₦airaland Forum

diggz:
Ni..list post is exactly the reason we have been calling morata out....same guys who said morata was greater than most strikers because he could do everything in ni..list post and more , are the ones crying fowl bcuz we are pointing out how he has failed to produce anything close to what they promised us he will do.

I am interested in seeing who these guys are.

Hehehe. Kante

Wasere Alvaro. Talk about hitting the ground running.

Morata the finisher!

ToyinDipo:
With ball on Morata's feet, there is no need for keeper to panic

Morata is still adjusting to the pace of the EPL. For that reason, he is prone to making hasty decisions for fear of losing possession.

Griffon:
At the end of the day, Kante is still going to record more tackles, more interceptions and more passes than the fella who was brought in to replace the ineffective Matic.

Very obvious at the moment.

There's something not right about Bakayoko yet

Morata nervous

Was hoping to see second Costa start

Griffon:
Oga nateevs, check your mail sir.

Responded.

Griffon:
Hehe. Drop the addy jare. I got some business or better still, leave me a message at Iammcsinclair@gmail.com

Ah! Outside of Chobhams. You got me scrolling back to the last 3 pages looking for the mail myself.
adolpa at yahoo dot com

Griffon:
Oga nateevs, I got mail for you (literally). What's the addy again abeg?

Mail? Wetin dey inside?
Na who send am?

Nihilist:
lowkey, I'm not particularly seeing anything funny about these pics.

For the diss to enter, the pic has to be embarassing to some degree, and then the accompanying diss needs to be sharp and cutting- a proper display of acerbic wit.

All I'm reading is the same old post from last week about betting, while looking at a picture of a man in glasses.

I'm not taking sides, but as far as I'm concerned, these disses are not landing, the punches are not connecting, there is just nothing titillating or tickling my fancy. It doesn't seem to be just me either. Nobody is quoting punchlines. Nobody is laughing, and the likes are in short supply.

This could be a sign that maybe it's time to stop...

People like to laugh at hilarious jabs. Nobody really has time for personal vendettas.

Well put. It's all become childish now.

airmark:
At least hazard also confirmed what we have been saying here. We need goals, goals and goals, not keeping one yeye shape.

When greece shocked belgium yesterday, lukaku had to deliver and killed the game with the winner. It is only on nairaland peeps will be saying a striker was not bought to score many goals for us, after they flaunted his 1 goal per match stat last season. Now that he tagged epl defenders naive, i expect at least 25 league goals from him.

Can't wait to open airmorata account.

You are one sly niggah. Walahi.
The way you argue for and against all sides, whilst trying to belong to all sides, all at the same time, is marvellous.

I should call you SlyMark.

lalaboi:
I nor carry fight come o. I just dey play

Indeed!

Singapore1:
One what? .. I don't understand your answer
To prove me wrong or to support my point?

A bad footballer at Pro Level

Singapore1:
As a side note, it is very important to look past the stats in football to appreciate the underlying processes if you truly want to enjoy the beautiful game. At this professionallevel, there’s no bad footballer - only a badly utilized ones

Judging a footballer base on stats alone is very wrong..

Benzema

Sergio busquest

Kante

Let me take this time to introduce you to one. Ramires Santos Do Nascimento.

You fellas no go bust my belle.

Nihilist:
paypal is

jackbauersballs@gmail.com bruh

Kunfamitplis!

Nihilist:
Nateevs is a good man. An honourable man. I think we even share the same last name.
I'm sure he won't try to finesse me the way Ibime did to airmark....

There is now consensus. Oya send me ya akant!

Nihilist:
Vardy has scored over 20 goals at least thrice. Vardy is prolific. How old was he when he scored 30 league goals.

Mahrez has never even crossed the 20 league goal Mark. And has only scored more than 6 goals once I'm his entire career.

The 4 seasons before 15/16. Mahrez never did anything. The season after 15/16 Mahrez never did anything.

I'm sure you're an honourable man. You can see that I'm also leading you considerably on the vote thread. Please do the needful.

Hollup! This was the prerequisite for £100.

Pick one team, a team of all consistent runners and "no prolific players". Then show me where they have consistently performed and consistently outperformed a team of prolific players with less runners and you get £100.

And we are discussing Jamie Vardy in the same team, even though there is doubt on Mahrez.

Trust me it's not about being dishonourable. You haven't won. If you have, I pay you right away.

Nihilist:
Mahrez has played 6 seasons scoring 4, 5, 6, 1, 2, 17, 10 goals

He scored the 17 goals 2 years ago.

I can see the trend and see that 17 goals is am exception not the norm.

There is no evidence to show that Mahrez can or will replicate his efforts from 2 years ago, so he cannot be said to be prolific by any standard.

That's like calling Danny Simpson a world class defender because of that one season he won the EPL.

Nah. That was an anomaly mate.

Please pay me my canvass money bro.

To start with, Vardy being prolific renders payment a no no. Unless you want to argue that too.
To Mahrez, he scored 10 goals in all competitions last season. In a season that Leicester almost went down. I see you omitted that after the 17 goals. I have helped. Plus the explanation.

Again, I explain. Mahrez was 24 when he scored 17. What did you expect him to do at 22 and 23? Why are we discussing those figures?

You will have to judge Mahrez by this season, to confirm that he is indeed not prolific.

Nihilist:
Mahrez is NOT prolific.

In his entire career he only scored more than 6 league goals once in his life...and that was that 1 good season. And this period covers 6 good seasons...


Infact he has only 46 goals in 209 career games...that works out at 1 goal roughly every 5 games....

It's make we vote o.

Given the presented stats, is Mahrez a prolific attacker or a one hit wonder.

Like for prolific, share for one hit wonder. Make I do go buy canvass tommorows abeg...

This is actually figures without the context therein. Mahrez is only 26. 2 seasons ago when he was deemed a "one hit wonder" he was only 24. How many 24-year olds were leading their teams to glory?

Before the season in question, he was the age Chalobah is now and some of us still like to call Chalobah a youngster. So I don't see the point in the clause "all of his career" as though he's been around for eons.

I strongly believe that last season, he could have consolidated. But it's no news that Leicester barely escaped relegation with open rebellion against the Manager. All of them downed tools for reasons we cannot explain. Verry reminiscent of the Hazard we saw in the season right after the league title.

It is enough to conclude that Mahrez is not prolific.

LogoDWhiz:
Is Vardy not prolific or is he a one season wonder?

Obviously not! Case closed.

Nihilist:
How is Riyadh Mahrez prolific?

Does having one good season make you prolific?

Brother yem that £100 pounds abeg...i have won this one...

This is open to debate. Having one good season is proof that you are prolific, or at the very least, capable of it.
Plus you specifically mentioned 2 years ago. That specific year Mahrez was prolific.

One thing is for sure. You CANNOT say categorically, that Mahrez IS NOT prolific.

That's the difference.


If however, there's overwhelming consensus with your POV, then I will give you the money. Until then......

Nihilist:
Chei I just saw this Bounty. My Brother see the simulation white paper I just put out....I suppose collect £100 for this


Otherwise, I tender Leicester city 2 seasons ago.

Hehehe....That was carefully worded mate. You omitted the key sentence.

Pick one team, a team of all consistent runners and "no prolific players". Then show me where they have consistently performed and consistently outperformed a team of prolific players with less runners and you get £100.

Riyad Mahrez!

diggz:
Burr 11 willian vs 11 hazard is actually a discourse of isolation and not one of consistency. And even if we are to assume it is one of consistency, then it is expected that 11 hazard will always play against 11willian. And if that is the case, I will personal pick 11 willian ahead of 11 hazard.



O...ga o!!! I only stated my opinion and no apologies if you consider it to be a lie.

Anyways, I can see were you are coming from and do appreciate your position however, my preference will remain mine and not yours. And if we are to continue this,we will end up going back and forth

So I rest my case.

It was supposed to be a joke na! The lie part.
I do appreciate your preference for Willian over hazard. I always do.
The exercise was just supposed to shed some light from my point of view.

We will definitely agree to disagree.

airmark:
If chelsea after knocking out a brilliant barca team and went ahead to destroy bayern in their stadium, sending their fans into serious mourning, 11 willians can do that to 11 hazards.

But we all know the difference between apple and mango.

In isolated cases, yes. Consistently, NO!

diggz:
1. Bearing in mind the qualities of just those two players, it is not a wrong assumption that a team of Hazard cannot/will not defend. It is simply a fact. They are mentally not wired to labour for 90mins or do the dirty job for 90mins even though you want us to believe they can be taught.

2. When mou was busy forcing players like hazard to do more defensively we were here reading epistles on how he was being shackled with defensive duties. epistles on how he should be freed to create more,score more blah blah blah blah.......bros I really cannot see how a team of hazard even when taught to defend will do better than that of willian.

3. We can argue higher ceiling and what not....but I have seen great teams filled with special talents who couldn't compete or do anything against a team of runners or workaholics like Willian.

4. Take a look at klops liverpool vs arsenal as at last week for example....where is the hazard type of player in that team? All I saw was 11 willing runners....willing to run for 90mins,fight for each ball,win tackles etc...

5. Now.....i am not trying to downplay the effect hazard brings to the team however we shouldn't forget that, we only had willing runners against spurs not too long ago and we came out victorious.

This whole post is a lie. Let me break it down.


1. Fundamental mistake. There will be, in this hypothetical debate, 11 Hazards on the pitch; meaning one player in each position for a team of 11. This is not to be confused with the hypothetical "Hazard" who doesn't run back. Unless you are telling me that for some reason, you think all 11 Hazards will be on the left wing, with cigars in their hands, refusing to go back to their positions. You can see where this is going.
On the other hand, you cannot teach 11 Willians to score and assist in high numbers; no matter what hypothesis we throw in the mix. Whereas, given that there will be a Hazard in every position, they can be taught to defend.



2. You saw the long epistles because there were 10 runners and 1 Hazard. The epistle was not to stop Hazard from running, but running all the way to the back to defend alongside the left back. Why? Well, because Hazard has the potential to score 20 goals in his best season but Willian cannot score more than 4. So it's just wise to let Willian run and let Hazard off some running; let him be a danger and let him score and assist.


3. You cannot use isolated instances of a team of runners to show that they can consistently out-performance a team of skillful players. Pick one team, a team of all consistent runners and no prolific players. Then show me where they have consistently performed and consistently outperformed a team of prolific players with less runners and you get £100. There's none. Instead, what you will find, are isolated cases and I don't consider that as ample empirical evidence to support this point.


4. This point is nearly fraudulent. Liverpool players are runners but they are not Willians. Firminio, Coutinhos, Manes, Sturidges, might be runners, but it doesn't prove your point. They were able to destroy Arsenal because they are prolific. Again, they are not Willians. To stress again. Willians run about without anything to show for it. 11 Willians don't win games but 11 Willians work hard. In fact, they find themselves in interesting positions but they cannot make anything of it. So they lose the game in the dying minute to the creativity of a better player. Firminio was not even a consistent runner before joining Liverpool. Coutinho was nearly a waste-man in Italy. Klopp has turned him into a player who now knows how to defend "from the front" by way of pressing; whilst still remaining extremely prolific. Can Klopp teach Willian to assist and score? Simple.


5. Of course no one of us is looking for an entire 11 filled with strictly either Hazards or Willians; it's supposed to be intelliegent debate describing how each party's ability could enable them to win a game.

diggz:
I guess everyone chooses to see whatever they want to see in that statement.

FBS is simply trying to say he will pick 11 players who will give everything for the team like willian ahead of 11 flashy players(I am deliberately not using hazard as an example here) who are not ready to do the dirty work when needed.

Firstly, there is no need to eject the specificity of the debate. It is a straight Hazard/Willian one.

On the topic, bearing in mind the qualities of just those two players, what is wrong with the statement is that it is made on the assumption that that a team of Hazard cannot/will not defend. And that's not true.

Secondly, I always lean on the side of technical flexibility. A team of Hazards can be taught how to defend tactically because they have a high technical ceiling. And then there's no use over flogging the potency of their attack. Whereas a team of Willians will keep running around looking like they are doing a lot, when in actual fact there are average defenders and very poor attackers. Unfortunately they cannot be taught how to attack. Their technical ability is limited.


So No; It's not what I want to see. It's a debate of technical ability and flexibility.

diggz:
What is wrong in the statement he made?

Hehehe. A lot!

Nothing's happening. I dey go sleep.