SteveW
Full Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2013
- Messages
- 7,194
He's a great poster.
Never heard of you
Christ, some of you are tiresome....That was his interpretation, Nick. He wasn't trying to stir shit up. No way.
That was his interpretation, Nick. He wasn't trying to stir shit up. No way.
He is. You're not.He's a great poster.
Never heard of you
There's probably a reason Mourinho mentioned that it was a scuffed shot. We can only guess what that is, but maybe it's something to do with encouraging Martial to take more chances rather than waiting for the perfect moment to come. He's only taken 10 shots in the league all season.Who cares even if it was a bad shot, he won us the game.
Irony overload.Christ, some of you are tiresome....
Sincerely hope you’re on a wide up and don’t genuinely read into things this much?It was unnecessary. Dont remember him saying that when Rashford bounced one it like that a few weeks. No interest in getting wrapped up in this stuff today anyway. We won
An interpretation. Thank you. Not sure I agree with your interpretation but it's infinitely better than just being called a cnut or a liar
I still think he was saying those who are questioning his choice of players are perhaps not red devils. Arguing over who plays is part of being a supporter. We're all looking for the same thing. I've been supporting them my whole life. I have little doubt most supporters love the club a lot more than he does so I resent the suggestion
I'd get pogba in for Zlatan but agreed. We need to get both Radford and AM into the team. Imagine if we'd done this with a young Rooney and Ronaldo. It just seems pointless to make it one or the other. The goal today showed again that Martial can play from the right. They both can.Lukaku
Rashford Zlatan Martial
Looks awesome
Very possibleI interpreted the "are they red devils" thing as him having a go at our former player pundits.
Very possible
The comments were vague but you're interpreting it in the most negative way possible, basically. You might be right but there's a very good chance you're way off base.
Mourinho went out of his way to say Martial also does well when he starts too, immediately before the comments in question. That sorta points in the opposite direction of your personal interpretation with regards to the "not red devils" thing - don't you think?
Perhaps in future you should consider such possibilities before saying shit like:Very possible
Yep. He also suggested people who think he should be starting are not real supporters. Not even joking
If a person listened to that post match interview and heard anything other than praise for Martial they're either missing some brain function or blinded by an agenda of some kind.
edit: or lying.
This whole thing has little to do with his thoughts on Martial. He generally praised him today. I took his comment about not being red devils to be aimed at people questioning his selections ie not picking Martial. It doesn't have much relevance to Martial imo.
Some lunatics just overreacted and pulled it into the whole Martial v Jose crap debate. It was a harmless comment but on here it means you get called a cnut, liar etc and a thread gets derailed for 5 pages
I'm allowed state an opinion. Being open to over opinions is hardly a failing?Perhaps in future you should consider such possibilities before saying shit like:
Because I felt it was aimed at supporters and not martial. I thought that would be clear from my initial post. Not sure where this confusion came fromA lot of the questioning lately is specifically about Martial. How can that not have much relevance?
The comment you made didn't bother me but I think it was a little disingenuous of you to not quote the full quote - as you made it sound a lot worse than it was.
You are. I refer you to my last post.I'm allowed state an opinion. Being open to over opinions is hardly a failing?
So I should consider the possibility that someone might disagree with my opinion before giving it? Surely that applies to just about any opinion?You are. I refer you to my last post.
Because I felt it was aimed at supporters and not martial. I thought that would be clear from my initial post. Not sure where this confusion came from
Yes but never-the-less the Martial comment is very relevant when you look at the whole quote in context.
No, you should consider what has been said before giving your take and making a cnut of yourself. As you did on this occasion.So I should consider the possibility that someone might disagree with my opinion before giving it? Surely that applies to just about any opinion?
I don't think he does. Don't think he loves him but they can definitely have a good professional relationship. I just think he's making a mistake by making our two best young attackers fight for the same one position in a team struggling for goals.Remember the stript: José hates Martial.
I agree we should sometimes start both but until now it worked.I don't think he does. Don't think he loves him but they can definitely have a good professional relationship. I just think he's making a mistake by making our two best young attackers fight for the same one position in a team struggling for goals.
Sorry I'm lost are we talking about the "Not red devils" comment? Really don't think that was directed towards martial at all. Felt it was directed at people criticising his team selections
No, you should consider what has been said before giving your take and making a cnut of yourself. As you did on this occasion.
No need to dive in. Take a minute to think about things.
The only slight criticism he made of Martial was saying it was a bad shot.
Nobody is saying it was directed at Martial. However Martial is relevant to the discussion if you are claiming it's aimed at supporters for questioning his selection.
Most of the criticism about his selections is for not starting Martial. Yet 30 seconds before the "not red devils" quote he says Martial is also good when he starts.
Do you see the contradiction there in claiming it's aimed at supporters questioning his selections?
It was'nt a critisim it was a obsevation and truth because it was not a perfect sweet shot, and chances are a perfect sweet shot would have been blocked.
Speaking the truth should not be considered as critisism.
I don't see a contradiction at all. He can question supporters without having to criticise the player.
It was at most a slight criticism. Unnecessary but not a big deal at all. Agreed
Not sure what you're talking about really. The only slight criticism he made of Martial was saying it was a bad shot.
I took his comment about not being red devils to be aimed towards people questioning his team selections, ie supporters. Maybe it wasn't. But can't really think who else it would have been aimed at.
I'm confused. Don't believe me how?I don't believe you.
I'm confused. Don't believe me how?