T
Tiki-Taka
Guest
Convincing win but you guys are so wasteful at times, I know how it feels... Good luck in the rest of the competition.
That's the end of the road for Arsenal.
Schweini is coming on.
Scared of a close 1-0 final defeat?Jammy bastards. I knew they'd get Hull, dunno why I got so nervous before the draw, it's always the same. at least we're home 2nd leg always feel more comfortable playing away first.
Come on Hull you divvies knock them out please!!!!!
United was the only one going full strength, says a lot.
Oh and forgot to add, West Ham are ****ing ****e!!! They're worse then Sunderland imo, at least at the moment.
Jammy bastards. I knew they'd get Hull, dunno why I got so nervous before the draw, it's always the same. at least we're home 2nd leg always feel more comfortable playing away first.
Come on Hull you divvies knock them out please!!!!!
Yeah that Arsenal team was pretty terrible, apparently Southampton were great tho so props to them.
United was the only one going full strength, says a lot.
Oh and forgot to add, West Ham are ****ing ****e!!! They're worse then Sunderland imo, at least at the moment.
The semifinal draw is complete. Southampton vs Liverpool and Manchester United vs Hull City will be the 1st legs.
Scared of a close 1-0 final defeat?
To be fair Manchester United's road has been tougher so far. You had one Premier League team in four matches, we had two in three.
Yes, it says that we are all in on our trip to Disney this season. Checking out all the rides We must win that cup. haha You and I know that you would love nothing better than beating us in the final.
Positive for us is that Mourinho FINALLY has proof that Mkihitaryan can play in the premier league. So good that West ham were that team that felt his penetration. Alex Ferguson used to say that word a lot and it always made me giggle. I'm giggling now just thinking. Anyway, good luck in your semi.
You can only blame yourselves for finishing low last season. One extra cup match won't harm especially when there are no European competitions for you this season meaning you can focus much better on the league. On the other hand we also have only ourselves to blame for having to play Thursday night football."Scared" well yeah I mean I'm hardly the only one, I bet United fans would rather Southampton in the final, and not (just) because they're easier on paper. There's nothing worse then losing to your biggest rival in a cup final. We'll never heard the end of it. Obviously be ****ing boss if we win it beating them but on the other hand id much rather lose to Hull or anyone else for that matter (maybe besides Everton lol). Would go as far to say that a defeat to United might have a negative effect on our season in general (league etc.), so yeah not to mention the nerves for us fans, will be unbearable though exciting at the same time. lol.
Yeah don't think you had a tougher road to the semis tbh, I'd say about the same, we played one extra round (coz we finished 8th last season) then Derby away is definitely tougher then Northampton at home (though admittedly Derby wasn't at their best at the time), City better then Spurs yeah but no by much, plus City played their 2nd string team, West Ham have got better quality players than Leeds but again as a team id say they're not that much better Payet & co look like they can't be arsed anymore, pretty disgraceful. And the three at the back is just daft, Bilic is no Conte. And now you've got Hull which should obviously be much easier then Southampton so I'd even argue we had the toughest road. Pretty similar in the end though, difference being we've played kids in every game so far.
Yeah i mean good for you I guess, personally I I've got a soft spot for the League Cup like couldn't care less if it's not as "prestigious" as the FA Cup and all that rubbish I've heard from some Arsenal fans tonight. lol was ****ing devastated last year when we lost to City so yeah as I said to Doctor I'd rather Hull in the final assuming we go through of course. Yes, you're right beating you in the final we did in 2003 is always my dream scenario going into them cups and although I'm confident were the better team (by far), it's an one-off game and anything can happen. We never do it the easy way so I wouldn't expect anything different now, hull or united in the final doesn't matter. Ughh I'm overanalysing things again and it's not even December yet Just hoping we go through and then we'll see.
Yeah Mkhitaryan looked good tonight I've got to admit. Will hopefully start on the bench at the weekend.
Cheers mate.
Martial is bringing the danger tonight.
Sweet assist for Mkhitaryan.
You can only blame yourselves for finishing low last season. One extra cup match won't harm especially when there are no European competitions for you this season meaning you can focus much better on the league. On the other hand we also have only ourselves to blame for having to play Thursday night football.
I don't remember Spurs putting their strongest line-up either. West Ham are in a slump but are clearly better than Championship sides. I'll obviously give you Southampton (even though Hull beat them in the league this season ). Maybe you would have preferred if we clashed in the semifinal. No runner-up disappointment for either side.
Now this is why I love karma.
What makes City and United similar?Likewise Man Utd/Mourinho's League position eh?
Ridiculous how people hype up Rashford more than this guy. Were going absolutely crazy for him (and completely over the top of course) after he made a good start last season, but now it's died off and people go mad wanking over Rashford, he is English I suppose. Rashford's a promising young player but he's nowhere near Martial's league.
Rooney suspended as I recall so a better chance of Mikey starting which is a pity.
Well Chelsea winning the oil derby then. City absolutely bottled it, it has to be said. Only got themselves to
Still don't see Chelsea winning the League to be honest. Both Tottenham and City probably should've beaten them. The more they play this 3 at the back the more teams will figure it out I feel so I don't see them winning the title. City not looking like the team that started the season though, door's open for the mighty reds.
Likewise Man Utd/Mourinho's League position eh?
That was one of the worst derbies in recent memory. Disappointing from both.
I thought that by now defenders would start paying more attention to Ramos after all those late goals from him, but no. We paid the price for not converting great chances to score the second and now Real remain in good control of the race. It is a disgusting feeling because they haven't been really spectacular themselves.
Still laughing about Liverpool
What makes City and United similar?
People have been saying Chelsea will be figured out all season, and I'd of agreed with that. I don't think that's the case anymore though, they seem so well drilled at it that nothing can work against it for 90 minutes. City have tried, Tottenham had to play perfectly to handle it for a half, teams have tried to match the formation and got blown away (Everton).
Chelsea will go through a bad patch, everyone does throughout the season at some point, but a universal formula that all teams will copy? It's not looking likely.
Injuries are probably the biggest hurdle right now. Fabregas came in and did what he does, but it wasn't as solid without Matic in there. Costa is by far and away the best striker in the league, Batshuayi can't replace him, if one of the wing backs go down the system wouldn't work etc..
City (barely) bought their recent success which is pretty much all they have. Now compare that to everything that United have and the manner in which they achieved it. Massive difference.Well lets see, geographical location, team of superstars. Massive wage bills, both attempting to buy success, big name managers.
So quite a lot as it turns out.
Well lets see, geographical location, team of superstars. Massive wage bills, both attempting to buy success, big name managers.
So quite a lot as it turns out.
Think Spurs haven't beaten Chelsea away in about 30 years or something? It was as much mental as anything else them blowing that, although Chelsea came back very well. City should've been out of sight by the time Chelsea came back, so wasteful. But I think you're right that teams won't be able to see the formula that everyone can copy. Because unless Chelsea have an off day, there's only so many teams who will be able to pull it off. But I think enough teams will figure it out over time to mean that too many teams will be able to give them a hard time, but who knows? Got a good run of fixtures from what I recall coming up though so probably won't happen for a while.
Having Kante and Matic gives so much protection it's no wonder the defence has been so good of late (especially considering Gary Cahill is a starter in said defence). Would disagree on Costa although a fantastic player I would say Aguero is a better player although Costa has been better this year, also if you count Sanchez as a striker I'd say him as well. Probably would be my player of the season so far.
I am a bit more disappointed with Neymar, he usually converts that sort of a chance with his eyes closed. Though I am trying not to be greedy as Barcelona have won so much over the last decade, it kind of annoys me that Real are ahead in this season by such a margin as I think they aren't playing football out of this world.Sergio Ramos is such a pain in the backside. But very disappointed with Lionel Messi.
Maybe he was referring to your recent spending. It isn't something we are very used to seeing from Manchester United, though your club is doing good business now even when not being successful on the pitch so credit has to be given for that. Even though I prefer Manchester City's football at the moment, they got rich in a different manner, how some would say, plastic. So as far as looking at success goes, I think there is difference.City (barely) bought their recent success which is pretty much all they have. Now compare that to everything that United have and the manner in which they achieved it. Massive difference.
So you think clubs having big wage bills, superstars and big name managers means they deserve to lose? That is not what I was suggesting when mentioning karma.
City (barely) bought their recent success which is pretty much all they have. Now compare that to everything that United have and the manner in which they achieved it. Massive difference.
So you think clubs having big wage bills, superstars and big name managers means they deserve to lose? That is not what I was suggesting when mentioning karma.
Yeah I'm sure there's a way that will make it tougher for Chelsea, but a universal plan that most teams can copy and have success with doesn't look likely (which is a pleasant surprise). It's been quite a while since a formation so different has had prolonged success in England, so that's good. I wonder if we'll play a 3-5-2 at some point with 3 central midfielders and 2 strikers. Conte liked that at Juventus and it gave Pirlo freedom to pull the strings, maybe that's a way of getting Fabregas more involved and more protection in the middle for the big games. Something to watch out for in the coming years I guess.
As for Aguero and Costa, I like Aguero a lot. He's a great finisher and poacher and technically brilliant with his ball at his feet. I'd say Costa has those attributes too (even if they're a bit behind Aguero's). Costa is far more physical, strong, dominant in the air, can bully centre backs, be used as a target man, hold the ball up etc.. Aguero doesn't have that. Look at Costa's goal yesterday, he had the great run, physically bullied the centre back, took it down and finished. Then for Willian he used his strength again to hold off the defender and win the 50/50, before playing it through for Willian to finish. Aguero is phenomenal at what he does, but he's not as complete as Costa imo.
Maybe he was referring to your recent spending. It isn't something we are very used to seeing from Manchester United, though your club is doing good business now even when not being successful on the pitch so credit has to be given for that. Even though I prefer Manchester City's football at the moment, they got rich in a different manner, how some would say, plastic. So as far as looking at success goes, I think there is difference.
Only time will tell I suppose I do think it's a more vulnerable formation with more weaknesses than most other formations so I'm still sceptical (partially in hope I admit but I have long been sceptical of 3 at the back, especially in the prem) and it's still been a relatively short period. See if it stands the test of time, but we shall see.
On Costa and Aguero you've said it there, Costa is a better powerful physical striker but Aguero is better in other ways, he's also done it for a lot longer and has better discipline (although part of that is a quality in winding up defenders and the rest of that obviously has it's uses). Both probably World Class players though, also they are both probably better fits for their respective clubs than the other one.
A good part of that money went on players that majority never heard of before, hardly any are true world class. Tough to buy success with that. As for the comparison with City, remember that money got them success while for United it's pretty much the other way around, success earned the brand and a lot of money with it. I guess we are guilty of buying the last FA Cup but it's clearly not City/PSG style.Half a billion or something in the last 3 or 4 years? More last season than Leicester in their entire History. Buying success is buying success.
If it's money beyond which nearly anyone can spend then it's a little unfair on everyone else. Teams doing that is destroying football. So yeah can't say they don't deserve it. Not to mention how Mourinho has behaved his entire career, especially recent years. No amount of failure could be undeserving for that guy karma-wise.
Safe to say you're very glad for Chelsea proving your wrong? If I remember well you were predicting that they will struggle to get the Champions League spot.People have been saying Chelsea will be figured out all season, and I'd of agreed with that. I don't think that's the case anymore though, they seem so well drilled at it that nothing can work against it for 90 minutes. City have tried, Tottenham had to play perfectly to handle it for a half, teams have tried to match the formation and got blown away (Everton).
Chelsea will go through a bad patch, everyone does throughout the season at some point, but a universal formula that all teams will copy? It's not looking likely.
Injuries are probably the biggest hurdle right now. Fabregas came in and did what he does, but it wasn't as solid without Matic in there. Costa is by far and away the best striker in the league, Batshuayi can't replace him, if one of the wing backs go down the system wouldn't work etc..
Manchester United weren't born with a massive brand and name. What do you think earned them that? Consistent success for more than two decades and some in older times as well. Now when there is a struggle, they have a lot of money to lean on and make their attempts to return to the top less difficult, and they earned that. Just how teams like Real Madrid and Bayern Munich earned that and how recently Barcelona have earned that. Building teams, dynasties, having big success awards with big worldwide fanbases and great deals with sponsors which results in wealth. Nothing plastic about that in my opinion.Man City are doing "good business" they pass financial fair play regulations, likewise with Chelsea. With enough really good marketing people getting lucrative sponsorships and the rest of it people can spend more than anyone else, it isn't football. Man Utd are living off their brand and name now not their successes. Not really in the spirit of fair play and even playing fields to be honest. It's all plastic.
Safe to say you're very glad for Chelsea proving your wrong? If I remember well you were predicting that they will struggle to get the Champions League spot.
100 % ABU talk. Get it right, the Club, the city, the players created the brand. On pitch success and a terrible tragedy made Manchester United the iconic brand that it is today. You can't buy this and you certainly cannot place a negative ethical connotation on it.Man Utd are living off their brand and name now not their successes. Not really in the spirit of fair play and even playing fields to be honest. It's all plastic.
A good part of that money went on players that majority never heard of before, hardly any are true world class. Tough to buy success with that. As for the comparison with City, remember that money got them success while for United it's pretty much the other way around, success earned the brand and a lot of money with it. I guess we are guilty of buying the last FA Cup but it's clearly not City/PSG style.
You earn, you spend. This isn't personal life where one might decide to slowly add money into a secret stash to use in tough life situations, this is highly competitive sports. Majority of big clubs are spending nowadays. Can't really expect them to apologize to the rest for being far bigger institutions and not use what they have. And we understood you can't stand Mourinho. He's had his tough moments and will have some more until his retirement, everyone goes through them. The reason I used karma for City is because back when they won the league they had some escapes while Manchester United and Liverpool both performed a choke of epic proportions so now them being wasteful in their matches is some kind of payback.
Manchester United weren't born with a massive brand and name. What do you think earned them that? Consistent success for more than two decades and some in older times as well. Now when there is a struggle, they have a lot of money to lean on and make their attempts to return to the top less difficult, and they earned that. Just how teams like Real Madrid and Bayern Munich earned that and how recently Barcelona have earned that. Building teams, dynasties, having big success awards with big worldwide fanbases and great deals with sponsors which results in wealth. Nothing plastic about that in my opinion.
It is not just about recent success. Clubs I mentioned have had success in several periods of their history, not just in the last decade. The prize money for winning or reaching certain rounds of competitions is really small compared to money that clubs earn through sponsors, TV rights and other things. If the clubs haven't performed well and won trophies throughout the years it gets much tougher for the marketing teams to earn them extra money. I am sure most would love to have the resources of the biggest clubs like Real/United/Barcelona/Bayern but wealth didn't fall from the sky for them. It isn't what made them great. Sometimes I wish there is less of the business part involved too but that is the way that football works for a while now.Football is better if anyone could achieve greatness in my opinion, sport in general is better when it's not a closed shop. Back in the day there were good teams from all over the place. Liverpool benefit from this as well to some degree, but all of it means that financial fair play is anything but. If it's about spending what you directly earn from your success then it's more of an even playing field. Rather than who's had recent success and can sign a good marketing team to make more money out of that. It makes it about the business rather than the sport itself, which in turn makes it grossly uneven. Why not just cut out the middlemen and put the marketing teams on the pitch as that's more and more who is really competing.
Sorry but I look at the players that are brought. If all transfer windows were like the last one where several top quality players were brought in most positions I would have agreed but that is not the case. Most of the signings aren't world class superstars and there is no amount of money that will change that. Majority if not all Sir Alex's squads were stronger than the current side and very tough opponents existed back then as well. Considering I hear and read a lot of comments how any decent side from any country would beat the current Man United, I wonder how are they success buyers if anyone can beat them. If the club didn't leave a huge mark on the game over the years, the current business wouldn't have been as good as it is so it does have to do with football. The period of success was huge so I don't see how good fortune can be brought into that.So it's better because you spent the money badly? I'm sorry but that's nonsense, if you spend half a billion on players over 3 or 4 years then you are trying to buy success. Success has in part made the brand but as much as anything else they have an excellent marketing team which is nothing to do with football. Having the good fortune to have that period of success at a time when so much more money was coming into football and so much more worldwide coverage available.
Yea Mourinho has had a hard time of it anyway. Poor guy, being eyebutted in the finger by Tito there what a disgrace. Gonna have quite a few more tough moments managerially speaking going forward as the game has moved one without him. Can't help but fell this is his last big job.
Huh? Nobody with the great brand and name like Man United can be considered plastic.Man City are doing "good business" they pass financial fair play regulations, likewise with Chelsea. With enough really good marketing people getting lucrative sponsorships and the rest of it people can spend more than anyone else, it isn't football. Man Utd are living off their brand and name now not their successes. Not really in the spirit of fair play and even playing fields to be honest. It's all plastic.
It is not just about recent success. Clubs I mentioned have had success in several periods of their history, not just in the last decade. The prize money for winning or reaching certain rounds of competitions is really small compared to money that clubs earn through sponsors, TV rights and other things. If the clubs haven't performed well and won trophies throughout the years it gets much tougher for the marketing teams to earn them extra money. I am sure most would love to have the resources of the biggest clubs like Real/United/Barcelona/Bayern but wealth didn't fall from the sky for them. It isn't what made them great. Sometimes I wish there is less of the business part involved too but that is the way that football works for a while now.
Anyway despite big spending, we have had some good underdog stories in recent time. Leicester City, Atletico Madrid, Montpellier, Borussia Dortmund all became domestic champions while battling richer clubs. This season Nice are leading Monaco and Paris Saint-Germain in France, Leipzig are leading Bayern in Germany, Liverpool and Arsenal are in the title race ahead of Manchester clubs. This one hurts but in Spain Real who hardly spent anything this summer lead Barcelona who spent a lot... Money is not always a guarantee for success, sometimes having less of it can even lead to some smarter decisions while it also can be easier for the transferred player to settle when not having a huge price tag on himself.
Sorry but I look at the players that are brought. If all transfer windows were like the last one where several top quality players were brought in most positions I would have agreed but that is not the case. Most of the signings aren't world class superstars and there is no amount of money that will change that. Majority if not all Sir Alex's squads were stronger than the current side and very tough opponents existed back then as well. Considering I hear and read a lot of comments how any decent side from any country would beat the current Man United, I wonder how are they success buyers if anyone can beat them. If the club didn't leave a huge mark on the game over the years, the current business wouldn't have been as good as it is so it does have to do with football. The period of success was huge so I don't see how good fortune can be brought into that.
What's up with that? I am not defending his behavior, especially not the one in Real Madrid. I am just saying he had some tough moments. He benefited from some questionable decisions sometimes but on occasions they went against him as well so it's not like there is a lot to "pay for", especially since he isn't an overachiever IMO.
Those are some exceptions alongside Paris Saint-Germain where some billionaires came out of nowhere and turned those clubs into a force. I am not a fan of that kind of path to success either though if those clubs play attractive football I tend to ignore how they got there. Most of the clubs that can afford to pay everything are the ones that already have established themselves as giants of the football world a while ago.All I'm saying is it's not good for the game to have anyone to have that much more to spend than anyone else, it's been getting out of control for a while now, but especially now. Man City don't have a great history of long success, neither do Chelsea but neither team fails the financial fair play because their marketing people work a way around it (or in Chelsea's case, farming young players and selling them). Think City did once but all those other seasons they have not.
Also - I can honestly say I'm glad my side is not spending the sort of ridiculous money that some of these clubs are spending. Especially now as they are doing well but even if they weren't - I wouldn't want them to play such a part. Because as much as anything else I'm a fan of football and this isn't good for football.