: Wed Jul 08, 2009 2:57 pm  

had enough of that E.E the only time they get wickets is when i say something lol and back to football i would leave the whole JT and go after Carvalho now try and see it as much as i want i cant picture JT leaving Chelsea

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 2:57 pm  

Enfield Exile wrote:

fella, he doesn't just act that way towards City fans, so don't take it personally. He was the same with keithcun, Lenny and others. Just don't respond to any of his posts. I avoided it for months and it wound him up.

p.s. No more criticising Aussie bowlers.

There's a huge difference between keithcun and you and lenny. You and Lenny are basically stupid trolls who talk 5hit, get shown up, refuse to accept you're wrong and then talk 5hit again. You deserve all you get.

I've gone OTT with keithcun, usually around CL semi times, but there is a basis of debate with him with doesn't exist with you and lamer because you two are clueless trolls.

I can't say I noticed you ignoring me. I know Mintball ignores me. But IMO my posts in response to her are correct and my facts stand for themselves. It's easy to refuse to debate with someone when they are right over a previous argument.

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 3:01 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

There's a huge difference between keithcun and you and lenny. You and Lenny are basically stupid trolls who talk 5hit, get shown up, refuse to accept you're wrong and then talk 5hit again. You deserve all you get.

I've gone OTT with keithcun, usually around CL semi times, but there is a basis of debate with him with doesn't exist with you and lamer because you two are clueless trolls.

I can't say I noticed you ignoring me. I know Mintball ignores me. But IMO my posts in response to her are correct and my facts stand for themselves. It's easy to refuse to debate with someone when they are right over a previous argument.

You're a bore. Shouting loudest doesn't make you right. I pity you for believing that to be the case.

Anyways goodbye, you soft tart

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 3:02 pm  

Enfield Exile wrote:

You're a bore. Shouting loudest doesn't make you right. I pity you for believing that to be the case.

Anyways goodbye, you soft tart

Thank fook that's over!

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 3:08 pm  

Enfield Exile wrote:

You're a bore. Shouting loudest doesn't make you right. I pity you for believing that to be the case.

Anyways goodbye, you soft tart

In this case you claimed that Citeh were a far better supported side than Chelsea. You came out with figures off the top of your head. I said they were wrong and provided evidence that they were wrong. You still come out with the same weak nonsense of seeing something a few weeks ago.

This has happened before. Last time you resorted to claiming to have been winning the debate, only for DD to "rescue me".

If you are going to ignore me, fine. I'll continue to respond to your posts when you say something clearly wrong. A lack of response from you is probably better than you just repeating the same nonsense over again in a different way.

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 3:11 pm  

Robbie Rotten wrote:

I would rather we'd go for somebody younger, more dynamic like Gokhan Inler, he's a top player.

I'd have had that Felipe Melo to replace Alonso.

Inler is 25 (compared to Cambiasso's 28 ) so not much difference...he doesnt score anywhere near enough goals though...I'd definitely have Cambiasso ahead of almost all defensive midfielders (with the exception of Essien I think)

PS...City are turd...Chelsea are also turd...my dad's harder than your's, i can run faster than you...just wanted to join in the City/Chelsea argument of the day

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 3:13 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

Probably a bitter red decided they weren't worthy of a place.

Just a copy/paste error I think.

Hopefully EE will listen to DD this time and stop talking 5hite. I doubt it though. He has been told before and refused to accept it. Last time he even came out of with 5hite that Chelsea were smaller than West Ham. That was until DD "rescued me" from the mauling that EE thought he was giving me.

Just a quick one...Can't resist.

You provided a list from an on-line messageboard with no reference. Hardly 'factual'. It was I who had to pioint it out to you that the figures were from 1947 onwards because I had seen that list previously. NB your list didn't tally up to teh one provided by DD, either. As far as I am aware, no one has presented any facts, simply limited, questionable data and anecdotal evidence.

The West Ham thing was a wind-up. I know West Ham are not particularly well supported. Especially as I live fairly close to West Ham heartland. I made your blood boil though, so that gave me a chuckle.

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 3:14 pm  

OrdsallRed wrote:

Inler is 25 (compared to Cambiasso's 28 ) so not much difference...he doesnt score anywhere near enough goals though...I'd definitely have Cambiasso ahead of almost all defensive midfielders (with the exception of Essien I think)

PS...City are turd...Chelsea are also turd...my dad's harder than your's, i can run faster than you...just wanted to join in the City/Chelsea argument of the day

Nice one. We never have Utd / LFC arguments do we?

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 3:54 pm  

Enfield Exile wrote:

Just don't respond to any of his posts. I avoided it for months and it wound him up.

I've got a thick skin so the personal abuse stuff, particularly when so badly expressed, tends not to bother me.

I think Terry would be a good signing for City but I'm certainly not desparate that we sign him. He has great leadership qualities but he's 29 not that quick and has a dodgy back. If he doesnt want to ask for a transfer or if Chelsea dont want to sell him then fair enough, it wouldnt be the end of the world.

Whether or not we sign him clearly impacts on which other players we buy. We would be buying him more for his leadership qualities rather than pure playing ability. If we dont sign him Hughes has to decide whether to look to make up that leadership deficit or buy someone such as Toure, a good player but not known as a leader.

One of Hughes's biggest problems will be to get the team to gel, particularly the defense. We could easily start the season with 5 or 6 new first team players. Fortunately we have a reasonably favourable early fixture list. We have the chance to collect some points and then go into the matches against Arsenal and United with a degree of confidense. But our season could be seriously undermined if we drop points against Bburn, Wolves and Pompey because we have a group of strangers at the back.

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 3:59 pm  

Enfield Exile wrote:

Just a quick one...Can't resist.

You provided a list from an on-line messageboard with no reference. Hardly 'factual'. It was I who had to pioint it out to you that the figures were from 1947 onwards because I had seen that list previously. NB your list didn't tally up to teh one provided by DD, either. As far as I am aware, no one has presented any facts, simply limited, questionable data and anecdotal evidence.

You say you've seen lists where Citeh are hugely supported and you can't even remember seeing Chelsea because they are so poorly supported. You don't provide any evidence of that.

I say that I've seen lists where Chelsea have a higher average than Citeh over the entire histories of the clubs. I provide a link to one quickly found on the net.

Sure, there may be slight discrepancies in the lists. The evidence wouldn't be accepted in a court, but the fact is that there has been evidence provided by me that supports my view. You just make claims and that's it.

The West Ham thing was a wind-up. I know West Ham are not particularly well supported. Especially as I live fairly close to West Ham heartland. I made your blood boil though, so that gave me a chuckle.

An easy troll get-out. You're proved wrong, so you say you were just joking all along. Fine if you want to admit doing that, but it just means that nothing you say is worth listening to, because no one will know if that's what you really think or are just going off on another sad troll trip.

And this all goes back to the only reason you could give for John Terry leaving Chelsea as being Citeh's superior support. As I said, even if it was true that Citeh had better support, it's a dreadful reason for any player to make a move. And seeing it is wrong, you obviously cannot think of any reason (beyond money) for John Terry to join your club.

Now go and cry because I've been mean to you.