₦airaland Forum

50d33q:
Yet parent still send their kids to the school
Nawa o

Parents want to show they have money and that they spend it on their children. Never underestimate people's desire to act uppity.

50d33q:
Parent sponsored by the school...come on
She have a kid in the school, and kids tell gist about what's trending in their school even when you don't ask.
Tell me why a mother will fabricate stories to cover up for school

Mehn, Chrisland has a bad reputation of covering up stuff like this. I know how I know. I am not saying she is lying sha just saying people should treat what they are reading with a pinch of salt.

50d33q:
They were actually separated with the teachers divided to do 3 roll calls just to be sure the kids were in their rooms.
They had to wait till the midnight when everyone was asleep this was a perfectly planned mission for months.
I read the gal is owning it that she's the one
I solely blame the parents,school can't do more than parental guidance

One parent's opinion which could be lies and sponsored by the school. That is not to say it is not true as I don't know if it is. But I read the IG post that you got this from.

Dumb groupie. If I uploaded a jpg of my genit.alia you'd lick the screen of your phone.

When commentators say Harry Kane passes the ball like a 'quarter back', you will assume intelligent soccer fans will know how it applies even if the term is not expressly used for soccer players. I would have been surprised except it is nairaland where the opinions of the dullest people are usually treated as the best simply because it is popular.

felix00:
This is where you wrong bro. We will surely get better defensively with Simmons even if it's just 15 minutes per game.

And you think KD Playing better than today's shitshow won't improve the Nets offense?

I think this is it from Boston(Both defensively and Offensively).. it's not the same for the Nets tho

There's more games to go sha. It's probably going to be down to 7.

Claxton should start over Drummond From this point forward

KD can get better but you and me know that Kyrie won't outperform what he did in game 1. Him and Kyrie will likely produce 27 ppg respectively so Kyrie will produce numbers that will make my prediction a reality.

Offensively I think this is peak Celtics as well. Tatum and brown will average 26ppg in the series but Smart and Horford will not average 20ppg or 19 ppg. They'll likely do around 10-15ppg.

The advantage they have is defensive as they were the best defensive team in the last 40 games of the entire league. On the contrary, I don't believe the Nets can reproduce the type of defense we saw today except Ben Simmons comes back and has his lateral movement and strength. But he is less likely to have it. I know because I am dealing with Klay Thompson.

Can the Celtics play this type of defense again? Yes
Can they improve on Offense? Not really IMHO
Can the Nets play this type of defense again? Not really.
Can they be better on Offense? Not really (KD can be better but Kyrie cannot).

It might be a simplistic model but the team with the better defense will usually win a series. My money therefore is on the Celtics even if Kyrie is a baaaaad man.

You are a fan, you'll never be as nice as I am.

All that bark when we know he is a pussy cat.

People who are smart enough should compare Zinchenko (what he was when he was signed) to his main position now as per transfermarkt in relation to Gabriel Jesus.

popizaino:
El-debtor go and pay your debt.

Dear Stan, I meant to write you sooner but I've just been busy.

Android22:
Jesus is a positionless player. Just like Julian Alvarez (new City signing from River Plate) is one as well. Because Palmeiras used Jesus as a striker does not mean that is why he was signed. Anyone who is trying to have a meaningful debate on this topic should first concede that Pep likes players like that. This is different from Haaland that City is trying to sign as a striker. That is why even after signing Alvarez, City are still going all out for Haaland.

Let us assume that Haaland comes and is not playing the striker role the way Pep wants and he starts using Alvarez there, that does not mean Alvarez was signed to compete with Haaland.

I made this post before all that Haaland bla bla bla jazz.

Jodera:
So In order word, you just brought a word that's not a standard football term and that it's used by ONLY YOU just to shove it down our throats

Then you say we have no right to contradict you?

Is it not ironical.

Right from the time you brought that word into the argument was when I knew you lost it since you've ran out of all options. Reason why you where just sidestepping when I told you to bring source backing it up. And it's surprising because most of your discourse, you always bring source when people insist

You are better than this. My conversation with DumaEmpire is not the same or related to my conversation with you and you know it but you want to avoid the huge L you caught by trying to muddy things.

Argument 1: Jesus who can play multiple up top positions was not signed to replace Aguero. I proved this a fact by showing you that City's manager will play players out of position if the player signed for that position is underperforming (Zinchenko for Mendy). When you could not refute this, your argument relied solely on Jesus being a striker from his days at Palmeiras etc. You claimed being a winger now was a redeployment for failing to succeed Aguero. I proved it a lie again with the help of expert17.

Any other thing you are claiming about source and what positionless means is your attempt to sidestep. That is why I ignored you while at the same time still replying DumaEmpire on the same topic. Catch your L and be a good sport about it.

Expert17:
Jesus:

If you take my beginning as professional at Palmeiras, I played left-wing. At the academy too, national team, the Olympics. I played as a forward and moved to the front," Jesus began.


Then I was second striker [at Palmeiras]. Then I became a centre-forward. In the national team as well, things happened. That’s how I came here [City]. In my mind, I was always more of a winger than a forward


I think that with my qualities, I help more from the wing than from the centre. I’ve been playing like this for the national team since the Copa America."

"It’s nothing new for me, nor for many people in Brazil. But here [in England], yes. Maybe they don’t follow [Brazil National team] so much.”

You must be Hannibal Lecter the way you silenced the lambs!

DumaEmpire:
Lol your example doesn't really coronate with what we are talking about. You said Positionless. In this context normally anyone would think you refer to a player being versatile enough to fit or suit different styles or positions of play. But you claimed it isn't the same thing and Positionless was a term that has a meaning of its own different from Versatility.

But then in the footballing world that word "Positionless" seems not to have a meaning which prompted me to ask for a source where such word has been used in connection to football since the history of the sport and here you are making explanations with examples that still doesn't connect

You are waffling. I am the one who said positionless player. You sensed there could be some misconception so you asked me for my definition of a Positionless player. I told you. You have no right to tell me what my definition should be when I set the context and not you. The only reason you are going round and round is because you read me hoping to contradict rather than converse with me.

By the way, the highlighted word is correlate.

CAPdan21:
You're the one not getting anything..I gave you the McTom example, Kelleher Liverpool 2nd choice Keeper played as a striker in his youth days, it would be foolish for me to now start counting it as a position for him cuz that's an entirely different world to begin with, so why should I care Jesus played as a winger in youth setup...U Gerrit now
Anyway this is my last reply concerning this topic today

You are replying for the sake of replying. Just take your L and bounce mo'fo.

CAPdan21:
You're not making any sense...
Jesus was bought as a striker, was played as a striker until he stopped giving returns that aguero at that time was giving and was then shafted to the wing to get more playing time...any other thing na Agenda

Did you read what Expert17 posted? Lol

The same you telling me Jesus was bought as a striker is the same you telling me to discredit the winger he started his career as because he was being used as a striker. Yet you don't see that that was my response to that .... Chelsea fan when he said Jesus was a bad signing because he is not replacing Aguero now. I reminded him of what Jesus is currently being asked to do.

Do you get it now? Tell me you do.

Expert17:
Jesus:

If you take my beginning as professional at Palmeiras, I played left-wing. At the academy too, national team, the Olympics. I played as a forward and moved to the front," Jesus began.


Then I was second striker [at Palmeiras]. Then I became a centre-forward. In the national team as well, things happened. That’s how I came here [City]. In my mind, I was always more of a winger than a forward


I think that with my qualities, I help more from the wing than from the centre. I’ve been playing like this for the national team since the Copa America."

"It’s nothing new for me, nor for many people in Brazil. But here [in England], yes. Maybe they don’t follow [Brazil National team] so much.”

That is why I told them you have to judge the player by the current role he is playing. So the person saying Jesus is replacement for Aguero is talking rubbish.

DumaEmpire:
When a manager assigns a player to a specific position then he's not positionless na. That word doesn't exist in Football/Soccer. If it does please show us. And please not from a positionless source

I know you are trying to troll but you are not doing a good job. You asked me to define what I meant by the word so you'd understand the context in which I used it. I did, so you would understand me. You cannot turn around to disagree with me. It is like I am replying someone on here and I say "brother". Then you ask me what I mean and I say "brother" just means "pal" and you turn around to disagree by telling me brother means "male person from the same progenitor" but pal means friend. Lol

Jodera:
Lol.. wing that he played last during his youth League??

Who regards youths' position when that's not what he played at professional level.

I guess to you, Arnold is a midfielder since that's what he played during his youth

Do you get the irony? You are making my argument for me. Please tell me you see it.

CAPdan21:
So he is a winger cuz he played as one in the youth setup??..McTom of Man utd played as a striker in the same setup, is he a striker??

Do you see why you should never join a conversation that you don't understand? cc Jo.dera and ask him this question so he will contradict you.

Jodera:
see evidences.
Na still that him positionless source I dey wait for

lol. If that link is your evidence then what conversation are we having? Did you see "going back to his ROOTS"?

CAPdan21:
Lol....see info from one of Man city's new sources for unbiased readers
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/man-city-goals-aguero-jesus-21378772

Let me post a screenshot of your link. If you don't see how your link agrees with me, what should you call yourself? Read it slowly.

Jodera:
Was Zinchenko a known fullback? Same as Delph, was he a known fullback when he also played that position too?

Jesus was a known striker and he played such in his first season and you're saying another thing. Lol

So if Kane comes to Man city tomorrow and plays 9, you'll say he's not a striker because..?

I'm not even getting your logic again. Did Jesus predominantly play striker at palmeiras or not? Did he play that during his early days at Man city? If yes, how come is he a winger?

If Kane comes to City and Pep is playing him as 10, you would be amiss to judge him based on what he played in Tottenham. You'll judge him based on the role Pep is asking him to play in City.

Jodera:
So striker's don't press. Is that what you're saying?

Cos the issue here is that pep bought a striker that can press and have work rate which is one of his basics. Simple

All these one you're deviating to is another talk entirely. The koko is that you disputed that Jesus was not a Striker and he wasn't bought to replace Aguero. That's what I'm countering and not what pep likes or not

Pep bought a player who could play multiple positions up top however Pep preferred to use him in the 9 position because he liked the way the player pressed defenders better than his top 9 who at the time was refusing to do it. Jesus was not signed to replace Aguero but in that season, he replaced Aguero. Correlation is not causation.

DumaEmpire:
Versatility is the word. Positionless is like saying he doesn't have a position. That makes him no different from you.

Jesus is a striker who's versatile and can play both the wings and the 9.

But i'm more interested in the second paragraph of your speech. Makes zero sense cos i don't know which club or manager in his right senses would sign a striker only to convert him to a midfielder.

Positionless means his designated position depends on the role the manager wants him to play on the day. You can say versatile and you'd be right but it is not exactly the same in every context. You will agree with me that Harry Kane is a striker right? But will you also agree that he plays as a 10 in some games. When he is playing as a striker that roams everywhere on the pitch he is showing his positionlessness. However when he plays as a 10 (only) in some games, he is showing his versatility.

Jodera:
You're the one confusing yourself by going away from the basics. The basics is , is grealish a striker? Yes or no? Whether he plays that position or not is another different discourse entirely.

Jesus was A STRIKER, WAS SIGNED A STRIKER, HE DISPLACED A STRIKER AND PLAYED THE STRIKING ROLE and that's the koko. Any other thing you wanna twist na kole werk

From the beginning I already told you that you don't know the team and manager like you think. Zinchenko is not a LB and by your Grealish argument he was not signed as a LB yet that is where he has played for City 97% of the time that he was played. If you wanted to criticize Zinchenko's role in City will you do so based on his natural position of midfield or based on the role he plays for City? Yup. That is your answer.

Jodera:
Yeah, and it was used against dayo when Aguero regained his spot back and start pumping goals

How people wey follow man city didn't know Jesus was signed to threaten/replace man city is surprising

When Aguero was benched he was scoring goals. In fact, Jesus scored less than Aguero in that stint but the manager still preferred him to Sergio because of the pressing.

Like I said before, you don't know the team or manager like you think. Your club legend Henry said it about Manchester City's manager. Henry scored a goal in the first half of a game but he was not playing the LWF role the way Pep wanted and he took him off. Same reason Zlatan never understood why Pep dropped him from the 9 position even though Zlatan was scoring goals for fun whilst playing there.

Jodera:
That he's versatile doesn't mean he's positionless like you put it. He's primary position is striking while other positions are his secondary position. No elite footballer is positionless.

Now If a supposed young striker was signed and he benched the striker he met, what is that?

Or didn't you read where I said Aguero was consigned to the bench during Jesus' first few weeks??

That is why I am telling you you don't understand your own argument. Lukaku was not signed to compete with Harvertz for e.g. But Lukaku was not interpreting his role to the degree that Tuchel wanted so he started using Harvertz there to better results which relegated Lukaku to the bench. That does not mean Harvertz is a striker. Harvertz is another "positionless player".

DumaEmpire:
This doesn't make sense one bit. Totally pointless and baseless.

what does positionless player mean?

Jodera:
This is different thing from our discourse.
Grealish wasn't signed as a striker weda we know him at Aston villa or not or weda he was bought for 100m or not.

Then maybe you don't understand the implications of your own argument. I never said Grealish was signed as a striker. I am showing you how the City manager said he sees certain qualities in Grealish that motivates him to play Grealish as a false 9. That does not mean Grealish was signed to compete with Jesus or Kane. That was my point.