peterstorey said:
Hasnt been to blame for ANY of the 14 goals you have let in? Are you sure? Dont think you have been watching the same goalkeeper as the rest of us then...
Saha is an ungrateful, disloyal bastard
- Thread starter Re_Deus
- Start date
- Status
Hasnt been to blame for ANY of the 14 goals you have let in? Are you sure? Dont think you have been watching the same goalkeeper as the rest of us then...
An Extremely Boring Man said:
Whooaa such a powerful and effective response there.
Must have used up all of your one brain cell
I think what the gentlement here means is, Man Utd should just offer 15mil nxt time if they think the value is about 10mil ... so that the opposite team would not get frustrated and happily sell .. The player aso won't get affected 'cos before he knew it - the club already wrap him with DHL box and send him to Old Trafford ...
nutsss !!
nutsss !!
Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:Brainless prick, Ronaldo's goals had little to do with Real's brilliance. They were shit on the day and even scored two on goals. We lost because the Phenomenon and THE best player on the planet destroyed us. His absence cost Real dear vs Juve. when he stepped on pitch he caused a goal. But why am I wastimg my time. I brick wall can never understand anything
Brush up on your english, then we can discuss it.
Or perhaps you should just stick with using terms that refer to the mentally retarded, as you seem keen on doing.
An Extremely Boring Man said:
What do you deem as 'competing'? You havent seriously competed or been a threat in the CL since '99.
An Extremely Boring Man said:Yeah, because especially AC Milan and Real Madrid have been so impressive this season
Such a daft naive comment to make - you of all people should know that the state of play in January means nothing, it's May when it matters - and year after year, come May, you're out of the CL.
DJS, do tell us again how much better Juve are than us to win the CL...
An Extremely Boring Man said:
Who gives a feck what Re_Deus said?
He has his opinions and i have mine.
thoward said:
When GH mentions number of shots on goal that Liverpool have, you all mock him and say that it doesnt matter, but when it's United, the number of shots is suddenly the tell-tale sign of how well you've played.
Inconsistent, two faced mancs.
An Extremely Boring Man said:DJS, do tell us again how much better Juve are than us to win the CL...
They usually go further than you in it.
DJS said:
Yes, and we have beaten them the last 5 times we have played them.
DJS said:
When GH mentions number of shots on goal that Liverpool have, you all mock him and say that it doesnt matter, but when it's United, the number of shots is suddenly the tell-tale sign of how well you've played.
Inconsistent, two faced mancs.
It is a double standard. But in defense of my fellow United fans, at least our club puts 1 or 2, or in the case against Real, 4 in the net where as Liverpool often end up where they started...0.
Gutsy said:
They usually go further than you, which suggests that they seem to have worked out how to progress in the tournement better than you have, hence i feel they'll go further in it this year than you do.
Logical, non?
The difference, extremely boring man, is that Blackburn were actually encouraging offers for Duff whereas Fulham made it quite clear they weren't interested in selling.
In any case, Duff didn't throw his toys out of his cot when Rovers turned down Chelsea's bid, unlike the ungrateful, disloyal bastard you lot have signed.
In any case, Duff didn't throw his toys out of his cot when Rovers turned down Chelsea's bid, unlike the ungrateful, disloyal bastard you lot have signed.
thoward said:
I'm sorry but that's just simply not true.
Real played us off the park in the first leg: the first half of that game was men vs. boys. Real played prettier passing football, and they were two nothing at half time when our 'boys' stood in awe. Second half we had some chances after 3-0, bu so did they. Final score could have been 3-2 just as easily as 4-1.
At the second game, when the score was 0-1, 1-2 and 2-3 they had a 3 and 4 goal cushion repsectively... no shit they took it easy and took Ronnie off the pitch. THEY DID NOT NEED TO CREATE CHANCES WHEN THEY LOOKED LIKE SCORING AT ANY TIME, BARTHEZ OR BUFFON IT WOULDN'T HAVE MATTERED.
That was the day I dreamt of Ronaldo playing for United after what he did. (United 4, Real 3)
I also think if he ever does decide to play for United, that standing ovation he received when he was subbed off will be a lasting memory as well as the chance to play for a club like Manchester United. Sadly, I don't think he'll come to England except when he's 33, on his last big payday, and probably to Chelsea for a fat paycheck...unless the rumors of a Chelsea bid this summer are true.
I also think if he ever does decide to play for United, that standing ovation he received when he was subbed off will be a lasting memory as well as the chance to play for a club like Manchester United. Sadly, I don't think he'll come to England except when he's 33, on his last big payday, and probably to Chelsea for a fat paycheck...unless the rumors of a Chelsea bid this summer are true.
He might be off to Inter this summer.
He'd be wasted there yet again.
He'd be wasted there yet again.
Re_Deus said:
Actually that is false.
Duff came out in public and actually expressed his anger at his price, saying it was ludicrous and in-accurate, and that its stopping him from leaving.
So in effect, he did throw the 'toys out of the pram'. Albeit in a different manner.
Saha wanted to further his career, you only get one shot in Football - He wanted to take it. I fail to see where the problem lies.
VanNistlerater said:
How do you 'only get one shot in football' ?
Little cliches are all well and good, but that's BS as you cannot possibly say that it would've been beyond the realms of possibility that Fulham would've kept him til the summer, then sold him when they had a proper chance to find a decent replacement.
Saha disrupted the whole club and set himself up as Anelka Mk II.
Only United fans seem to want to defend him...funny that.
Big clubs always get their men
By Alan Hansen
BBC Sport football expert
Louis Saha is on his way to Manchester United despite Fulham's protestations - and you can be sure Scott Parker will follow suit by moving from Charlton Athletic to Chelsea if he has his way.
This is not cruel or harsh on two clubs who have fought, and in Charlton's case are still fighting, to keep hold of their prize assets.
It is simply the reality of football.
Of course the first cry is lack of loyalty, but loyalty in football is for other people - it is wrong to criticise either Saha for wanting his move to Old Trafford or Parker for being unsettled by talk of a move to Stamford Bridge.
I believe 99% of people in society would do exactly the same in their position.
Let's get one thing straight: when clubs get players to sign a four or five-year contract, it is as much to allow them to get a transfer fee, or even push the fee up, as anything else.
You can't blame the player for wanting moves like those on offer to Saha and Parker. Fulham have got decent money for Saha and Charlton will get decent money for Parker.
And while Fulham insisted they would not sell Saha and Charlton insist Parker is not going to Chelsea, in reality it is all rhetoric because the lure of the big clubs and the financial firepower at their disposal makes them almost impossible to resist.
The minute the big clubs come in it is inevitable the player will go, and that is said with total respect for what has been achieved at Fulham and Charlton.
Chris Coleman was very vocal about Saha, but these words have enabled him to push the price up and now he must put it behind him.
There has been talk that Parker should not move to Chelsea because he would not get a regular game, using his England colleague Joe Cole as an example.
I do not believe that scenario will enter his head for a second.
If Parker has got the self-belief and ability many sound judges believe he has, he will take his chances and say to himself: "Once I get in that team at Chelsea I will play so well they won't get me out."
Saha and Parker will look at what's on offer, see Champions League football, the prospect of doubling their wages and testing themselves at the very highest level, and they will rightly want to be part of it.
And to criticise them for lack of loyalty, or wanting to be part of it all at the highest level, is out of order.
Saha's signing is an interesting one, with Sir Alex Ferguson picking him from a list of strikers he had drawn up.
When you've looked at him in the past, you thought he had pace, ability and the potential to be successful - but it was just potential.
Now it has all come together and he has looked very dangerous, with serious pace and an ability to hit the back of the net.
There are not many of those about and you have to pay to get them.
Mark Viduka has been talked about, and I actually think he is a better player than Saha.
You can see him playing in the Champions League and being terrific, but Sir Alex has obviously examined every facet of the respective players' make-up and plumped for Saha.
I, for one, am not going to argue with his judgement.
We have certainly seen enough from Saha to suggest he will be successful and it is not as if Sir Alex is paying £25m for him.
There is no cast-iron guarantee of success unless you go to the very top of the list of the world's great strikers, and they are just not available at the moment.
So Saha it is and United are clearly confident he will succeed.
All this may come as no consolation to Fulham and their fans, in the same way as Parker's eventual departure will upset Charlton, but both these transfers are simply a sign of football's reality.
If clubs of the stature of Manchester United and Chelsea come calling, players will not resist.
---------------------------------
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/3410269.stm
Agree with him.
By Alan Hansen
BBC Sport football expert
Louis Saha is on his way to Manchester United despite Fulham's protestations - and you can be sure Scott Parker will follow suit by moving from Charlton Athletic to Chelsea if he has his way.
This is not cruel or harsh on two clubs who have fought, and in Charlton's case are still fighting, to keep hold of their prize assets.
It is simply the reality of football.
Of course the first cry is lack of loyalty, but loyalty in football is for other people - it is wrong to criticise either Saha for wanting his move to Old Trafford or Parker for being unsettled by talk of a move to Stamford Bridge.
I believe 99% of people in society would do exactly the same in their position.
Let's get one thing straight: when clubs get players to sign a four or five-year contract, it is as much to allow them to get a transfer fee, or even push the fee up, as anything else.
You can't blame the player for wanting moves like those on offer to Saha and Parker. Fulham have got decent money for Saha and Charlton will get decent money for Parker.
And while Fulham insisted they would not sell Saha and Charlton insist Parker is not going to Chelsea, in reality it is all rhetoric because the lure of the big clubs and the financial firepower at their disposal makes them almost impossible to resist.
The minute the big clubs come in it is inevitable the player will go, and that is said with total respect for what has been achieved at Fulham and Charlton.
Chris Coleman was very vocal about Saha, but these words have enabled him to push the price up and now he must put it behind him.
There has been talk that Parker should not move to Chelsea because he would not get a regular game, using his England colleague Joe Cole as an example.
I do not believe that scenario will enter his head for a second.
If Parker has got the self-belief and ability many sound judges believe he has, he will take his chances and say to himself: "Once I get in that team at Chelsea I will play so well they won't get me out."
Saha and Parker will look at what's on offer, see Champions League football, the prospect of doubling their wages and testing themselves at the very highest level, and they will rightly want to be part of it.
And to criticise them for lack of loyalty, or wanting to be part of it all at the highest level, is out of order.
Saha's signing is an interesting one, with Sir Alex Ferguson picking him from a list of strikers he had drawn up.
When you've looked at him in the past, you thought he had pace, ability and the potential to be successful - but it was just potential.
Now it has all come together and he has looked very dangerous, with serious pace and an ability to hit the back of the net.
There are not many of those about and you have to pay to get them.
Mark Viduka has been talked about, and I actually think he is a better player than Saha.
You can see him playing in the Champions League and being terrific, but Sir Alex has obviously examined every facet of the respective players' make-up and plumped for Saha.
I, for one, am not going to argue with his judgement.
We have certainly seen enough from Saha to suggest he will be successful and it is not as if Sir Alex is paying £25m for him.
There is no cast-iron guarantee of success unless you go to the very top of the list of the world's great strikers, and they are just not available at the moment.
So Saha it is and United are clearly confident he will succeed.
All this may come as no consolation to Fulham and their fans, in the same way as Parker's eventual departure will upset Charlton, but both these transfers are simply a sign of football's reality.
If clubs of the stature of Manchester United and Chelsea come calling, players will not resist.
---------------------------------
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/3410269.stm
Agree with him.
DJS said:How do you 'only get one shot in football' ?
Little cliches are all well and good, but that's BS as you cannot possibly say that it would've been beyond the realms of possibility that Fulham would've kept him til the summer, then sold him when they had a proper chance to find a decent replacement.
Saha disrupted the whole club and set himself up as Anelka Mk II.
Only United fans seem to want to defend him...funny that.
Heres the situation. We need a new striker NOW, not in the summer, not in 2006, not next decade, Now.
Saha knows this and evidently knows this is his one chance to move to United, before, in his own words, 'they get someone else'. Obviously he is aware he wont initially be a regular starter but he has to grab this opertunity, whose to say we would go back in for him in the summer?, thats what it seems he was worried about.
He's not Anelka MkII atall, he played during the speculation and played brilliantly, didnt sulk on the field atall.
You seem to have a problem with him wanting to leave for a better club, he wants to seize an opertunity while it is there for the taking. Why is that such a big problem?
VanNistlerater said:
Either you're lacking in intelligence, or you're just missing the point on purpose.
He's entitled to want to go to a better club, and put in a transfer request.
But having done so, if the club rejects offers, it's entitled to do so and Saha is obligated to take this on the chin and not go to the press, whinging and whining. He signed a contract til 2006 and should be prepared to see it out, continuing to act professionally and do everything in his power to increase the fortunes of Fulham Football Club and not act in a way that is to the detriment of the club. By going to the press and moaning, he is not doing what he is obligated to do.
If you or I (well, when you get a job) were in this position and went to the press, criticising our boss for his actions, we'd be disciplined and we wouldnt just get what we wanted.
Basically, Saha knows the power of players in these cases and used it to his full advantage, without a care in the world for the club that made him such a famous name. Disloyal, unprofessional and downright pathetic.
Funny how you choose to ignore the fact that, United fans aside, most football fans now seem to have lost respect for him. Just coincidence that, is it?
DJS said:
I would say that many ABUs have lost respect for him, but then again I'm sure he's not too worried about a bunch of bitter tw@ts who are more concerned that he's going to help United win a few more trophies, than the ethics of players who don't adhere to their contracts.
DJS said:
Didnt Saha offer to see out his contract?
Gutsy said:Hasnt been to blame for ANY of the 14 goals you have let in? Are you sure? Dont think you have been watching the same goalkeeper as the rest of us then...
Which of the 14 then?
Basically you're moaning about him talking to the press, but it's funny how you didn't have the same concerns when one Djibril Cisse made similar comments to the French press.DJS said:
I have not read this whole thread and my comments are more to the original post.
Where did Fulham get most of their players from. Did they not make an offer to a club and then leave it up to the club and player what happened from there. If loyalty was meant to mean you must see out your contract then the only player movement would be on free transfers.
Fulham bought Saha so he must have been mid contract why not complain about his lack of loyalty then.
Where did Fulham get most of their players from. Did they not make an offer to a club and then leave it up to the club and player what happened from there. If loyalty was meant to mean you must see out your contract then the only player movement would be on free transfers.
Fulham bought Saha so he must have been mid contract why not complain about his lack of loyalty then.
DJS said:
So, getting knocked out of the semi-final on away goals is not competing?
In my opinion, getting to 3 quarter final, 2 semi-final and one final in the last six seasons is competing at the highest level in Europe.
DJS said:
So, it's now changed from "better at winning it" to "usually going further in it"...DJS, you idiot, you must be so bored of coming out with statements that are being proved wrong all the time!!!In the last five seasons, Juve have gone further than United only once...
You're fecking obsessed with trying to prove that United are worse than we are - and you're bloody crap at it
An Extremely Boring Man said:
In the last five seasons, Juve have gone further than United only once...
You're fecking obsessed with trying to prove that United are worse than we are - and you're bloody crap at it
Best.....post......ever...
*thumbs up to Boring*
Got to the semis in 2002 when we went out on away goals and were unlucky with injuries. Knocked out in quarters by Real in 2000 and Bayen in 2001 and these teams went on to win the competition those years.DJS said:
Suedesi said:
Real played United off the park for about 25 minutes in the first leg. The rest of the game United played well . John Toshack even commented that United were playing much better until Reals second goal. United played better in the second half. In the return game Real scored 3 goals, one of which Barthez should easily have saved and two good goals from Ronaldo the second of which was awesome. United missed a load of chances. Lou Macari said recently that United should have scored 8 or 9 on the night.
giggzy said:
No idea. Then again I've never been that interested in ancient history.
thoward said:
Real were the better team in both legs...they outclassed you and always looked capable of scoring again if they needed to...
Christ, they even "rested" Ronaldo in the second leg after the bloke had banged in a hat trick...
From the moment their second goal went in during the first leg the tie was effectively over
Davo said:
They weren't better than us in the second leg. They might have been able to step it up, bu that's just speculation.
An Extremely Boring Man said:
They were...and they "eased off" in both legs..
As I said, once it was 2-0 the tie was effectively over...you're kidding yourself if you think otherwise
An Extremely Boring Man said:
I think playing at the Bernabeu in the first leg was difficult for us. Barthez lost the plot and Figo played a blinder. In the seond leg Barthez was not much better and Ronaldo played a blinder. Only Ruud and O'Shea really played well for us. I think we are better prepared to take them on now than we were then
Davo said:
It was never 2-0 for them, but I agree with you that the tie was effectively over after their first goal. After they lead 2-1, 3-2 they had a 4 goal cushion...
People go on about Real winning cuz Ronaldo had a blinder in the second game. I seem to recall that for the first goal Barthez simply made a mistake and for the second goal Real stringed 5-6 passes in the box which enabled Ronnie to net with an open goal.
Saying that "Ronnie had a blinder" does not do justice to our poor defense and their superior midfield.
Davo said:
I'm not saying the tie wasn't over.
I'm saying United were the best team in the second leg. United won it, created far more chances than Real etc. In what way was Real better in the second leg?
An Extremely Boring Man said:
Yeah we whipped them in the second game, the only thing was that they whipped us better in the first game. I do think though that the fact that the first game was at the Bernabeu helped them. We lost it for about 30mins but if it had been at OT then we'd have acclimatised to the tie a bit better and gone to Madrid with something to work with.
I think SAF said something similar which is why he said that they chose the tie themselves.
Real were certainly not the better team in the 2nd leg. It could easily have been 8-4 or 9-4 to United.Davo said:
- Status