₦airaland Forum

@Loyika a.k.a Poof Daddy

Of course Fergie was dissapointed by the performance of some of the young lads on the night.He however has been in the game long enough to know that the prospects of young lads can't be determined in a single 90 mins game of football.

Players like Pique,Nani,Anderson and Evan have proven over full seasons that they are great prospects. . .for them collectively to have one bad game is dissapointing but ultimately. . . no intelligent person trys to make a mountain out of a mole hill by giving the impression that Fergie's youth policy has suffered a significant setback(which is what your idiot self is implying).

Utd is one of the rare clubs to have players who actually emerged from its academy as its key players.Given the paucity of talent in the Isles,clubs have to make do now with grabbing youngsters from abroad and we have some of the best in Anderson,Nani,Pique and Ronaldo irrespectivwe of their perfomance in a single game.

Like I said,only an idiot takes Fergie's words here literally. Even the famous 95/95 team was defeated 3-0 by some Mickey Mouse club(York City) in the League Cup-players like Butt,Scholes,G.Neville,P.Neville all played and they were crap in that game.Wonder what happened to them. . . . . by the way Fergie was "heavily disapointed" then as he is now.

lordimpaq:
i hate this guy, but i don't know what to do wit him,

Newsflash. . . hating people on web forums is the most cretinous attitude to have. . . but then you are a Gunner.It means the insults get to you on a personal level. . . if that is the case,you need psychological help.

@Jackal

Gunners are all imbecilles. . . actually they make imbecilles look like geniuses.How can someone question whether Rooney and Ronaldo are young lads when they call Adebayor a young lad   I listed their ideal starting 11,only 2 of them are Un-23. . . their team is in a stunted state of growth,never maturing,just like their brains.IF it was possible,they will call Lehman a young Gunner.  

The PH mangina said this was the last convo. . . . .just like 6,5,4,3 and 2 months ago.Every new month brings an attempt at a "last convo"Its as seasonal as my girl's menstrual period. . . . . .next month we will have another "last convo".  

topeorekoy:
and this is our line up

Arsenal: Fabianski, Justin Hoyte, Eboue (Diaby 64), Senderos, Traore, Diarra, Denilson, Song Billong, Walcott, Bendtner, Eduardo (Perez 90).

wenger is just the caoch that can play a small small team against a bigger team and still get result

Aren't Eduardo,Senderos,Diarra,Eboue,Fabianski full internationals for their various national teams?Walcott even went to the World Cup.Yet you call them a "small team".

Tell me. . . .where is your trophy for beating Newcastle? Meanwhile,two 22 year olds-Rooney and Ronaldo-were the spearhead of our League winning team.

ritchboi:
rooney n ronaldo amongst 11 young lads?

Aren't they both 22?What's your idea of a "young lad"? Eduardo or Ade?

loyika:
Suit Yourself mate (Last Convo i will ever try having with you)

GOONER 89

If I had a penny for every time you have made the above remark. . . I will be on the Forbes list.Listen. . . don't reply my posts,if I wanted to read idiotic posts,I would ask  for Mustay's opinion.

ritchboi:
I-man
erm,is it d same 'selection policy' that made him play ronaldo n rooney(your 2 top scorers)last season against SOUTHEND 4 90 MINUTES your talkin about?

Last season. . . . . .was that not the season we were crowned Champions of England and a certain team at the Emirates ended trophyless? You don't have to be Einstein to figure out that the League Cup has always been the least of Fergie's priorities.

Of course he will say he is dissapointed. . .what did you expect? His actions tell us more than his words.

@Loyika

You have always been a brazen idiot.Nobody takes Fergie's words seriously when he talks about being utterly dissapointed every time his selection policy backfires at the Carling Cup. Now you being a hare brained manchild typically misunderstood my point.That's not surprising,comprehension always eludes idiots.

@A-40

So Arse are a girl's club. . . who cares.Are we supposed to be unhappy that our interest in football doesn't correspond to that of the girls? Does that get you laid. . . . . most of those girls are "Lebanese" anyway.

Utd fans say Fergie's youth team did the domestic double.Arse fans retort that their youth team defeated Newcastle 2-0   We are supposed to marvel at Wenger's youth policy when they have never won a trophy.Isn't the point of football to win trophies?

Fergie does not take the Carling Cup seriously.Loyika said Fergie wasn't making excuses,do you expect him to say,"I don't really give a damn about the Carling Cup" .Each season,he fields his reserves for the Carling Cup and every time we are knocked out,like last season,he will repeat the same "no excuses,I'm totally dissapointed" .Only an idiot will take his words seriously.

One relevant comparison will be with the famous United side of 95/96(The one that prompted Hansen's"You'll never win anything with kids.")

It had as starting players,the likes of Beckham(20),Scholes(21),Andy Cole(23),G.Neville(20),Giggs(22).In effect,it had more Un-23 players than the present Arse-anal first 11.They actually did win trophies and not simply sympathy

@medube

Wenger has been building for 11 years and still hasn't won a single European trophy.If we take it back to his entire coaching career,he has been building for more than 2 decades,still empty handed in Europe.

@Jackal

I'm still wondering what constitutes a youth footballer.The oldest age grade competition is the Olympics(Un-23).If we take that as metric,the ideal Arse starting 11 only has 2 players who are Un-23(Clichy and Fabregas).Ade doesn't count for you have to be deluded to believe he is really 23.

Hleb(26),Lehman(38),Sagna(24), RVP(24),Gallas(30),G.Silva(31),Rosicky(27),Fabregas(20),Clichy(22),Ade(23),Toure(26)

What is particularly "youthful" about the above?

ocho cinco:
My football knowledge is average at best,but it took Alex Ferguson more than 15 years at the
helm of Man United to win the Champions League.
And before that, there were humiliating defeats to
minuscule clubs, failing in the early parts of the competition.
So I reckon Wenger still has a bit to go

Firstly,like Jackal pointed out,it was 12 years after he took over.But it doesn't stop there,you did admit your knowledge of footie was limited,so let me educate you a bit.

When Fergie took over,English clubs were banned from European competitions for 5 years.In the first season back,United defeated Barcelona to win the European Winners Cup.So in reality,it took Fergie 8 seasons to win the Champions League and one,to win his 1st European trophy.

Wenger on the other hand  is in his 11th year at Arse-anal.He took over the club from Rice when they were 3rd in the League,they had last won the League 5 years before he came in(he inherited the bulk of the winning team) and 7 years earlier.They had also won the European Winners Cup,2 years earlier and were runners up,a year earlier.The point is that he took over a fairly strong club.

When Fergie took over at United,they were engaged in a relegation battle.They hadn't won the league in 2 decades and in between then,had been relegated.Their is remarkably sharp contrast between the club Fergie took over and the one Wenger took over.People just look at United in its present state and assume Fergie had an easier task.That Utd looked more powerful than Arse has been largely thanks to Fergie and raises questions over Wenger's record.

Wenger hasn't won any trophy in Europe.Even more remarkable is the fact that Arsenal have made it past the Q/F only once since Wenger took over.Each new season brings a mountain of new excuses.At some point this season,the familiar charade of Gunners excusing their team's ouster from the UCL will be witnessed on this forum.

How is Fergie's record in the UCL remarkably different from hitzfeld's or Heynckes.Are you aware that Wenger has gotten past the Q/F stage only once,talkless of winning the trophy.

ocho cinco:
Well if you notice i said my football knowledge is limited.

Your most accurate statement

the Hitzfeld's, Heynckes'. Lippi's
Ferguson's record in Europe has been abysmal. Only slightly better than Wenger's
I think and not as good as Mourinho's or Benitez.

Heynckes has won 1 European trophy,Hitzfeld has won 2 trophies in Europe.Yet Fergie who has won 3 trophies(more than Arse-anal in their entire history) is branded as slightly better than Wenger  Meanwhile,Wenger hasn't won a single European trophy.

ocho cinco:
About my Russia digression, my point was no matter the seeming generosity
of white people, they are by their nature racist.

ocho cinco:
White people are scandalous.

You fail to see the irony in your statements.Hey. . .what if O'Reilly were to say ,"Black people are scandalous"? Would that be fair comment?

Are you against racism in general or just racism targetted against Blacks

harvest:
@topic--+Osisi-the fake christian=tribalist
Babeelove when she was a militia.
romeo
Donzman
Iman
Xris77
grafikdon
londoner & all Igbos.
Michellin89.

This is like nominating yourself

@ocho cinco

What's the relevance of all that twaddle to whether Bill O'Reilly's comments were actually racist? The Black people who heard the program didn't find it racist. . . . . .so Patrice Lumumba doesn't arise

Big B1:
Dude, what are you talking about?

Nobody who has bothered to listen to the program in question would conclude that O'Reilly was being racist.My conclusion is that you didn't listen to it and are drawing your conclusions from Media Matters-which I pointed out is like obtaining information about Jews from Neo-Nazis

So its because of the Carling Cup that Gunners are quacking like a bunch of over excited teen girls?

Big B1:
Nobody is against white or being white; we are only denouncing white racist.

Why don't you actually watch the said program and decide for yourself.Must you depend on people to interprete things for you?

@Denex
You are an ignorant hypocrite.For someone who spends his time defending Arab causes like a slave.Did you listen to the program in question?Nope.

Even Juan Williams,who is an African American,was outraged that people distorted O'Reilly's statement.If an African American who listened to the program was irate about Media Matters distortion,what's an Arab slave like you whinging about?

I nominate Laudate.The most insidious tribalist you will ever meet on this forum

Juve were lacklustre in their 2-2 draw with Roma on Sunday.Ranieri's system of playing 3 strikers-Del Piero,Trezeguet and Laquinta-left them light in midfield.They were easily overun by Roma's packed midfield.Only Roma's lack of a killer instinct in front of goal saved Juve.

I am not a big fan of Ranieri and its only a matter of time before he gets the sack.

Is it just me or is Iniesta not one of the most underated footballers on the planet.That boy will fit into any team.

ocho cinco:
So whose bliss is it,

O'Reilly's or ours?

Listen to the entire program on his website and decide whether he was racist.Getting information off Media Matters is like trying to find out about Jews from Neo-Nazis.The program was an entire diatribe about the foolishness of racism.How it is driven by fear and ignorant stereotyping.When you listen to it,you will realise that the bliss is borne by you and the first poster.

I could bet my life neither of you heard the entire program he did with Juan Williams.The bliss that ignorance brings

I don't know why you insist on including these other conflicts.

Ha America ever been blamed for the conflict between Pakistan and India for example. Jeez

Believe it or not,many people claim America has some responsiblity for the impasse in Kashmir.The underlying currents-Islamic sectarianism and extremism-exists in all these other conflict areas.To blame America when such problems rear their head is often misguided.People ignore these issues untill America comes along and they suddenly claim the US created it.

Do you know that prior to 9-11,the Talebans massacred thousands of Shias in Afghanistan and there was a brutal civil war raging there?Today,many blame America for causing the violence in Afghanistan when violence clearly predates America's prescence.The problems might take another form but they did exist before America's entrance,same as in Iraq.

ocho cinco:
I-man, if so, then why the uproar over the wmd dossier in Britain.

Blair rarely made that case and based most of his case on Iraq's WMD program.This was not the case with the US.

ocho cinco:
Doesn't diminish my argument I think
They were nowhere as powerful as in their current manifestation.

The important thing is that in some ways,this is a case of plus ca change,plus c'est la meme.The key difference is that then we had a Sunni oligarchy.A Sunni oligarchy is removed,naturally Sunnis go beserk and vent their anger violently,Shias responded in kind.

The implication from your posts is that we shouldn't mind a quasi-apartheid minority Sunni rule because the alternative,majority rule by Shias,will unleash more violence.By that token,we should have second thoughts about the wisdom of dethroning Ian Smith's white minority rule in Rhodesia since living conditions have worsened for Zimbabweans since Mugabe came to power.I await your toast to the good health of Smith

ocho cinco:
Wonder why the Americans didn't put that at the heart of their case for invasion.

And if they are in the mood for excising bellicose dictatorships, there are a few I can recommend that deserve
attention.

The Americans did put that at the heart of their case.The military invasion was even tagged "Operation Iraqi Freedom". Many people used to knock the Americans then for making such a case,it was raised regularly in Parliament.Strangely,post-war,people now claim it was never made or rarely made.

The UN did name Saddam in the 90s as the single largest violator of human rights.I guess that makes him unique.

ocho cinco:
It is a matter of opinion whether the current situation is worse off than what obtained before.

I do not in any way want to absolve the insurgents for any of the troubles, but their appearance on the scene
derives from the poor execution of the invasion.

A lot of the insurgents were Bathists who were killing and pillaging long before the invasion.Sadr's Mahdi organisation and the Badr brigades have been existing for decades.Zarqawi who led Al-Qaeda in Iraq was there before the invasion after fleeing Afghanistan.Ansar Al Islam,responsible for the bombing of the UN building,has been operating for a decade.

So the question of them "appearing on the scene" is quite misleading.The simple truth is that pre-war,there was little interest or knowledge about the situation in Iraq.A lot of the things we assume are quite recent have always been there-sectarian tensions,terror organisations,sectarian militias.e.t.c