₦airaland Forum

iamoyindamola:
We want to swap balo and tomi for barella
I like barella but 2 players for him is much, they should take balo plus 10m leave tomi jare

Who's in charge of this negotiation?
Which Kain freebies we wan do inter laidis?

Tomi shouldnt go anywhere oo, at least not yet

BlueRayDick:
U mean selling all the clowns masquerading as defenders in our team back then ?

Lol... Those are one of the messes too

Shegzdave:
Lacazzette even posted our photo celebration of the Community Shield on his instagram

I believe Auba would have done same if not the animosity in which he left us.

Auba and Laca really enjoyed their time here

mostob:
I just watch a clip now. Arteta never celebrate City's goal against Arsenal when he was still Pep's assistant. Could it be passion or love?

Old news!!
But I even noticed it before seeing the News sef(first match of the season when Emery was appointed, we lost 2-0)

But I think that's one of the reasons why he was able to clear the mess the way he did. He was really connected to arsenal even while at Man city

mostob:
To be frank, both are good. Raya just has better ball distribution which is important for Artetaball next season. Dele usually panicks under pressure compared to Raya.

Dele??
I never knew Aaron was a Nigerian oo. Lol

But what you said about both are true

daveP:
Do 20-20🤣

Hope it's not over reaching sha.

Lol, never say never

kokaneprodigy:
It can work

Give one cup (UCL, EFL, FA) responsibility
Give the other EPL responsibility.

I don’t understand us. We saw what worked for City, anytime we attempt to replicate we start saying it can’t work.

So we should keep an amateur Goalie as second choice so when Ramsdale gets injured we start to struggle.

We saw how our title challenge nosedived once Saliba was out.

We never learn!

Lol... Ederson is the only one keeping in the UCL and EPL. There's no competition there.
EFL cups have always been for 2nd Keepers since time immemorial.

Like I said, I'm not against having two quality GKs. And I'm happy that Raya is coming

Anyways, I think it came out wrongly thus I'm not clearly understood, so lemme just end the matter here.

swiz123:
You were supposed to understand my point. Trossad's goal in the end helped Arsenal fulfil their objective and therefore consequential.

A final has one single objective; It is just what it is.

Only Trossard goal didn't help arsenal win. You guys are just making it seem Trossard scored the goal that gave Arsenal the cup when in actual fact it is not. It just opened up the platform for penalties

The people that helped arsenal win was Trossard, Odegaard, Saka and Viera Penalties while needing the help of Kdb and Rodri misses.

Trossard goal just gave the platform for the above to happen and that's the thing you guys are not getting.

Like Ova said, the only inconsequential goal was Bernardo Silva own

OVA200:
The funny thing is that he will result to grammars and mind game and stop going straight on the argument.

I will not stay long on the matter too, that's the reason I didn't quote him and I will not.

It's just a funny something

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

Spy360:
He may improve but for now he is mid range. Top GK are like Donaruma, Allison, Elderson, etc.

He might not be a WC goalkeeper but he's certainly a top goalkeeper especially considering EPL.

I'm surprised seeing you calling him mid range.

Same Ramsdale most of us dey praise for here since his debut fa?

Spy360:
Your reasons are Ok but they are based on unfounded hypothesis.

Assuming both of them are the top keepers in their NT, that would have been a genuine excuse but both are basically mid range quality. They will share the responsibility and they will fight for dominance. The end result will be good for both player and club.

If Ramsdale starts PL, Raya will be the sub in case or injury or red card which do happen.

If Raya starts the CL, Ramsdale is on the bench as backup.

I remember when Liverpool had a GK issue ahead of the CL finals and lost because the GK was poor. Remind me that year.

It'll be interesting to see if Raya starts UCL and Ramsdale starts EPL. Make we deh see how it unfolds.

But I wholly disagree with the fact that Ramsdale is mid range. This same Ramsdale mid range?

Calm down na

daveP:
G/A doubles of Igwe style

Lol... E no go bad

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!!!

daveP:
Plus all the comical things they do during the game steals the seriousness or fun. Like The pk after 90mins😆

Then in a way, other teams are rebuilding now. We have for 2 seasons with discipline. The onus lies on us. I expect Saka will be double figures this time.

Yeah, we're ahead of many others in terms of rebuilding as we're well in our strengthening stage. I just hope we capitalise on it effectively

As for the bolded, what double figures are you talking about or do you mean 20+ goals?

Cos last I knew, Saka have been hitting double figures for the past two seasons now

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??

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?

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:
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?

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:
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?

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

daveP:
Personally, i no fancy all these pre-season matches. I stopped the season we had one poor pre-season and still went on to have a great season, while London blues beat everyone during pre-season and went on to have an abysmal season. 😆😆


This is ours to lose once again. Let's see how we will move, especially as Saudi don water down Europe in a way.

Naahhhh, me too, I don't know when last I watched a preseason game. Na main season be the Koko

Hopefully, Arteta and the boys will push this team one position higher than last season

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

Is seems you missed the second question

Is penalty not another platform for winning?

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:
England played to win. If they did not, they could have walked off the pitch as soon as it was time for the shoot outs. LOL.

Lol... This is childish talk na


So one can't win through penalty or what?


England knows it'll be difficult to win Nigeria through regulation time. Why would they walk out when the best bet to win Nigeria is through Penalties?

Android17:
No it did not ensure it. Trossard's goal ensured it.

Nobody is talking about worst result. City played to win.

So City can't win through penalty?

Is penalty not another platform for winning?

Android17:
Ok, Arteta was making subs so that he could get to penalties to lose? Trossard's goal was consequential because Arsenal won. So his goal helped Arsenal achieve her objective. If you got to the penalties and still lost to City, the goal would have been inconsequential.

It is not that hard.

How don't you get it?

when he made those subs in the dying minutes

Did Arteta play to get to penalties or not? Yes or No

Did Trossard goal get us to penalties? Yes or No

You can keep beating around the bush when the answer is staring at you

Android17:
England played to win.

Just say you did not watch the ball, especially after the red card

Android17:
So City were playing to get to penalties?

City wasn't playing to get to penalties but getting to penalties is not the worst result if you can't win in match in normal time.

And that's what Palmer's goal ensured it did

Android17:
You don't play to participate in penalties. You play to WIN.

If your goals don't win you the game in a final, they were INCONSEQUENTIAL. Period.

Lol, and who told you this misconception again??

When Arteta was bringing in Trossard, Nketiah and Smith Rowe, what do you think the plan was especially as time was running out, knowing fully well there's no extra time?

What do you think the average arsenal fan was praying for to happen in that few minutes?

You think I and my friends was seated that day hoping and praying for us to score Man city two goals just so that we'll win the match?


Abeg no make me laugh with this your funny takes this night. You're more than that biko


NB: There are many examples of Matches teams play just to participate in penalties.

Example, England Vs Nigeria just ystdy is a very very good example. Everyone who watched that ball knows fully well that the England team was just playing to participate in penalties in order for them to win that game.

Stop thinking football in black and white. In fact, football is the last thing to think it such!

Android17:
I am surprised at Jod.era tbh. Some other people less so but Jo.dera has always been someone who thinks logically.

He asked that I did not "drag" KdB and Rodri - I dragged Palmer?

Haba. How can I be dragging the team I support?

They think I am saying the player did not play well or what?

I did not say you dragged Palmer and I never insinuated so

Palmer have created the platform for Man city to win through penalty shootout (since it wasn't enough through normal time).

It's up to the penalty takers to do their job which fortunately for us, Kdb and Rodri didn't do theirs.

How then does that make Palmer's goal inconsequential?