₦airaland Forum

Ibime:
Mount is a professional footballer. Havertz is a semi-professional who will literally dash opponents ball unnecessarily

Anyone with eyes can see this.

Exactly! You can hail shitty Mount to the high heavens but will gnash teeth when others hail an on-off Havertz, yeye and hypocrisy.

Ibime:
Everybody had been criticising Mounts decision making in Lampards first season here, until you Havertz stans came and started demanding a performing Mount be dropped so a semi-professional looking Havertz can flourish, yet Havertz was playing ten times worse than Mount has ever played and literally dashing opponents the ball.

You came in few days ago acting like you are criticising both but after yesterday your werey is no longer disguising. Keep the same energy. If Mount is bad to you, you should find Havertz disgusting.

Havertz hasn't been great either. I have repeatedly mentioned that I'll pick him ahead of Mount but he needs to be consistent and not appear to be on-off.

I mean, Mount had a horror performance against Zenith but Mount stans were all over the place trying to give him credit that he never deserved. That was nauseating for those of us who watched it. Mount is an academy boy and I sure want him to be a top performer but not with false praises.

Ibime:
But why your energy is only focussed on Mount?

Werey dey disguise.

Because you Mount stans will not agree that he's mid.

Another day, another horror performance from Mason Mount that he has to be hauled off the pitch...Guess what, the goals rained and Chelsea were on top.

But Mason Mount fans think he's the best thing after butter.

thorrvik55:
Willian played 36 games.
I'm not a Mount Stan, I just call out ppl who chat shit..

U said Mount did not play a role in our 2019/2020 champions League qualification, I'm asking once again, who were the players that played a "role" in ensuring we qualified for Champions League that season..

All these ur plenty shalaye dey out of point

You can do you agenda without not quoting what I didn't say. You're the one who alluded to "key role", I have asked you to define the role, you've been the one chating shit, despite the ridiculous posit. 37 games, 7 goals, 6 assists, is your interpretation of "key role". All good!

thorrvik55:
It seems u just came across the word "stinker" earlier this morning that's why u try to shove it in any sentence u make

Which part of the quote below did ur "brain" interpret to "Mount had a stinker Vs Zenith".. Or the Zenith game ended in the first half?

Yes, I just learnt the word stinker, if that makes you happy. You have highlighted the one that suits your agenda, I have highlighted mine, so come off it.

BlueAngel444:
So you understand the phrase "I expected more" to be an agreement with your claim of "piss poor" and not an agreement to the "stans" who said mount had a "decent performance"


Please who else can explain this for me, abeg

You're trying to be clever by half, which is fine. The fans are the ones who can use terms or words unrestricted. You sure don't expect Tuchel to call out Mount directly or label his performance piss poor.

The point is clear: Mount was highlighted based on his poor performance, which Tuchel noted (without having to spell it out for you Mount stans).

thorrvik55:
Why did u not post everything Tuchel said? U took only the part that fits ur agenda
The full quote:


And how the fvck did ur brain interpret the statement above as Tuchel saying Mount had a stinker Vs Zenith?

Oh! You want Tuchel to spell STINKER right? Or you want to hear Tuchel say Mount is bang average? Of you want to hear Tuchel say Mount had a piss poor performance? Lmao

Silentgroper:
My bad. I was just catching up on d thread..

No shaking!

thorrvik55:
In comparison, Willian had 9 goals, 7 assists.. That was also Mount's first season at the Club. And Mount also played in midfield while Willian was an attacker throughout the campaign (And yea, Willian played almost every PL game too)..

I'm still waiting for the list of players that played a "role" in Chelsea qualifying for the Champions League in 2019/2020 since Mount did not play a role in our Champions League qualification that season

Wether his stats were great or not is not my business, I just want to know the players that played a role in Chelsea finishing in the top four that season since Mount was not one of them according to u

How many of them had up to 37 matches played? That said, the comparison is between Mount and Havertz. Mount stans cannot be the ones to call Havertz a flop because Mount himself is just bang average (my opinion), that is the point of all my posts.

thorrvik55:
Okay, Mount did not play a "role" in Chelsea qualifying for Champions League in Lampard's firs season..

Mason Mount had 7 goals, 6 assists in the Premier League that season..

Can u name the Chelsea players that had more output that season?

Exactly! Despite being forced down our throats with 37 matches right? Great stat!

Silentgroper:
Are there non motion video?

anyways, what's with the spoonfeed word. U must've heard alot of that 4rm ur dad, i guess.

We've moved past this already Silentgroper...Even the person that asked me to show him videos of Tuchel spelling STINKER, has moved on. Abi day just break for your side?

Ennyjay69:
his shooting is decent, his long passes are okay
Even in the champions league run,he has more goals and assists,if you don't like his goal against Porto,then I can't help you,his assist for Hudson odoi in the group stage,his assist in the champions league final

What exactly is havertz good at?
Is he a striker?
Is he an attacking midfielder cos he has zero qualities of a midfielder

What's decent about Mount's shooting? Shooting that can't land in the back of the net. Goals, is even missing despite playing all way way more minutes.

Compared to Mount, Havertz has a better conversion ratio (goals/assists) when you look at the minutes played.

thorrvik55:
When Lampard was appointed, with transfer ban and Hazard leaving Chelsea were expected to have one of their worst seasons in a while but we still managed to clinch Champions League qualification..
Did Mount play a key role in us qualifying for Champions League?
There was nothing outstanding about his display, who were the outstanding guys in Lampard's first season if I may ask?

Depends on what you define as role. Goal? Assists? Or just being fit to play all the matches as Lamps chosen heir.

Ennyjay69:
havertz is even worse at chelsea,I know he has potential but right now he is not better than mount at anything

Well, it will be always subjective. My opinion about Mount does not mean some people don't like or rate him. In the end, the stats will be there for all.

thorrvik55:
Lol.. Ur statement was u prefer Havertz cos he rises to the occasion, e.g; Champions League final which his goal won for Chelsea.. U were specifically refering to the Champions League final not the campaign in general..


Yea, u are not hating on anyone. Ur statement below shows ur not hating at all

Against Madrid, he was outstanding, so it sure wasn't just about his goal.

I clearly don't rate Mount does not mean I hate him. I sure want him to improve if he can, afteral it will be to the benefit of Chelsea.

thorrvik55:
Who dubbed him the "New Lampard"?
Mount was referred to as Lampard's Son not the new Lampard..

In Lampards first season, Mount was one of our most consistent players and he played a huge role in ensuring the Club qualified for Champions League (I remember he even scored a free kick against Wolves I think on the final match day that secured Champions League qualification for Chelsea)..

That Champions league qualification ensured Chelsea were able to capture the likes of Timo, Thiago Silva and Havertz

There's a ton of articles with such references. Even with Lamps iterally forcing him down our throats, there was nothing outstanding in his display, aside ofcourse occasional flashes which is pretty standard. It's the same problem I have with Havertz, consistency. Mount played almost all the games under Lamps but was here and there.

thorrvik55:
Didn't Mount also rise to the occasion in the same Champions League final when u put the ball on a plate for Havertz to round the keeper and score?

U don't have to hate on Mount to hype Havertz.. They are two different players with different attributes

Firstly, my reference was to the campaign in general.

Secondly, I'm not hating anyone (they're Chelsea players) just pointing out what some of us have been seeing.

Ennyjay69:
okay, remove goals and assists,what else did he do?
If havertz has been decent,Mount?

Remove goals and assists ke? Lol

Mount has had 2 seasons already and was touted as the new Lampard but we're yet to see anything near that. The goals Lamps scored, the shooting, the assists, the chances created, aside the headless chicken runaround work rate which his stans claim is his strength, lmao.

He is just there for me, not worth the hype but considering he's an academy boy, will be great to see him grow and not just the usual Brtitish media hype.

Ennyjay69:
which champions league campaign?
Cos of one goal in the final?
His impact in our champions league triumph is inferior to mount if not the same

It is beyond goals. He was only having his first season at Chelsea and has been decent for a youngster. Look at his performance for Germany, decent too.

Ennyjay69:
many mount fans here still say that mount has to improve,havertz stans are the one that hype him to high heavens and call him generational talent

You even said you will rather pick havertz over mount cos of one game

Generational? Maybe but I'm definitely not sold on that yet as I have to see consistency. But one thing is, Havertz can rise to the occasion when it matters (Champions league campaign last season is an example), which is why I'll pick him ahead of Mount.

Ennyjay69:
lol,you are here shouting cos of one stinker when havertz has been serving us the same thing since,havertz stans and okoto

Atleast we admit there is one stinker, which is a good start from the delusion some of the Mount stans have been dishing out. I stated, Havertz hasn't been exceptional either but definitely no way will Mount fans be the ones to talk about "exceptional".

NinjaMetahuman:
highlight where tuchel told you he had a stinker.

Yeah, I'll also show you the video too where he spelt S.T.I.N.K.E.R in caps.

NinjaMetahuman:
if mount had stinker/piss poor and still by far the best attacker that night, what does that say about havertz and ziyech that didn't even come close to him on performance scale?

We supposed to demote havertz and ziyech to Birmingham under 19 then if mount having a stinker still had better day than both of them.

Good for you. Doesn't change the facts: Tuchel's views about his stinker clearly highlighted and what every other fan saw.

NinjaMetahuman:
you could see I cancelled out your comment on what you claimed tuchel said.

If mount was the best attacker to play that night apart from Lukaku that got the goal, how is havertz better?!


If tuchel did say that, how is that a bad thing to say or how is it a total condemnation on mount's performance that night like the picture you are trying to paint here?
The same tuchel allowed him to play 90 minutes and the general concenus was that he could have done better with some of the balls he got which tuchel allegedly highlighted.

The reason I posted it was the argument in here same day with a few Mount stans claiming he had a decent performance, despite the clear piss poor performance he had. People have stinkers but still play 90 minutes, no be today. The coach clearly saw what we all saw and noted same.

NinjaMetahuman:
[s][/s]

Explain to us how mount had more key passes than ziyech and your havertz combined ?
or how he had more touches, more ground duel won higher up the pitch than both combined?

How why tuchel didn't remove him and put your havertz?

I don't want to get into havertz vs mount argument cos both are Chelsea players and because I believe havertz still has alot of potential to come good but you havertz Stans are really annoying and drawing too much hate towards havertz.

Don't ask me questions. I simply posted what Tuchel said about Mount's stinker of a performance against Zenith. You can direct your retinue of questions to Tuchel.

femaIesoldier:
Cc NewDelhi Pocohantas rule 2

From the ashewo thread down here to troll? Hian!

Ennyjay69:
stop disguising, we know who is behind the moniker

A moniker only 2 years old claims a moniker over 11 years old is disguising? What do some of you smoke?

macjireh:
oya carry ur load to wherever u come from... we don't need ur bad energy on our thread

Werey say na "on our thread". Lmao!

Clown!

macjireh:
so if ur closest friend goes public to lie against u,,the public should believe hook,,line and sinker without verifying from u abi...

Are you okay at all? Lmao

I have posted a quote, with the name of the publisher and the exact words verbatim from Tuchel. You have google on your phone but you want me to spoonfeed you while you probably order me around to satisfy your cravings ba? Una no dey serious.

macjireh:
pls give us a direct comment from tuchel himself and not someone else's quote...how can tuchel say something and another person is quoting him...if it was said on YouTube or Twitter,, drop d link here

Huh? I should spoonfeed you? I have dropped a quote from one of Chelsea FC's biggest and popular fan blogs with thousands of ardent followers (190k plus followers on Twitter), media channel and readers but you want me to spoon feed you probably with a motion video of Tuchel making that comment, when you can simply factcheck? Just negodu

WarAgainstBegga:
Same Tuchel

My post was Tuchel's comment just a few days back after the stinker against Zenith. Yours is Tuchel's comment way back. Mount was shit in the last game as he has been in previous games. The reason I posted that was because of people trying to butterise Mount's poor performance against Zenith and the rancour that argument generated here