₦airaland Forum

airmark:
Who was the LW we signed?

Your post on August 28, was more consequential than the one you posted long before.

My August post aligned with the February post.

In February, I recommended a LW. We signed Neto, and in August, I stated that I don't want another LW..... My posts are straightforward, unlike you.

I'm waiting for you on the Neto matter. You are so predictable, but I'm waiting for you, let me tie you up

airmark:
When you asked us not to sign the only LW we wanted to sign.

After we have already signed a LW?

How about the post where I recommended a LW, why are you avoiding that post?

airmark:
Neto's manager, always arguing blindly based on faulty premise.

Even when his manager tagged him a right winger, you couldn't stop embarrassing yourself.

Stop running away from a simple question.

When you were accusing me here, was it about Sancho as a player or LW as a position? When was I strongly against the signing of 1 LW?

airmark:
Maybe you didn't have data when I was asking for 1 LWF that could dribble in tight spaces and Timbros was strongly against it.

Had we got a clinical finisher, we would have beaten Crystal Palace and be leading the table now and become a strong contender for the trophy after spending over 1bn on players.

My opinion on football is too complex for casuals and my high expectation of a striker is alien to Gen Z Chelsea fans. But that's not my problem.

Jackson burying this chance would have seen us topping the table today, but most of you wouldn't see it.

airmark:
I was asking for a LW that fits that profile and we got Sancho. You were against getting Sancho or any LW by August 28.

It's funny that you are the one turning Amala here and still pointing finger. If Sancho has been ghosting, you would have come here to claim expert analyst. But now you are hiding from your ish.

You wanted a wastepipe, Morata, to continue to torment us. You defended Jackson and his wastefulness. You don't want us to get a better LW, and stick to unimpressive Mudryk.

You are anti-Chelsea, that's why Dayo likes you.

You are still lying against me.

LW is one position I recommend we recruit. I have shown you proof over and over again.

Since you don't know the difference between "any" and "another", I'll break it down for you.

If I say I don't want any LW, it means I don't see that position as priority for us to strengthen. But if I say I don't want another LW, it means we have recruited in that position and it's already enough. In that my comment to Ibime you keep quoting, I said below that we need to trim down the squad. Did you read that part? We already have enough recruitment so we don't need another LW.

Funny enough, I have nothing against Sancho as a player (If you have any evidence that I don't like Sancho, please feel free to provide it). I don't mind having him in the squad as long as he improves the team. However, when I made the comment was made, we already have signed Neto who is a LW. We do not need another LW which happens to be Sancho. I am a Chelsea fan. I support ANYONE who wears the blue jersey. I am not like you who pick players to support, not the club. The moment Sancho was signed, did you see me criticise the signing?

Having said all that, please show me where you were asking for 1 LW and I was strongly against it.

And, was this your comment talking about Sancho as a player or LW as a position?

airmark:
Maybe you didn't have data when I was asking for 1 LWF that could dribble in tight spaces and Timbros was strongly against it.

Had we got a clinical finisher, we would have beaten Crystal Palace and be leading the table now and become a strong contender for the trophy after spending over 1bn on players.

My opinion on football is too complex for casuals and my high expectation of a striker is alien to Gen Z Chelsea fans. But that's not my problem.

Jackson burying this chance would have seen us topping the table today, but most of you wouldn't see it.

airmark:
You asked us not to sign Sancho, a new LW. True or false?

You are not a true Chelsea fan. You always want our downfall.

Were you talking about Sancho here?

You should know me by now that your amala turning doesn't work for me.

Were you talking about Sancho here?

airmark:
Maybe you didn't have data when I was asking for 1 LWF that could dribble in tight spaces and Timbros was strongly against it.

Had we got a clinical finisher, we would have beaten Crystal Palace and be leading the table now and become a strong contender for the trophy after spending over 1bn on players.

My opinion on football is too complex for casuals and my high expectation of a striker is alien to Gen Z Chelsea fans. But that's not my problem.

Jackson burying this chance would have seen us topping the table today, but most of you wouldn't see it.

airmark:
Who did we sign as LW?

Airmark can you address the question?

Were you talking about a particular player or a particular position in the post you were accusing me?

airmark:
Were you not against signing a new LW in Sancho?

Was this accusation about a particular player or a particular position?

airmark:
Maybe you didn't have data when I was asking for 1 LWF that could dribble in tight spaces and Timbros was strongly against it.

Had we got a clinical finisher, we would have beaten Crystal Palace and be leading the table now and become a strong contender for the trophy after spending over 1bn on players.

My opinion on football is too complex for casuals and my high expectation of a striker is alien to Gen Z Chelsea fans. But that's not my problem.

Jackson burying this chance would have seen us topping the table today, but most of you wouldn't see it.

airmark:
You won't stop disgracing yourself. Instead of you to keep it shut, and accept your L.


Between you and Maresca, we could see you are the shameless liar here.

Which L exactly? That I am strongly against signing a LW? Or what?

airmark:
Maybe you didn't have data when I was asking for 1 LWF that could dribble in tight spaces and Timbros was strongly against it.

Had we got a clinical finisher, we would have beaten Crystal Palace and be leading the table now and become a strong contender for the trophy after spending over 1bn on players.

My opinion on football is too complex for casuals and my high expectation of a striker is alien to Gen Z Chelsea fans. But that's not my problem.

Jackson burying this chance would have seen us topping the table today, but most of you wouldn't see it.

airmark:
Answer the question ogbeni. Sancho that you were against, already on 3 assists. Why do you hate Chelsea this much?

Thank God Chelsea didn't listen to your poor suggestions.

Can you stop grasping at straws and prove this accusation below in italics? Was there a mention of Sancho in the post below?

You cheap liar.

Why do you enjoy lieing like this?

airmark:
Maybe you didn't have data when I was asking for 1 LWF that could dribble in tight spaces and Timbros was strongly against it.

Had we got a clinical finisher, we would have beaten Crystal Palace and be leading the table now and become a strong contender for the trophy after spending over 1bn on players.

My opinion on football is too complex for casuals and my high expectation of a striker is alien to Gen Z Chelsea fans. But that's not my problem.

Jackson burying this chance would have seen us topping the table today, but most of you wouldn't see it.

airmark:
Were you not against signing Sancho? Ogbeni, rest.

Was this your initial accusation, or you are shifting goal post?

airmark:
The question is, were you against signing a new LW on August 28?

To put in a correct form, you were against the signing of Sancho as our new LW. Thousands of words from you, can't nullify the truth as captured below.

You were against signing a new LW but as usual Chelsea went against your poor opinion and we are doing better. The only clog remaining, is your wasteful Jackson.

I was against signing another LW. is that the same as being against signing a LW?

You cheap liar.

airmark:
Stop being a dirty liar with senseless semantics.

That post was your reply to Ibime's post stating that Sancho wasn't a bad idea and you attacked it by 'we don't need another LW' I.e we already had Neto and Mudryk, no need for another LW(Sancho). And you hammered on experienced CB and a CF as what we needed at August 28 and not LW.

Just as we didn't sign your suggested experienced CB after Tosin, Sancho was signed 3 days after you posted against it.

You always goof and the way you try to cover up, is always irritating. You were against signing Sancho, accept your L and bounce.

Did you lied that I was against the signing of LW or Sancho precisely? Talk make I know where to start from because I see say you no too dey okay.

In my comment below, I said I need a CB, CF and one of either LW RB or LB.

Why will I need another LW when we already signed one (Neto) in addition to the one we already have (Mudryk).

I ask you again, when you were accusing me, did you say I was against Sancho signing or LW signing?

timbros:


If I can get ONLY 3 players with 200m, I'll get a CB and CF. The last spot will be either of LW/RB/LB.

Fofana, Chilwell, James all have terrible injury records. Silva is already semi retired. These are defensive positions that needs reinforcement critically. I have not even mentioned the goalkeeper department.

Our left and central side of attack currently needs upgrade.

So you see that our problem is not just attack.

And apart from just signing players, we need a coach that can actually upgrade the players we currently have. A different coach can come in and change these crop of players to monsters and drop the jaw of football world. These are young players that can be moulded.

Mourinho came into Chelsea in 2004 and suddenly Geremi became solid. Terry became a rock. Lampard already have the talent but he became much much more better. Joe Cole became a terrorist. Even soft Glenn Johnson deliver wenever he was called upon..... All these are players Mourinho met in Chelsea. So apart from his signings, he still improved the players he met in the club.

Chelsea issue is not just attack.

I know you are a cheap liar so let me requote your accusation. This is exactly what you said. You even bolded the 1LWF which means I was also against the signing of Neto, no?

airmark:
Maybe you didn't have data when I was asking for 1 LWF that could dribble in tight spaces and Timbros was strongly against it.

Had we got a clinical finisher, we would have beaten Crystal Palace and be leading the table now and become a strong contender for the trophy after spending over 1bn on players.

My opinion on football is too complex for casuals and my high expectation of a striker is alien to Gen Z Chelsea fans. But that's not my problem.

Jackson burying this chance would have seen us topping the table today, but most of you wouldn't see it.

Where was I against the signing of 9ne LWF?

You are terrible Airmark. You think I speak from both sides of the mouth like you?

airmark:
Maybe because I was busy with work unlike what Nateevs thought that I was jobless.

Were you high when you typed the reddened line, when we were reported to be chasing Sancho on August 28?

It seems you have dementia bro or you are not in control of what your fingers type and post.

You are worse than I thought...

We don't need a LW

And

We don't need another LW

Do you want me to spoonfeed you the difference between those two statements? Are you okay like this?

As you are pushing for a CF now and Chelsea buy the first CF, buy another one and looking to buy the third one and you say "we don't need another CF", Does it mean you are against Chelsea signing a CF?

airmark:
Colwill, elegant to watch.

I remember when Tim.bros said the return of Colwill wouldn't improve our defence. With Colwill fit, who will start Badiashile in our defence?

If I ask you to provide where I said this now, you will disappear like you did when you lied against me that I was against LWF signing.

One would read that comment and think it's a match Colwill helped England win and kept cleansheet.

Where is your shame airmark? One clearance and your finger start scratching you to type. I dey shame for you walahi....

drisham:
This is cap foden has been top for 3 seasons max

Maybe there's a reason pep is playing him much this season

If he is top for 3 seasons, then he is NOT a one season wonder then just saying.

I'm not holding brief for Foden, but if he won YPOTY twice and the main POTY also, then he must be doing something right.

andrewbaba44:
You want make e answer make android finally break him neck

e choke.

nateevs:
There will be the second coming of Jesus before he sits anything out. He will come back with more cho cho cho and drop even more materials for us to use in the future.

We will be here jotting down those materials

Android schooling Airmark

I'm so ashamed to have such a fellow fan. This is what too much talking does to you. Everything is argument. I too know.

Is Palmer better than Lampard and Hazard? You no fit answer.

See how you set up Palmer, Hazard and Lampard... Because of too much cho cho cho cho

Sit this one out Airmark.

airmark:
With huge number of big chances created for Jackson and missed by him, his edging Havertz with just 1 in goal involvements, will be thrown out of the window to your face.

I didn't expect you to think deeply and figure that out though.

And Havertz didn't get that huge chunk of big chances in Chelsea shirt? Pull out Havertz numbers for the same Chelsea.

Shegzdave:
That’s what I’m trying to say that going by the numbers Jackson is better than Harvertz in Chelsea shirt cause looking at that table he’s decent but his misses are so bad that people tend to overlook his numbers.

Leave air.mark jawee

Havertz and Isak balling with 25 GA but Jackson a flop with 26 GA.... If it's not agenda, I don't know what it is.

airmark:
You wanted to type Android17 but it seems you have parkinson's and typed the wrong letters.


This is the player that has been carrying our team and not your wasteful Jackson, with no goal in 16 matches for Senegal.

Palmer - England Player of the year 2023/2024.

Doesn't change the fact that Jackson is better than the Havertz you have been using to castigate him here.

Palmer is part of Chelsea attack. Out of those his goals, how many assists came from Jackson?

Shegzdave:
I think stats and numbers Favour Jackson but if you watch his misses, you fit naked swear for am

Oh stats shouldn't be counted now that it favours Jackson, abi? Did you not watch Havertz in Chelsea colours? Are you not in this same thread when Havertz was playing for us?

Where were you when Airmark was using Havertz to castigate Jackson?

For context, the reigning POTS is topping Jackson the flop with just one goal.

Airmark is terrible.

PDPGuy:
Star boy for a reason!!

Airmark will tell you Jackson is the flop while Havertz is better.

iykmora:
I thought it is based on match stats for players, i.e passing, shot on target, assist , goals, cards and fouls accumulated etc. abi no be so?

I'm just hearing this now. Let me check it out.

Godstime001:
Turn up for group stage and get lost when it matter most?

When does it matter most please? If you don't come out of the group, will you to that lace where "it matter most"?

Obere4u:
Misuse of stat have ruined the beautiful game

Exactly.

And it's so painful. The Zidanes them would have been called fraud today because of GA.

Imagine someone bringing Foden name side by side with De Lima. What disrespect!

Android17:
This does not mean I'm comparing Rico to TAA.

It could have meant that without any context - if I just posted this image. However, if someone says Rico is a fraud, I can post the below and say "This guy?".

It simply means, a player who has assisted more goals than TAA this season is not a fraud. It does not mean I'm saying he is better than TAA. The context is, I'm defending him from being a fraud.

Rico and TAA is playing 8n the same league. The stat is based on the league BOTH of them are playing. Did De Lima played in EPL? Wetin concern UCL goals in Foden dropping 0 goals 0 assist in EPL?

Leyqute:
Based on that mentality, Charlie McNeil is a bigger talent than Foden. Hes singlehandedly dragging Everton along while Foden can’t even get a starting shirt.

McNeil - 3 goals + 2 assists
Foden - 0 goals, 0 assists

Yahoo boy pro max

Android17:
I'm not statmuse. I did not compare Foden to De Lima.

I showed that a player who has more UCL goals than El Fenomeno cannot be a fraud.

It does not mean I'm comparing Foden to Delima.

You are comparing both. For you to bring one person's goal tally side by side with another person's is comparison.

And you had to use another competition entirely different from the discourse on ground to drive your point home? Which kind of nonsense is that?