Android17:
Since it is a means to an end but not an end itself can you see that you have been arguing for nothing?

You're the one arguing for nothing.

What are the means to an end (which is winning)?

Answers
1... Winning through normal time
2... Winning through Penalties (ie if you cannot win through normal time)


So how will you say most teams don't play to participate in penalties when time and time again history have shown every year that team does

Android17:
See it again. Just incase it walked by you.

Is seems you missed the second question

Is penalty not another platform for winning?

Jodera:
You're the one arguing for nothing.

What are the means to an end (which is winning)?

Answers
1... Winning through normal time
2... Winning through Penalties (ie if you cannot win through normal time)


So how will you say most teams don't play to participate in penalties when time and time again history have shown every year that team does

Once you say winning THROUGH. . .

Your statement ends. You have now checkmated yourself. You have identified the objective.

Jodera:

Is seems you missed the second question

Is penalty not another platform for winning?

If it is a platform, it is not the objective. Did you see Mbappé smiling after the WC finals? LOL

Android17:
Once you say winning THROUGH. . .

Your statement ends. You have now checkmated yourself. You have identified the objective.

Every objective have a process.

That an objective is not met doesn't always mean the process is wrong or inconsequential

And that's what you've been trying to say throughout this evening which I'm here to debunk

Android17:
If it is a platform, it is not the objective. Did you see Mbappé smiling after the WC finals? LOL

He's not smiling because his teammates unfortunately lost their PKs and not because he scored 3 goals.

If not, he wouldn't have celebrated when he scored the 3 goal that dragged them to penalties.

Afterall they weren't winning then right?

Jodera:

Every objective have a process.

That an objective is not met doesn't always mean the process is wrong or inconsequential

And that's what you've been trying to say throughout this evening which I'm here to debunk

Wrong is not a synonym (even contextually) for inconsequential. Do better.

Jodera:
He's not smiling because his teammates unfortunately lost their PKs and not because he scored 3 goals.

If not, he wouldn't have celebrated when he scored the 3 goal that dragged them to penalties.

Afterall they weren't winning then right?

He was celebrating after scoring because it was getting him closer to his team's objective.

He did not smile because France did not WIN.

Android17:
Wrong is not a synonym (even contextually) for inconsequential. Do better.

I never said Wrong is a synonym for inconsequential and I never insinuated it in that post.

They're both independent of each other in that statement

Android17:
He was celebrating after scoring because it was getting him closer to his team's objective.

He did not smile because France did not WIN.

Did he win or was France winning at that point?

If no, Why then was he celebrating the 3rd goal if he knew it might be inconsequential?

Why didn't he wait till he was won before he celebrated?

Jodera:
I never said Wrong is a synonym for inconsequential and I never insinuated it in that post.

They're both independent of each other in that statement

You may need a refresher's course on grammar. In that sentence you presented wrong and inconsequential as synonyms.

Jodera:
Did he win or was France winning at that point?

If no, Why then was he celebrating the 3rd goal if he knew it might be inconsequential?

How will he know it was inconsequential until . . .wait for it. . .FRANCE DID NOT WIN?

Android17:
You may need a refresher's course on grammar. In that sentence you presented wrong and inconsequential as synonyms.

Lol...

Thank you Teacher

Android17:
How will he know it was inconsequential until . . .wait for it. . .FRANCE DID NOT WIN?

According to you, it's not the winning goal.

So I ask, why will Mbappe celebrate an equalising goal that's drawing his team closer to Penalties?

Jodera:
According to you, it's not the winning goal.

So I ask, why will Mbappe celebrate an equalising goal that's drawing his team closer to Penalties?

Again for people who understand English. The goal is keeping France's OBJECTIVE alive. France wanted to win the world cup.

Android17:
Again for people who understand English. The goal is keeping France's OBJECTIVE alive. France wanted to win the world cup.

In order words, the process I talked about which you termed "inconsequential" is what you feel he should be celebrating?

In one breath, you feel the process in keeping objective alive ought to be celebrated

In another breath, you feel that same process that was once ought to be celebrated is now inconsequential because the final objective wasn't unfortunately met.


Wetin the be colour of your problem again??

BREAKING: Thomas Tuchel has recommended Chelsea goalkeeper Kepa Arrizabalaga to Bayern Munich. First talks have already taken place, with the next steps to be decided in the coming days due to Bayern having two other goalkeeper candidates.

[via @kerry_hau]

🤷

Jodera:

In order words, the process I talked about which you termed "inconsequential" is what you feel he should be celebrating?

In one breath, you feel the process in keeping objective alive ought to be celebrated

In another breath, you feel that same process that was once ought to be celebrated is now inconsequential because the final objective wasn't unfortunately met.


Wetin the be colour of your problem again??

Like I told the other person. You must not reply if you have nothing else to say.

Let me take it extra slow for you.

France v Argentina. Their objective: win the WC.

Thus, even if Mbappé missed all his PKs but France still won the WC - He would have been happy and his misses would have been inconsequential because his team achieved its objective.

Same way if City had won, KDB and Rodri's missed penalties would have been inconsequential.

You determine the consequentiality of an action AFTER the objective has been finalized not before.

I have reversed it so maybe you will understand.

If you can't, speak Igbo. English is not for you.

Android17:
Like I told the other person. You must not reply if you have nothing else to say.

Let me take it extra slow for you.

France v Argentina. Their objective: win the WC.

Thus, even if Mbappé missed all his PKs but France still won the WC - He would have been happy and his misses would have been inconsequential because his team achieved its objective.

Same way if City had won, KDB and Rodri's missed penalties would have been inconsequential.

You determine the consequentiality of an action AFTER the objective has been finalized not before.

I have reversed it so maybe you will understand.

If you can't, speak Igbo. English is not for you.

So many grammar while beating around the bush without answering the question.

It's only you who determine what's consequential and what is not.

It's only you that claims teams don't play to participate in penalties when history proves otherwise on countless occasion

It's only you that still claimed a player can celebrate a goal even if It'll end in a draw because it'll draw them nearer to their objectives but still talk about the goal being inconsequential because the team lost on penalties.

You'll just formulate something in your head and bring it here and you think people will just accept it because of your penchant for many words and Amala turning.

This your school of thought this past few hours na error!!!

🚨 Bayern Munich plan to present the first offer to Chelsea for Kepa in the next days. (@MatteMoretto @relevo) ✅🔜


👀

Jodera:
So many grammar while beating around the bush without answering the question.

It's only you who determine what's consequential and what is not.

Not me, common sense. So sad that as we can see, it is not common.

It's only you that claims teams don't play to participate in penalties when history proves otherwise on countless occasion

The irony is, Teams go into penalties rather than settle for a "draw" because they want to ensure a winner is decided. This defeats your current argument and any other argument you could possibly make along this line because it proves both teams always play to WIN not to merely participate. Read it slowly. Then digest it even if it is hard to swallow.

It's only you that still claimed a player can celebrate a goal even if It'll end in a draw because it'll draw them nearer to their objectives but still talk about the goal being inconsequential because the team lost on penalties.

Stop being clever by half. Why are you sneaking the word "draw"? Can you draw a final?

You'll just formulate something in your head and bring it here and you think people will just accept it because of your penchant for many words and Amala turning.

Yah bless. Hope you're winning in real life.

This your school of thought this past few hours na error!!!

It's acceptable. Darkness won't accept the light.

Person go just they one place they type nonsense with confidence
You Chelsea fans suppose report these 2 for derailing

I'm hearing Tuku is in for Kepa

If it happens I will stop attacking his talent ID

I will worship the ground he steps on 😭😭

iamoyindamola:
Person go just they one place they type nonsense with confidence
You Chelsea fans suppose report these 2 for derailing

Aswer bro those monikers are arsenal and Mancity fans making noise and derailing Chelsea thread 😢

I wonder what happened to their fanpages...

🚨 Bayern Munich would like to loan Kepa Arrizabalaga for a season with an option to buy.

(@kerry_hau)

[quote author=Gucciboy post=124983241]

Aswer bro those monikers are arsenal and Mancity fans making noise and derailing Chelsea thread

Not long ago, the asking price for Robert Sanchez was up to £70m he was so highly thought of at Brighton. Even earlier this summer, a Chelsea enquiry was met with a request for £40m which, then, abruptly ended the discussion.


If Sanchez will get back to his best, sell Kepa and get another GK. 2 days to register any new players to face Liverpool no Caicedo

Ibime:
So Boehly has started creating companies out of thin air to sponsor Chelsea

Infinite Athlete name change was registered less than a week ago and they already signed £50m sponsorship deal within few days

The day UEFA will hold Boehly on his blockos ehn

I done talk am say na Saudis dey behind Boehly in disguise

This is my major fear. It just takes one diligent UEFA staff to spot this magomago wey them dey do. Omo the repercussion go mad gan, na ban upon ban we go chop.

I'm disappointed in jodera's incessant praise of that guy intellect, intellectual ability is not about grammars or many words.
That guy is empty, I know this since the day he insinuate 3 at back is for defensive football. Now his pep have tried it and it's stopped being defensive formation.

Football is played in phases in a final:
90 minutes decides the winner;
IF TIED, then extra time decides the winner;
IF TIED, then penalty decides who lift the cup.

Inconsequential is synonymous to unimportant, insignificance etc.

Then how can a goal that tied the game that can be won in 90 minutes and propelled it to penalty (a different reality) be unimportant or insignificant?

If you cannot see how dumb that sound then I can't help you.

OVA200:
I'm disappointed in jodera's incessant praise of that guy intellect, intellectual ability is not about grammars or many words.
That guy is empty, I know this since the day he insinuate 3 at back is for defensive football. Now his pep have tried it and it's stopped being defensive formation.

Football is played in phases in a final:
90 minutes decides the winner;
IF TIED, then extra time decides the winner;
IF TIED, then penalty decides who lift the cup.

Inconsequential is synonymous to unimportant, insignificance etc.

Then how can a goal that tied the game that can be won in 90 minutes and propelled it to penalty (a different reality) be unimportant or insignificant?

If you cannot see how dumb that sound then I can't help you.

City's objective was to win the cup. If Palmer's goal won the game and fulfilled that objective, it will be consequential. Sadly for them, Palmer's beautiful goal was rendered inconsequential when Trossad equalised and Arsenal subsequently won on penalties.

Therefore, Palmer's goal was inconsequential or rather of no significance to City's objective.

There are not many inconsequential goals in football.

The goals that can be term inconsequential are consolation goals in knockout matches.

In league football their is no inconsequential goal because even if you lose 5-2 the two goals you scored will reduce your goal deficit and we've seen team winning the league with goal difference.

Going by his stupid logic then a 3-0 win for a team have two inconsequential goals because the last two goals did nothing to change the outcome of the game.

OVA200:
I'm disappointed in j.odera's incessant praise of that guy intellect, intellectual ability is not about grammars or many words.
That guy is empty, I know this since the day he insinuate 3 at back is for defensive football. Now his pep have tried it and it's stopped being defensive formation.

Football is played in phases in a final:
90 minutes decides the winner;
IF TIED, then extra time decides the winner;
IF TIED, then penalty decides who lift the cup.

Inconsequential is synonymous to unimportant, insignificance etc.

Then how can a goal that tied the game that can be won in 90 minutes and propelled it to penalty (a different reality) be unimportant or insignificant?

If you cannot see how dumb that sound then I can't help you.

Lol, I don drop the matter after that my last post to him. His penchant for wanting to always being right some times makes him type some ridiculousness even when his mistake is obvious.

It's well sha