What’d VVD say?Yes Roy. fecking arrogance from VVD.
What happened?Go on keane giving it Van Dijk!
Said that “only one team wanted to win” and “Utd were buzzing with that point”.What’d VVD say?
Me likey.Said that “only one team wanted to win” and “Utd were buzzing with that point”.
Roy said that VVD should remember that Liverpool have one PL title in 33 years, and were buzzing for many a point against Utd in the past.
What’d VVD say?
Go on keane giving it Van Dijk!
I really want to see this exchange!What’d VVD say?
Only one team tried to win they'll be buzzing with a draw.keane basically called him an arrogant pr@ck and said 1 league in 30 years remember where your coming from!What happened?
Oh god noHope SJR brings Keane and Robbo on to the United Football board.
Oh god no
Come on.While slightly over the top, what Van Dijk said was largely true. Invoking the past, which has little relevance in terms of today’s game, in order to put down Van Dijk and Liverpool seems a bit small-time.
Van Dijk was obviously being a cnut though, there's nothing small time about calling a cnut out for being a cnut.While slightly over the top, what Van Dijk said was largely true. Invoking the past, which has little relevance in terms of today’s game, in order to put down Van Dijk and Liverpool seems a bit small-time.
Love Roy but we need to stop holding on to the past. Get people who are professional and have expeience in those roles. What does the football “board” even do?!Why?
Whilst also largely arrogant. Keane was completely right to respond as he did.While slightly over the top, what Van Dijk said was largely true. Invoking the past, which has little relevance in terms of today’s game, in order to put down Van Dijk and Liverpool seems a bit small-time.
While slightly over the top, what Van Dijk said was largely true. Invoking the past, which has little relevance in terms of today’s game, in order to put down Van Dijk and Liverpool seems a bit small-time.
While slightly over the top, what Van Dijk said was largely true. Invoking the past, which has little relevance in terms of today’s game, in order to put down Van Dijk and Liverpool seems a bit small-time.
Invoking feelings and intentions has absolute no relevance to today’s game. We were there for the taking, Liverpool were not good enough to take advantage and we grew into the second half when it could have either way. That’s all that matters not “who was buzzing” and “who truly wanted to win” - which is just loser mentality nonsense the Liverpool side is using to wipe their salty tears.While slightly over the top, what Van Dijk said was largely true. Invoking the past, which has little relevance in terms of today’s game, in order to put down Van Dijk and Liverpool seems a bit small-time.
Love Roy but we need to stop holding on to the past. Get people who are professional and have expeience in those roles. What does the football “board” even do?!
No mate. We didn’t win this match because we didn’t actually want to. This stuff is so stupid you wonder how it comes out of educated people’s mouths.Except we had a couple of very decent chances to score? Including probably the best chance of the match?
VVD it's talking out of his arse. Yeah they dominated the game but we had our moments to nick it... And they didn't really create a solid chance.
We lost 7-0 the last time and are in terrible form and ravaged by injuries, but Liverpool couldn't beat us at Anfield today. Van Dijk was being a salty cnut and Roy put him in his place.While slightly over the top, what Van Dijk said was largely true. Invoking the past, which has little relevance in terms of today’s game, in order to put down Van Dijk and Liverpool seems a bit small-time.
Arrogant as though they’re the dominant force and not 4 years since a league title playing in the Europa.Said that “only one team wanted to win” and “Utd were buzzing with that point”.
Roy said that VVD should remember that Liverpool have one PL title in 33 years, and were buzzing for many a point against Utd in the past.
Thing is, it wasn’t.
A draw was more than fair. Liverpool didn’t deserve to win the game.
Sorry but that’s just objectively wrong.Thing is, it wasn’t.
A draw was more than fair. Liverpool didn’t deserve to win the game.
Sorry but that’s just objectively wrong.
They had 34 shots to our six, eight on target with one for us, 69 percent ball-possession, and 12 corners to our zero. An xG of 2.3 to our 0.6.
It was a positive performance from us but Liverpool absolutely deserved to win.
Sorry but that’s just objectively wrong.
They had 34 shots to our six, eight on target with one for us 69 percent ball-possession and 12 corners to our zero. An xG of 2.3 to our 0.6.
It was a positive performance from us but Liverpool absolutely deserved to win.
If this is the level of discussion you want, I’m out.You didn’t watch the game did you?
That's BS, VVD was being a disrespective arsehole, we might not be great upfront but suggeting we weren't trying to win is just hiding the fact that his team couldn't score a goal eitherWhile slightly over the top, what Van Dijk said was largely true. Invoking the past, which has little relevance in terms of today’s game, in order to put down Van Dijk and Liverpool seems a bit small-time.
Why does a team with a better xG ‘deserve’ to win? I’d love to know. They didn’t take any of their chances and most of them shots seemed to be pot shots from range. It’s not even as though they played exquisite football or anything.Sorry but that’s just objectively wrong.
They had 34 shots to our six, eight on target with one for us, 69 percent ball-possession, and 12 corners to our zero. An xG of 2.3 to our 0.6.
It was a positive performance from us but Liverpool absolutely deserved to win.