I’ve never heard him speak but if he doesn’t sound like one of the Krays I’ll be very disappointed.
Weird feelings of football
- Thread starter fontaine
- Start date
I’ve never heard him speak but if he doesn’t sound like one of the Krays I’ll be very disappointed.
It’s also because loads of the major journalists in the UK support West Ham (they do have a large fanbase to be fair to them).
I always had him down as a scouser, most likely because he played in the Liverpool team at the same time as other scouse, product-of-incestuous-relationship looking players like Jon Flanagan and Jay Spearing.
The name Jonjo sounds a bit scouse too
Last edited:
What are these posts
. You lot hardly beat us at the Emirates or Highbury. We've also drawn a few times at Old Trafford over the years since 2006 and lost a few close games. Sure we got trashed once and lost I think 3 home games in 15 years or so against United but come on....They actually bought him from Charlton, who he’d already made almost 50 appearances for. His name comes from his Irish traveller background so kind of Scouse in a way.
Definitely not one of the best looking crops of young players though. Stephen Wright from the early 00s was another shocker.
Liverpool always play at home.
Every week Ronaldo and Messi beat the same record to become the leading goal scorer of all time/of their current club/of the league they play in.
Grown men who post “SIIIIIUUUU” within seconds of Cristiano Ronaldo banging in his 15th penalty of the season against Benevento belong on a register.
@SirAF I still love you
When a team wins a game by anything more than 4 goals, automatically they draw the next game wishing dearly they had saved one from the previous game when they were scoring for fun.
Case in point, us last night.
Case in point, us last night.
Except for Man City, they only win games by more than 4 goals when losing or drawing the game before.
What does that even mean?
Sure they only came in to existence in 2008 got to give them some time to learn the ways of football.
Gungogan has scored 40 league goals for City this season
Ruben Neves should be around 29...
He's 23.
He's 23.
90% of PL games I’ve watched live this season have been 0-0s.
A weird feeling that many fans and the media seem to have - that categorically isn't true - is that AFC Wimbledon are the actual continuation of Wimbledon FC.
That's 100% factually inaccurate. They can claim to be the 'spiritual' continuation of them - that's valid. But so often I hear them described as 'former cup winners' / 'Wimbledon returned to the football league' / 'Wimbledon retuning to Plough Lane.' Absolutely not.
AFC Wimbledon formed in 2002, as a bunch of fans objected to the takeover and planned move of Wimbledon FC, and entered the non-league pyramid and have played competitive games from 2002. Wimbledon FC continued playing in the championship as Wimbledon FC until 2004, when they moved to Milton Keynes and, for the first six months there, were still called Wimbledon FC. Only then did they change their name to MK Dons - over two years after AFC Wimbledon were formed and playing in non league.
So for two full years, from 2002-4, Wimbledon FC were still there in their original state, while AFC Wimbledon were already up and running. So just how anyone can claim that they're actually the same team drives me mad. Spiritually a continuation of them, yes, fine. But stick to that. Don't try to spin the blatantly false narrative that they're an actual continuation of Wimbledon FC.
That's 100% factually inaccurate. They can claim to be the 'spiritual' continuation of them - that's valid. But so often I hear them described as 'former cup winners' / 'Wimbledon returned to the football league' / 'Wimbledon retuning to Plough Lane.' Absolutely not.
AFC Wimbledon formed in 2002, as a bunch of fans objected to the takeover and planned move of Wimbledon FC, and entered the non-league pyramid and have played competitive games from 2002. Wimbledon FC continued playing in the championship as Wimbledon FC until 2004, when they moved to Milton Keynes and, for the first six months there, were still called Wimbledon FC. Only then did they change their name to MK Dons - over two years after AFC Wimbledon were formed and playing in non league.
So for two full years, from 2002-4, Wimbledon FC were still there in their original state, while AFC Wimbledon were already up and running. So just how anyone can claim that they're actually the same team drives me mad. Spiritually a continuation of them, yes, fine. But stick to that. Don't try to spin the blatantly false narrative that they're an actual continuation of Wimbledon FC.
A club is basically the fans though, isn’t it? On the other hand, I’ll stick with your criteria as it winds up Rangers fans.
The Rangers one is a different situation. Whether they're the same team is open to interpretation, as only one 'club' ever existed at one time.
The Wimbledon / AFC Wimbledon is categorically provable, as AFC Wimbledon were formed for 2 years while Wimbledon FC continued on - with just the usual change of owner that happens loads of times in clubs histories.
Any debate can really only be about whether MK Dons are a continuation of the original Wimbledon, or whether that club ceased to be in 2004 when they moved to Milton Keynes and changed their name (so more comparable with the Rangers debate). What isn't debatable is that AFC Wimbledon are categorically not the old Wimbledon, as they were created in 2002 while Wimbledon FC were still very much in existence for 2 more years after that.
Sadly, people are far more willing to buy into the emotional narrative, and what they'd like to be true, rather than acknowledge the facts and what is true.
MK Dons officially are a brand new enterprise they gave all trophies etc. to Wimbledon council, they should sell the naming rights and intellectual property to the new club as well really
They gave the trophies to Wimbledon Council as a compromise, because the supporters clubs were refusing to recognise MK Dons away travel until they did. It was forced upon them, and not a recognition of them being, or not being, Wimbledon FC.
But, as I said, by all means say MK Dons aren't a continuation. By all means say AFC are the spiritual continuation. They're valid viewpoints with no right or wrong answer. But no one can say that AFC Wimbledon are the legal or actual continuation of Wimbledon FC. That's categorically inaccurate and can be easily proven so by the dates.
I believe the FA don't view MK Dons as a continuation either, when the compromise was made MK Dons effectively liquidated Wimbledon and took their place and as such have no history prior to that date
Again, that's fine. It's not really what I'm talking about. I'm addressing the incorrect belief that AFC Wimbledon are the actual continuation. If people say neither are, that the original club died in 2004, then that's fine. It just proves that AFC Wimbledon aren't the actual continuation, which is my main point.
1. No matter how many points Aston Villa drop, they always still have enough games in hand to break into the top four
2. Crystal Palace have not won a Premier League game in about two years, but somehow remain comfortably above the relegation zone
2. Crystal Palace have not won a Premier League game in about two years, but somehow remain comfortably above the relegation zone
This is so acurate
They beat us on the opening day of the season
They beat us on the opening day of the season
And last season
This is not particularly related to the thread, but I have to admire the pure fury within you for such a trivial (not even widespread) belief.
I daren’t even ask why.
Ollie Watkins has scored in every PL game he’s played in
The big one for me is in the OP. Villarreal have never had an away kit.
Gundogan is now some KDB and Aguero hybrid beast.
That he hasn't been in my dream team.
I never actually thought about this, wow.
Always seen them play in yellow indeed.No 'pure fury'. Why would there be? I support Man United, not either of those two teams.
I'm just familiar with the facts, due to knowing someone who supported Wimbledon FC at the time of their financial troubles / move to MK, and so have noticed the frequent, and often deliberate, misrepresentation of the facts over the years.
I'm not 'furious' about it, I just felt it fitted the thread subject of weird things that people believe about football that aren't true, and then got into a conversation with a fellow poster about it so it kept it going.
I'll let it drop now if it somehow comes across as 'pure fury'. I'm new to the non-United threads so I guess I have to go along with the definition of pure fury that's established here.
Going to have to nickname you “Tyson” at this rate. It’s a forum, don’t take things so seriously. Happy Valentines Day T.
United have not played at 15:00 Saturday since the Fergie Era.
Every Saturday kickoff at 15:00 in the Fergie Era United smashed Villa/Wigan/Bolton/Blackburn 4-nil with Ruud/Ronaldo/Rooney scoring a brace.
Arsenal just don't play Saturdays unless it's a 17:30 kickoff.
Every Saturday kickoff at 15:00 in the Fergie Era United smashed Villa/Wigan/Bolton/Blackburn 4-nil with Ruud/Ronaldo/Rooney scoring a brace.
Arsenal just don't play Saturdays unless it's a 17:30 kickoff.
Last edited:
Football was more pleasing to watch when players kits were a looser fit/baggier, something about the movement of the kits felt more natural than the tighter fitting kits of today.
True.
Another thing from the early 2000's which made watching more enjoyable would be the loud sound of the graphics before and after replays. Used to make the replays exciting and added to the 'action'. Don't know if they still have this on certain channels but I haven't heard it for a long time.
Case in point (after each celebration):