₦airaland Forum

AdisaOwala:
The bolded reeks of agenda because it appears you are deliberately ignoring all those golden opportunities your forwards missed yesterday...

It's an open secret that most sides would almost always be on the backdoor vs a typical Guardiola team playing at home - Possession, goal scoring opportunities etc would always be few and far in between. Bearing this in mind, profligacy in front of goal is literally an unforgivable offence - you simply cannot afford to be missing chances like we saw yesterday.

For the records, the Chelsea defence did well last night.

It is possible to have won the game 1-0?

Khayceeofficial:
Haaland roasted colwill yesterday
If he had his firing boots on, we probably would have been talking bout how trash of a defender colwill really is

Jackson needs to learn to hit a football still. If I was poch I would make this his primary learning since he joined.
Hit a ball well so even if trash goalkeeper manage save your 1v1's, make them carry wound for body at least

This guy really could have been at the top of the goal charts if he hadn't miscued so many chances.

With those misses yesterday, that draw really felt like a loss

This is how you analyse a game objectively, without bias.

There are issues both in attack and defence.

But some self acclaimed football experts here will tell you that attack is our only problem. The Ivorien, Popi, even claimed a top coach does NOT come into a match thinking of how to stop opponent scoring against him. Can you imagine that?!

Greatihex:
You used to be sensible with your posts before. What happened? Is it agenda?

Which agenda exactly?

Do you also agree that Chelsea's defence is very okay, that we shouldn't work on it and focus only on improving attack?

Airmark feels that Disasi winning MOTM is an indication that our defence did okay. Forgetting that MOTM award is a personal thing. Disasi had a great game and he was duly recognised for that. However Chelsea as a team failed to win the game because the defence conceded a late goal. Where is the agenda there?

It is this same Man City that we scored only one goal against and won UCL. Was our attack of Werner, Havertz and Mount the best attack in Europe then? Why did we win the match? Water tight defence. Simple.

Individual award is very different from team result. That is why I made reference to the 'keeper who conceded 10 goals but won MOTM award. If you are a fan of that club, will you be happy that your' keeper won MOTM award or will you be angry that your team lost 10-1?

I was on my own jejely when Airmark, with his scratching fingers, mentioned me. And now you are insinuating that I carry agenda.

If you guys think that attack is our only issue, then do well to advice Poch to field 11 attackers and bench all our defenders. Playing 11 attackers will increase our chances of scoring more goals.

popizaino:
The draw felt like a loss to me.

Although there have been improvements in our recent game play and among some players like Chilwell, Gallagher, and Gusto but i won't laud it till they are consistent with it.

Before i come back to our useless attack,Pochettino needs to tell me why Chalobah is game in? In my over decade years of watching football,going defensive by having 3CB doesn't work.

I have forgotten so many instances were having 3CB at the back cost us or any other team, but the one i can remember was the 2013 Super Cup vs. bayern. Mourinho removed Hazard who just scored and kept lahm busy to introduce Terry,David Luiz and Cahill,we still ended up conceding late to Javi matinez. No excuse with red card,the introduction of the third CB caused us that game.

Given the way city were all over our third half,the sensible thing Pochettino should have done with Chalobah sub was to put him the midfield and if in a case were you identify a threat,you ask him to man mark him.

You don't protect your house by opening your gate and locking your door. You lock your gate even if you open your door. Pochettino is a foolish coach,i hope he learns.

All this jargon you type would have made a tiny little bit of sense if Conte didn't use 3CB to win the league or if Tuchel didn't use 3CB to win UCL, conceding just 4 goals all campaign.

airmark:
The point is, nobody is ready to drag anything with you on today's match as it's obvious you only checked the result on LiveScore.

No sane football fan would drag anything with you on that match that you didn't watch. Rest.

The point is, MOTM is an individual award which is different from the entire team result. Disasi winning MOTM doesn't cancel the fact that Chelsea defence conceded the goal that denied us the 3 points.

A 'keeper conceded 10 goals and still won MOTM. What are you on about?

Why did you mention me?

airmark:
Nobody has Tim.bros' time again. He didn't even know that our defender was awarded the Motm.

He should continue his dance of macabre alone, Raumdeuter has abandoned him.

Was Leyqute replying my post or was he talking to me when you jumped in and start mentioning me?

We all know who has whose time here. Keep disgracing yourself.

airmark:
Obviously and as usual, you didn't watch the match. No need arguing with a blind person about the colour of my pant.

Did our attack score? Yes, just the way we scored 2 against Arsenal. They played their role.

Did we win the match? No. Why? Because, just like Arsenal, the defence didn't play their own role.

If our team was balanced, this two matches would have been maximum points for us.

@bolded... Who is arguing with you when you already agreed with my points?

airmark:
Mention one match in which we conceded 5 goals or 4 goals without a red card, this season then I will agree with you.

I won't be surprised if you even blame our defence for the barren draw we played yesterday. You are the elder brother of Lord.falcao.

Comot from my mention jor..

popizaino:
Now over to @tim.bros and his compatriot talking about balancing like say football na economics department.

@raumdeuter is already a football lost cause so no need to tag him.

Judging from our match against city today with the way we defended and the chances we missed. Which department should we try to improve on next time?

I can still rephrase my question if you don't understand me.

airmark:
I am not sure Tim.bros watched today's match as usual. But next week he will be looking for balance that is not lost.

Both of you are very foolish if you don't accept that both attack and defence have specific role to play in the football pitch. Balancing those roles form a perfect team.

If both play their roles correctly, the team win matches consistently. A balanced team score goals and is water tight in defence.

You guys are shameless to even think of mentioning me in a match where we are on course to win (attack played their role) but a porous defence conceded late in the game to deny us all 3 points. Even more shameless is the fact that both of you forgot that Timbros is existing when we were scoring 6 goals in 2 matches. Where were you guys when we were conceding 8 goals in 2 matches?

I can forgive Popizaino if he doesn't understand what a balanced team in football term means because he is a French speaking Ivorien, but Airmark? It is a big shame that through all your years of sojourn in the white man's country, you still find it hard to understand the term balance in football dictionary... Oh damn, I forgot, Canada is a French speaking country too.

Make both of una getat.

Lana1:
You guys should pity timbros now. The dragging never too much like this

Dragging? Which dragging?

Wetin concern me?

izzou:
[color=royalblue]Will Timbros deny the Peseiro he hugged last week?

Time will tell![/color]

Shut up.

Check the date and comment again.

izzou:
[color=royalblue]See your reply to that quote.

So, who did you SPECIFICALLY MENTION FOR THE JOB?

Was it Peseiro?
[/color]

My recommendation will take Super Eagles to the final like Peseiro did

Can Rohr do the same? You are shameless.

izzou:
[color=royalblue]From who?

You are the poster boy for shame tonight

You voluntarily took the role yourself

I congratulate you[/color]

Shut up!

Shame on you and your goons.

popizaino:
Did you support the sacking Rohr or not?

Is Rohr still the NT coach ?

If your answer is accordingly then why are you not accepting your L? He no dey kee now.

I DID support Rohr sack now Super Eagles are in the final.

Who has the L now?

izzou:
[color=royalblue]Which kind show of shame be this?

Eeiii

[/color]

Hide your face in shame.

Capaldi:
This is very hilarious. Posts that were made to you, that you rejected and argued against back then for days, you are now quoting them again to accept them . What level of shamelessness is this?

Is Super Eagles in AFCON final without Rohr or not?

airmark:
For this international break, na Timbros be the scapegoat. Next one fit be Lordfalcao.

Who is the scapegoat now?

Airmark no dey view thread like that. Come out and talk.

izzou:
[color=royalblue]I really don't know why you want to keep dragging something this is very clear.

You didn't care who replaced Rohr, and Eguavoen DID NOT replace Rohr.

I am surprised you are beginning to inteprete INTERIM. Where in this universe is an Interim tagged as a Replacement?

The reason i asked for rest, is because you have refused to take your L. So no need to bore people with back and forths

Eguavoen did not replace Rohr. NFF affirms Jose as his replacement. You know that, but because of L, you dey interprete English

I really hope you rest this matter. It is tiring[/color]

So you even confirmed this Izzou? Chai...

airmark:
Can you please answer the question I asked first?

Who said 'i don't care who replaces Rohr, he must go to move forward'?

I was the one that said that.

Have Super Eagles not moved forward without Rohr now?

airmark:
Who said 'i don't care who replaces Rohr, he must go to move forward'?

Airmark come outside

airmark:
You are the one not ok, and everybody have told you.

NFF announced Peseiro as Rohr's permanent replacement. You should have objected if not ok with him. But because your solution was Rohr must go and anyone could replace him, you didn't object.

You need to stop embarrassing yourself.

Izzou take note. From the horses mouth.

Kenturkey048:
Only few people understand how things work in this country. And the few of us voice no loud reach.. The ones with zero understanding get loud voice...

I was surprised when I saw Nigerians supporting the sack of Rohr.. Like if you know that team before Rohr came him, you go respect Rohr..

But I no know if Nigerians get short memories, or they just be actual stupeed people , or they lack basic understanding about things. I just don't get..

See where them don bring themselves back to.. It's clear we aren't gonna qualify from this group..If south win today, they are 4points ahead of us..

It's interesting to know who the stupeed one is right now

airmark:
You said you didn't care who replaced Rohr and when Peseiro was signed, you didn't object.

This L you are trying to shy away from, will eventually choke you.

Izzou can you see where your almighty airmark confirm that I don't care who replaces Rohr?

izzou:

Renard is a 2 time AFCON winner with 2 different teams. Who says he cannot do it a third time with Super Eagles?

You wan argue, abi?

popizaino:
Forget about airmark.........Tell us how the team is improving without Rohr as you told us.

Ok, I have forgotten airmark.

The team is improved without Rohr as you can see. Super Eagles are in AFCON final, with the potential to become champions. Something Rohr could never do.

Isn't that enough improvement?

izzou:
[color=royalblue]Are you hoping on this one too?

You seem not to know your stance again. [/color]

Since you don't want to agree the fact on ground that Rohr got sacked and we are in AFCON final.

Let's argue that Renard will still take this Supe r Eagles team to the final. You wan argue am?

izzou:
[color=royalblue]See wetin person recommend.

Then he has the guts to call out Airmark

Lol[/color]

Yes. And we have sacked Rohr and in the Final.

Renard would have taken us to the final too. If you want to argue speculations, bring it on.

Leave the fact that Rohr got sacked and we are in the final. Bring on the speculations

Capaldi:
Instead of taking 1 L and a W, he is receiving 2 L's.

The same Renard would have taken us to AFCON final. As long as it's not Rohr.

The L and shame is on you

izzou:
[color=royalblue]Tueh



Even Peter did it thrice. How many times we go count for this guy?[/color]

Renard would have taken us to this AFCON final. Want to argue it?

Capaldi:
Somebody asked him this



And he replied






How can his own post be exposing him yet he wants to keep arguing. He has twisted it to I only wanted Rohr sacked.

Anybody but Rohr will take us to AFCON final. Argue with your keypad.

Capaldi:
Your own post will expose you. You said sack Rohr and appoint Renard.

Below is the answer to your post...

popizaino:
The only thing everyone sees is that you said you don't care about who replaces Rohr.

My main campaign is LET ROHR LEAVE THE DUGOUT. Disstroy now wanted to know my opinion who should replace him. I gave my opinion. That is by the way.

Popizaino above have told you that I DON'T CARE WHO REPLACES HIM,BUT ROHR HAS TO GO!

I can argue with you that Renard will still take us to this final if he was in the dugout. But that will be mere speculation.

The fact on ground is that Rohr is no more and we are in the final! Deal with it.

popizaino:
The only thing everyone sees is that you said you don't care about who replaces Rohr.

Exactly!

I don't know why Izzou is dancing skelewu all over.

I don't care who replace Rohr. What I care is his SACK!

popizaino:
I dey.

Anything?

Who has the mail now?