imbalanced.
They had been on a bit of a wobble with the performances against Liverpool and West Brom and in both of the Shakhtar matches they had been a bit slack (although against a very good team), and in some ways they should closed the first match against Juventus out and won it instead of letting a 2 goal lead slip. However the squad he had was very disjointed. Torres is off form and Sturridge isnt even a proper striker so they have no options upfront. In the last few years they've got rid of players like Drogba, Anelka and Kalou and they havent really replaced them. A lot of emphasis is placed on the midfielders getting the goals and again injures started to take their toll, once a few players like Lampard get injured you have a big amount of pressure on the more defensively minded midfielders like Mikel.
I dont think Di Matteo had much input in the make up of the squad. If he did, then there is a case for him being to blame. For instance the way AVB pushed Alex and Anelka out of the team last year, and nearly did the same with Drogba, left the squad unbalanced. But I dont think Di Matteo really did this, so I think it's very harsh as he did well in terms of results, and (this season) in terms of style and it wasnt his fault that the squad was very imbalanced.
- Thread starter
- #314
cfdh_edmundo
Maverick
- 30 December 2002
Well to be fair to Oscar he does try and track and win the ball, and Mata does to a lesser extent too. The real issue is that Torres and Hazard dont track back. But the worst thing seems to be Torres's lack of movement - he doesnt try and drag defenders around the pitch with off the ball runs (even Drogba would do this) so yesterday Kompany knew he could mark him out of the game and didn't need any assistance from the other Man City midfielders. This meant the likes of Barry, Milner and Yaya Toure could push up a bit more as they werent really needed defensivly. This in turn means Hazard has to go back and defend more (which simply isnt his game).
I dont want to scapegoat a guy, but Torres is really affecting Chelsea midfield as well as blunting their attack. I think Di Matteo realised this and that was the reason why he didn't start him in Turin, sadly it seems Bruce "Quick" Buck and Ron Gouraly dont see this and are still trying to prove that £50m on Torres was sensible.
-------------Cech
-----Ivanovic----Cahill
Alipzut.---------------Cole/Bertrand
----------David Luiz------
-----Ramires------
------------Hazard------
Oscar--------------Mata---
-----------Moses
At the moment I'd play that team if I was looking at the strongest Chelsea team, but in January I'd try and get a decent out and out striker and then use Moses as a back up for the other attacking midfielders.
I dont want to scapegoat a guy, but Torres is really affecting Chelsea midfield as well as blunting their attack. I think Di Matteo realised this and that was the reason why he didn't start him in Turin, sadly it seems Bruce "Quick" Buck and Ron Gouraly dont see this and are still trying to prove that £50m on Torres was sensible.
-------------Cech
-----Ivanovic----Cahill
Alipzut.---------------Cole/Bertrand
----------David Luiz------
-----Ramires------
------------Hazard------
Oscar--------------Mata---
-----------Moses
At the moment I'd play that team if I was looking at the strongest Chelsea team, but in January I'd try and get a decent out and out striker and then use Moses as a back up for the other attacking midfielders.
amineken22
*****
- 9 November 2010
Good post Edmundo.
lo zio
International
- 24 October 2005
- Team
- Palermo
man, talk about unbalanced!
i think the reason roberto didn't start torres against juve is because he realised this chelsea team simply can't handle mata, oscar, hazard AND a striker at the same time. and i agree with that. u'd need at least 2 ramires, much better cbs than chelsea's and sidebacks much more willing to sacrifice to afford such a lineup. i remember ancelotti's milan used to field sheva, inzaghi, kakà, and seedorf\rui costa..... but that milan also had gattuso and pirlo at midfield, and also maldini, stam and nesta in defence. this chelsea team has none of that.going "all guns blazing" may pay off against lesser opposition, such as chelsea's average opponents in the epl. if your opponent is gonna sit back at the edge of his own box without even trying to control the ball, then nobody will even notice how weak you are in your own half of the pitch..... but that's not gonna happen against more serious opposition.
as for torres, i believe if he were to track back more, that would cause more problems than anything (especially to that plethora of talented lightweights upfront). as good as mata, hazard and oscar might be, they cannot shift the possession line up the pitch.... they just don't have the physique du role. now, i agree torres is no drogba either, but at least he's up there. as soon as he tracks back, chelsea's center of gravity shifts down the pitch along with him.
i do agree with u that torres should work the defenders out a little more. but to be honest, that's never been fernando's forte. i'm afraid torres is really doing the best he can... and that just isn't enough.... not because he's not good neough, but because he's just not suited to play in this offensive setup.
however, although i agree with u that torres has been doing a pretty poor job, i don't think he's chelsea's main problem.
i mean just look at their starting 11..... a top team with a cb partnership formed by the likes of terry and luiz is a top team with a poor defence.......a top team with ramires and mikel as the only 2 midfielders behind the midfield line is a top team without any sort of "filter", wich will have serious issues recovering the ball, holding to it and passing it (so pretty much everything).
my beloved palermo has an awful midfield this season...... and still i don't think mikel would be a substantial improvement to palermo's midfield..... that's how serious chelsea situation is at midfield. ramires is a lovely player, but as i said, u'd need at least 2 of them to give chelsea's midfield some order and structure.... combine this with that amazing black-hole that is chelsea's defensive line and u have a recipe for disaster.
u can have a top team with a below average defensive-line, u can have a top team with a mediocre midfield..... but u just can't have a top team with a poor defensive line and a non-existent midfield.... such a team is no top team at all, no matter how much talent u have upfront.
so that's their problem imo. torres is certainly not the most fitting player for this formation and he's also off form, but "the torres situation" is nothing compared to the much more serious issues chelsea has at midfield and in defence.
last season chelsea had a awful team. di matteo had the merit to learn from avb's mistakes (he was more "diplomatic" with the senators) and to appeal to the players' pride and spirit, wich allowed them to overcome their limits and to beat better opponents (napoli, benfica, barça and bayern were all better teams), eventually winning the CL in the most surprising fashion.... but if u look at the league table (wich is the only real measure of a team's strenght), then u'll see they finished the season more than 25 pts behind the leaders (and it's not like city and united hitted the ground running last season either).
this summer chelsea spent a shitload of money and amazingly they still forgot to address the most pressing issues in this team.
so, as opposed to last season's awful chelsea, this season u have yet another awful chelsea.... an awful chelsea, with the 2 more talented offensive players
Last edited:
gerd
Retired Footballer
Completely agree with you Ben, but don't you think that all what you mentioned in your post doesn't reflect bad on Di Matteo.
Chelsea bought: Hazard, Oscar, Azpilicueta, Mozes and Marin.
Hazard and Oscoar are good players; but are disturbing the balance of the team when both are played with Mata.
Azpilicueta seemed a fringe player, but IMO he was the bright spark in Chelsea's match against City. I prefer him to Ivanovic at RB.
Mozes did always reasonably well when he played (as a sub mostly).
Marin was never used to my knowledge (why buy him then???).
Chelsea didn't buy a decent DMF or CMF nor a decent CB (and they could use more than one).
Who was the manager during that transfer period? Di Matteo.
People will say that perhaps he was never heard about those transfers? Well that is when a good manager uses the press to make his point about the transfer policy.
It is true that Abramovich treated Di Matteo in a bad way, but Di Matteo made it very easy for him. With hindsight it's easy to see, but after winning the Cl with Chelsea, Di Matteo should have stepped away from Chelsea. He would certainly have found a better suited club.
Perhaps Di Matteo is a fine coach (i doubt it to be honest), but he's shown himself a very bad boardroom politician...
Chelsea bought: Hazard, Oscar, Azpilicueta, Mozes and Marin.
Hazard and Oscoar are good players; but are disturbing the balance of the team when both are played with Mata.
Azpilicueta seemed a fringe player, but IMO he was the bright spark in Chelsea's match against City. I prefer him to Ivanovic at RB.
Mozes did always reasonably well when he played (as a sub mostly).
Marin was never used to my knowledge (why buy him then???).
Chelsea didn't buy a decent DMF or CMF nor a decent CB (and they could use more than one).
Who was the manager during that transfer period? Di Matteo.
People will say that perhaps he was never heard about those transfers? Well that is when a good manager uses the press to make his point about the transfer policy.
It is true that Abramovich treated Di Matteo in a bad way, but Di Matteo made it very easy for him. With hindsight it's easy to see, but after winning the Cl with Chelsea, Di Matteo should have stepped away from Chelsea. He would certainly have found a better suited club.
Perhaps Di Matteo is a fine coach (i doubt it to be honest), but he's shown himself a very bad boardroom politician...
lo zio
International
- 24 October 2005
- Team
- Palermo
well it certainly doesn't reflect well on him.... either he had his saying on the transfers (in wich case he can't assess the team's needs) or he didn't (in wich case he didn't spend the credit he earned with the succesful CL campaign).
anyway i don't think he had much to do with chelsea's transfers. no coach, no matter how inept, would be so incompetent not to see what chelsea needed this summer.
besides i always had the impression roman saw di matteo as a transitional coach (an interim solution, waiting for a more high profile name to hire, such as guardiola).... whether that was a good call or not, u can certainly understand why roman didn't wanna invest on a coach he didn't really trust that much in the first place (letting him pick the players to buy).
why? he already got one of the most prestigious jobs in coaching. a top club, competing on the biggest stages, with a munificent owner... and also a club he actually cares about.... would u leave? i know i wouldn't.... besides, leave chelsea for what? u seem to suggest he could have landed another big appointment, but you yourself don't seem to rate him very highly (and i don't think any top club owner does). italian top clubs don't have the prestige nor the will to invest theese days (except juve, but that spot is already take by conte), and no english or spanish top club were looking for a coach this summer, so i don't think leaving would have been a reasonable option.Gerd said:
as for his actual ability as a coach, i believe it's still way too early to tell. he did a very good job at west brom (i remember Sina gave me a heads up about roberto's west brom, and that was indeed a very nice team to watch... wich is quite an unusual thing for an epl non-top club).
and also at chelsea i think he did a pretty good job. he soon realised he couldn't line up a balanced formation (wich makes me believe he didn't have much to do with the transfer even more), so he "pulled off a leonardo" and decided to field a very disjointed formation, hoping his offensive players would be able to keep the ball as far away from the defence as possible for as much time as possible...... and it actually worked pretty well on a decent number of occasions. i don't think anyone could do much more than that with this team right now.
Last edited:
gerd
Retired Footballer
I'm not so sure about Di Matteo Ben. When he was first with WBA, they played good football, but the current team plays good football too and they last longer than under Di Matteo. But i remember being charmed by him at the time too...
I (think) i would not have stayed. I would have opted for a longer contract with a lesser club like Spurs, Everton, Fiorentina, Montpellier, Schalke (i just mention some clubs as an example, i know most of them still had other coaches) instead of knowing that i would be used as a transitionary manager until Guardiola finally decides to go to Chelsea or until they had another big name manager....meanwhile i would have been the manager who would have won the CL...
I still remember Di Matteo climbing the steps after the CL win. Somewhere on those steps he met Abromovich and Di Matteo gave him a very proud 'see, i did it'-look. Roman responded with a look that was awfull. Then i knew what would happen...of course Roberto didn't notice because he was euphorious, but i wonder if he ever looked at those images on a video....i'm bad at reading people, but to me it was obvious there and then that Roman would get rid of Roberto Di Matteo as soon as possible towards the fans....
Now he made the mistake to go for Benitez who is hated by the fans....( and i can't understand that).
I (think) i would not have stayed. I would have opted for a longer contract with a lesser club like Spurs, Everton, Fiorentina, Montpellier, Schalke (i just mention some clubs as an example, i know most of them still had other coaches) instead of knowing that i would be used as a transitionary manager until Guardiola finally decides to go to Chelsea or until they had another big name manager....meanwhile i would have been the manager who would have won the CL...
I still remember Di Matteo climbing the steps after the CL win. Somewhere on those steps he met Abromovich and Di Matteo gave him a very proud 'see, i did it'-look. Roman responded with a look that was awfull. Then i knew what would happen...of course Roberto didn't notice because he was euphorious, but i wonder if he ever looked at those images on a video....i'm bad at reading people, but to me it was obvious there and then that Roman would get rid of Roberto Di Matteo as soon as possible towards the fans....
Now he made the mistake to go for Benitez who is hated by the fans....( and i can't understand that).
-Panos-
Premier League
I think I saw the most funny/idiotic offside call, which resulted in a cancelled goal, in the Malaga-Anderlecht match :p The Anderlecht player dribbled his way into the area, scored, but referee stopped the play as the linesman thought the dribble was going to be a pass....
gerd
Retired Footballer
It wasn't like that.
It was a ridiculous decision, but not like that.
Before Safari's dribble, there was a pass to Mbokani (who might have been off-side, but that is far from sure) that was intercepted by Malaga. The flag was for Mbokani. The linesman should have wait and see, and could only have give an off-side if the ball did reach Mbokani. But i didn't.
The Malaga player that intercepted the ball lost the ball to Safari who dribbled and scored. The goal was not validated because the previous (supposedly) off-side position of Mbokani.
Malaga scored on the counter-attack: 1-0 instead of 0-1. In the end it didn't matter since Milan lost to Zenith.
It was a ridiculous decision, but not like that.
Before Safari's dribble, there was a pass to Mbokani (who might have been off-side, but that is far from sure) that was intercepted by Malaga. The flag was for Mbokani. The linesman should have wait and see, and could only have give an off-side if the ball did reach Mbokani. But i didn't.
The Malaga player that intercepted the ball lost the ball to Safari who dribbled and scored. The goal was not validated because the previous (supposedly) off-side position of Mbokani.
Malaga scored on the counter-attack: 1-0 instead of 0-1. In the end it didn't matter since Milan lost to Zenith.
-Panos-
Premier League
I only saw this once last night from the match highlights, that's why I wasn't sure about what happened there, but it seemed funny to me.
gonalois
KING OF LISBON
Benfica: Artur; Maxi Pereira, Luisão, Garay e Melgarejo; Nolito, Matic, André Gomes e Ola John; Lima e Rodrigo.
Subs: Paulo Lopes, Luisinho, Jardel, André Almeida, Bruno César, Gaitán e Cardozo.
Barcelona: Pinto; Montoya, Puyol, Adriano e Planas; Thiago, Song e Sergi Roberto; Tello, Rafinha e Villa.
Subs: Valdés, Piqué, Sergi Gómez, Dos Santos, Busquets, Messi e Deulofeu.
Subs: Paulo Lopes, Luisinho, Jardel, André Almeida, Bruno César, Gaitán e Cardozo.
Barcelona: Pinto; Montoya, Puyol, Adriano e Planas; Thiago, Song e Sergi Roberto; Tello, Rafinha e Villa.
Subs: Valdés, Piqué, Sergi Gómez, Dos Santos, Busquets, Messi e Deulofeu.
airjoca
International
"Si eres Portugues, hijo de puta és" or something along those lines.
When will Barça fans stop with this chant?
When will Barça fans stop with this chant?
LFC Albania
Banned
What Does that mean ?
Baxter
International
- 23 August 2011
"If you are Portuguese, you are a son of a bi**h".
airjoca
International
That comes from the days of Figo's betrayal I think.
I was at Barcelona when they celebrated their title a few years ago, happy that Barça had won because they're my favourite team in Spain. All of sudden everyone starts singing that.
I don't think that some of the idiot Barça fans that sing that know that their club has a lot of Portuguese fans, specially amongst those that don't like Mourinho and Ronaldo...
I was at Barcelona when they celebrated their title a few years ago, happy that Barça had won because they're my favourite team in Spain. All of sudden everyone starts singing that.
I don't think that some of the idiot Barça fans that sing that know that their club has a lot of Portuguese fans, specially amongst those that don't like Mourinho and Ronaldo...
- Thread starter
- #328
cfdh_edmundo
Maverick
- 30 December 2002
Theyve had a few portuguese players recently too. Quaresma, Deco but to be fair these guys weren't playing when messi played so perhaps a lot of the fans don't remember it.
Damjan
World Cup Winner
- 16 July 2011
- Team
- Arsenal|Juventus|ASSE
- Thread starter
- #330
cfdh_edmundo
Maverick
- 30 December 2002
I agree its one thing to say Mourinho, Cristiano Ronaldo, Figo or whomever else is a bad person, but to put that against all citizens of a nation is a bit poor.