|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGee, that was a tight match and Celtic should have killed it in the first half but wasted at least three chances. Rangers easily had the better second half and also butchered two clear chances. Hart made one cracking save. A classic game of two halves. So Celtic maintain a six point lead with three rounds and nine points up for grab for each side. Harry, i am 57 years old and can honestly say that this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league, ok may the 86 team was worse. Celtic are equal to or already have more points than most title winning sides over the last few years and have 3 games left to play. Not sure how you can possibly come to that conclusion. Celtic are winning this title because they’ve largely dominated the rest of the competition whilst Rangers went into sleep mode after the winter break. I do think Rangers have a more pacey/physical side that suits them for derby games, but their bad can be really awful, you don’t go from 6 points up to 6 points down if you aren’t dishing up crap. Rangers have ran over the top of Celtic twice now but both games had the same pattern, Celtic a goal up and missed sitters to bury Rangers before they could equalise. A lot of those players didn’t even do a pre season with Ange, they’re limping over the line, but the job is all but done. I suspect both sides will look different next season, I think a lot of the signings Ange made in a rush was just to try and be competitive and not finish 25 points behind again. I highly doubt he thought he was getting anywhere near the title at Christmas.
He did spend 25-30 million pounds TBF. And was it only Celtic that missed chances ? Actually, Celtic's net spend was £11.6m. Rangers was £12.6m and they were not in a position where they required a rebuild. They had won the 2020/21 title by 25 points. £12.6m on who for this season ? I didn't write they spent £12..6m . I said net . But, I made a mistake, It was actually £8.6 million. £6.3 incoming players, £14.9 million outgoing players. So they brought in £8.6m more than they spent. Celtic brought in £11.6m more than they spent. £26.4m paid £38m received. The Rangers money was spent on: Juninho Bacuna £4.8 m. Charlie McCann £.9 m. Mateuz Zujowkski £.6 m. 7 other players came in on a free or on loan. Source: Footballtransfers.com You might want to check the Juninho fee again, it seems you have made another mistake. Remember to state what teams actually spent on the individual transfer ,not the net, we are not accountant’s. Footballtransfers.com clearly displays the amount paid under paid. So you are saying they have got it wrong? "What teams actually spent on the individual transfer"? Where is that information disclosed? To get that you need to know the costs over and above the actual fee for an individual player. Who knows that other than the administrators in the club? I don't and neither do you. Celtic received €16.3 m for Edouard and €15.7 m for Ajer alone. They then spent 83.5% of those two fees on incomings. So the replacements cost them nothing, as did Rangers replacements. You made big deal of the money Celtic paid. So what? If you lose a player of a certain value then it makes sense to replace him with a player or players of similar value if you can afford it, assuming the money received reflects ability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGee, that was a tight match and Celtic should have killed it in the first half but wasted at least three chances. Rangers easily had the better second half and also butchered two clear chances. Hart made one cracking save. A classic game of two halves. So Celtic maintain a six point lead with three rounds and nine points up for grab for each side. Harry, i am 57 years old and can honestly say that this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league, ok may the 86 team was worse. Celtic are equal to or already have more points than most title winning sides over the last few years and have 3 games left to play. Not sure how you can possibly come to that conclusion. You guys just do not get it, forget all that shite. Rangers lost it, end of. WIFI password is all you need to know. Honest question , what do you make of teams outwith Rangers who visit Parkhead ? Yep, forget all the facts that demonstrate that this is, at worst, a good side that dispatches lesser sides with efficiency and has matched an alledgedly superior Rangers side all season. You didn't answer my question. How is this Celtic side the "Worst team ever" to win the title? Literally every measure I can think of suggests that is absurd. Read it again, and you will see that I said “ the worst team that I have seen “ . BTW, how many have you seen in the ONE season you have been watching ? Yes, I've read it. Hence my question, on what basis have you made that assertion? Saying Rangers bottled it might be somewhat true but it doesn't cut it when Celtic have amassed enough points to have one the league in almost any other season over the past decade. My opinion, that not enough for you. Europe for starters, no - oops, I just ate my own poop... gives a monkeys how they play against teams like Dundee that barely try against them. Most Scottish managers say the same thing, THe results against the old firm DON’T matter. What a load of tripe.
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGee, that was a tight match and Celtic should have killed it in the first half but wasted at least three chances. Rangers easily had the better second half and also butchered two clear chances. Hart made one cracking save. A classic game of two halves. So Celtic maintain a six point lead with three rounds and nine points up for grab for each side. Harry, i am 57 years old and can honestly say that this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league, ok may the 86 team was worse. Celtic are equal to or already have more points than most title winning sides over the last few years and have 3 games left to play. Not sure how you can possibly come to that conclusion. Celtic are winning this title because they’ve largely dominated the rest of the competition whilst Rangers went into sleep mode after the winter break. I do think Rangers have a more pacey/physical side that suits them for derby games, but their bad can be really awful, you don’t go from 6 points up to 6 points down if you aren’t dishing up crap. Rangers have ran over the top of Celtic twice now but both games had the same pattern, Celtic a goal up and missed sitters to bury Rangers before they could equalise. A lot of those players didn’t even do a pre season with Ange, they’re limping over the line, but the job is all but done. I suspect both sides will look different next season, I think a lot of the signings Ange made in a rush was just to try and be competitive and not finish 25 points behind again. I highly doubt he thought he was getting anywhere near the title at Christmas.
He did spend 25-30 million pounds TBF. And was it only Celtic that missed chances ? Actually, Celtic's net spend was £11.6m. Rangers was £12.6m and they were not in a position where they required a rebuild. They had won the 2020/21 title by 25 points. £12.6m on who for this season ? I didn't write they spent £12..6m . I said net . But, I made a mistake, It was actually £8.6 million. £6.3 incoming players, £14.9 million outgoing players. So they brought in £8.6m more than they spent. Celtic brought in £11.6m more than they spent. £26.4m paid £38m received. The Rangers money was spent on: Juninho Bacuna £4.8 m. Charlie McCann £.9 m. Mateuz Zujowkski £.6 m. 7 other players came in on a free or on loan. Source: Footballtransfers.com You might want to check the Juninho fee again, it seems you have made another mistake. Remember to state what teams actually spent on the individual transfer ,not the net, we are not accountant’s. Footballtransfers.com clearly displays the amount paid under paid. So you are saying they have got it wrong? "What teams actually spent on the individual transfer"? Where is that information disclosed? To get that you need to know the costs over and above the actual fee for an individual player. Who knows that other than the administrators in the club? I don't and neither do you. Celtic received €16.3 m for Edouard and €15.7 m for Ajer alone. They then spent 83.5% of those two fees on incomings. So the replacements cost them nothing, as did Rangers replacements. You made big deal of the money Celtic paid. So what? If you lose a player of a certain value then it makes sense to replace him with a player or players of similar value if you can afford it, assuming the money received reflects ability. You were clearly wrong on the Juninho fee. You are starting to ramble on like "Bunch of hacks " with your "net "spends. Not important to supporters like me.
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGee, that was a tight match and Celtic should have killed it in the first half but wasted at least three chances. Rangers easily had the better second half and also butchered two clear chances. Hart made one cracking save. A classic game of two halves. So Celtic maintain a six point lead with three rounds and nine points up for grab for each side. Harry, i am 57 years old and can honestly say that this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league, ok may the 86 team was worse. Celtic are equal to or already have more points than most title winning sides over the last few years and have 3 games left to play. Not sure how you can possibly come to that conclusion. You guys just do not get it, forget all that shite. Rangers lost it, end of. WIFI password is all you need to know. Honest question , what do you make of teams outwith Rangers who visit Parkhead ? Yep, forget all the facts that demonstrate that this is, at worst, a good side that dispatches lesser sides with efficiency and has matched an alledgedly superior Rangers side all season. You didn't answer my question. How is this Celtic side the "Worst team ever" to win the title? Literally every measure I can think of suggests that is absurd. Read it again, and you will see that I said “ the worst team that I have seen “ . BTW, how many have you seen in the ONE season you have been watching ? Yes, I've read it. Hence my question, on what basis have you made that assertion? Saying Rangers bottled it might be somewhat true but it doesn't cut it when Celtic have amassed enough points to have one the league in almost any other season over the past decade. My opinion, that not enough for you. Europe for starters, no - oops, I just ate my own poop... gives a monkeys how they play against teams like Dundee that barely try against them. Most Scottish managers say the same thing, THe results against the old firm DON’T matter. What a load of tripe. You stick with St Mirren. So a team that conceded the most goals in the group stages for the second year running ,then get pumped out of the conference by a team no one had heard of before are a good team ? Europe is where we were told you are judged on when we did 9 in a row in the nineties. Does this apply anymore ?
|
|
|
|
|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGee, that was a tight match and Celtic should have killed it in the first half but wasted at least three chances. Rangers easily had the better second half and also butchered two clear chances. Hart made one cracking save. A classic game of two halves. So Celtic maintain a six point lead with three rounds and nine points up for grab for each side. Harry, i am 57 years old and can honestly say that this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league, ok may the 86 team was worse. Celtic are equal to or already have more points than most title winning sides over the last few years and have 3 games left to play. Not sure how you can possibly come to that conclusion. Celtic are winning this title because they’ve largely dominated the rest of the competition whilst Rangers went into sleep mode after the winter break. I do think Rangers have a more pacey/physical side that suits them for derby games, but their bad can be really awful, you don’t go from 6 points up to 6 points down if you aren’t dishing up crap. Rangers have ran over the top of Celtic twice now but both games had the same pattern, Celtic a goal up and missed sitters to bury Rangers before they could equalise. A lot of those players didn’t even do a pre season with Ange, they’re limping over the line, but the job is all but done. I suspect both sides will look different next season, I think a lot of the signings Ange made in a rush was just to try and be competitive and not finish 25 points behind again. I highly doubt he thought he was getting anywhere near the title at Christmas.
He did spend 25-30 million pounds TBF. And was it only Celtic that missed chances ? Actually, Celtic's net spend was £11.6m. Rangers was £12.6m and they were not in a position where they required a rebuild. They had won the 2020/21 title by 25 points. £12.6m on who for this season ? I didn't write they spent £12..6m . I said net . But, I made a mistake, It was actually £8.6 million. £6.3 incoming players, £14.9 million outgoing players. So they brought in £8.6m more than they spent. Celtic brought in £11.6m more than they spent. £26.4m paid £38m received. The Rangers money was spent on: Juninho Bacuna £4.8 m. Charlie McCann £.9 m. Mateuz Zujowkski £.6 m. 7 other players came in on a free or on loan. Source: Footballtransfers.com You might want to check the Juninho fee again, it seems you have made another mistake. Remember to state what teams actually spent on the individual transfer ,not the net, we are not accountant’s. Footballtransfers.com clearly displays the amount paid under paid. So you are saying they have got it wrong? "What teams actually spent on the individual transfer"? Where is that information disclosed? To get that you need to know the costs over and above the actual fee for an individual player. Who knows that other than the administrators in the club? I don't and neither do you. Celtic received €16.3 m for Edouard and €15.7 m for Ajer alone. They then spent 83.5% of those two fees on incomings. So the replacements cost them nothing, as did Rangers replacements. You made big deal of the money Celtic paid. So what? If you lose a player of a certain value then it makes sense to replace him with a player or players of similar value if you can afford it, assuming the money received reflects ability. You were clearly wrong on the Juninho fee. You are starting to ramble on like "Bunch of hacks " with your "net "spends. Not important to supporters like me. So you say. As I said the figure is as per the quoted sources website and I would believe them before I believe you. Net spends not important? LOL you are as fiscally ignorant as the administrators of the skint team you follow.
|
|
|
|
|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGee, that was a tight match and Celtic should have killed it in the first half but wasted at least three chances. Rangers easily had the better second half and also butchered two clear chances. Hart made one cracking save. A classic game of two halves. So Celtic maintain a six point lead with three rounds and nine points up for grab for each side. Harry, i am 57 years old and can honestly say that this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league, ok may the 86 team was worse. Celtic are equal to or already have more points than most title winning sides over the last few years and have 3 games left to play. Not sure how you can possibly come to that conclusion. You guys just do not get it, forget all that shite. Rangers lost it, end of. WIFI password is all you need to know. Honest question , what do you make of teams outwith Rangers who visit Parkhead ? Yep, forget all the facts that demonstrate that this is, at worst, a good side that dispatches lesser sides with efficiency and has matched an alledgedly superior Rangers side all season. You didn't answer my question. How is this Celtic side the "Worst team ever" to win the title? Literally every measure I can think of suggests that is absurd. Read it again, and you will see that I said “ the worst team that I have seen “ . BTW, how many have you seen in the ONE season you have been watching ? Yes, I've read it. Hence my question, on what basis have you made that assertion? Saying Rangers bottled it might be somewhat true but it doesn't cut it when Celtic have amassed enough points to have one the league in almost any other season over the past decade. My opinion, that not enough for you. Europe for starters, no - oops, I just ate my own poop... gives a monkeys how they play against teams like Dundee that barely try against them. Most Scottish managers say the same thing, THe results against the old firm DON’T matter. What a load of tripe. You stick with St Mirren. So a team that conceded the most goals in the group stages for the second year running ,then get pumped out of the conference by a team no one had heard of before are a good team ? Europe is where we were told you are judged on when we did 9 in a row in the nineties. Does this apply anymore ? Why? So far this season Celtic have scored 10 more goals than Sevco and conceded 9 fewer. That suggests both a better attack and a better defence. Both are decent teams. Their home competition is the SPL and to say "this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league" is nonsense. If you don't perform at home you don't get the chance to play in Europe. Before you bring up Bodo Glimt, have you forgotten about Rangers v that part time powerhouse from Luxemborg, Progres Niederkorn This year in the Europa League Group Stage: Rangers Played 6 Won 2 Drew 1 Lost 2 Points 8 Celtic Played 6 Won 3 Lost 3 Points 9 Celtic had a stronger group than Rangers. Rangers Group European Rankings: 33 Rangers 41 Lyon 71 Sparta Prague 307 Brondby Celtic Group European Rankings: 24 Leverkusen 34 Real Betis 45 Celtic 112 Ferencvaros Hail hail.
|
|
|
|
|
theFOOTBALLlover
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGee, that was a tight match and Celtic should have killed it in the first half but wasted at least three chances. Rangers easily had the better second half and also butchered two clear chances. Hart made one cracking save. A classic game of two halves. So Celtic maintain a six point lead with three rounds and nine points up for grab for each side. Harry, i am 57 years old and can honestly say that this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league, ok may the 86 team was worse. Celtic are equal to or already have more points than most title winning sides over the last few years and have 3 games left to play. Not sure how you can possibly come to that conclusion. You guys just do not get it, forget all that shite. Rangers lost it, end of. WIFI password is all you need to know. Honest question , what do you make of teams outwith Rangers who visit Parkhead ? Yep, forget all the facts that demonstrate that this is, at worst, a good side that dispatches lesser sides with efficiency and has matched an alledgedly superior Rangers side all season. You didn't answer my question. How is this Celtic side the "Worst team ever" to win the title? Literally every measure I can think of suggests that is absurd. Read it again, and you will see that I said “ the worst team that I have seen “ . BTW, how many have you seen in the ONE season you have been watching ? Yes, I've read it. Hence my question, on what basis have you made that assertion? Saying Rangers bottled it might be somewhat true but it doesn't cut it when Celtic have amassed enough points to have one the league in almost any other season over the past decade. My opinion, that not enough for you. Europe for starters, no - oops, I just ate my own poop... gives a monkeys how they play against teams like Dundee that barely try against them. Most Scottish managers say the same thing, THe results against the old firm DON’T matter. What a load of tripe. You stick with St Mirren. So a team that conceded the most goals in the group stages for the second year running ,then get pumped out of the conference by a team no one had heard of before are a good team ? Europe is where we were told you are judged on when we did 9 in a row in the nineties. Does this apply anymore ? Why? So far this season Celtic have scored 10 more goals than Sevco and conceded 9 fewer. That suggests both a better attack and a better defence. Both are decent teams. Their home competition is the SPL and to say "this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league" is nonsense. If you don't perform at home you don't get the chance to play in Europe. Before you bring up Bodo Glimt, have you forgotten about Rangers v that part time powerhouse from Luxemborg, Progres Niederkorn This year in the Europa League Group Stage: Rangers Played 6 Won 2 Drew 1 Lost 2 Points 8 Celtic Played 6 Won 3 Lost 3 Points 9 Celtic had a stronger group than Rangers. Rangers Group European Rankings: 33 Rangers 41 Lyon 71 Sparta Prague 307 Brondby Celtic Group European Rankings: 24 Leverkusen 34 Real Betis 45 Celtic 112 Ferencvaros Hail hail. Love the use of stats.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
Too funny :) 
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGee, that was a tight match and Celtic should have killed it in the first half but wasted at least three chances. Rangers easily had the better second half and also butchered two clear chances. Hart made one cracking save. A classic game of two halves. So Celtic maintain a six point lead with three rounds and nine points up for grab for each side. Harry, i am 57 years old and can honestly say that this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league, ok may the 86 team was worse. Celtic are equal to or already have more points than most title winning sides over the last few years and have 3 games left to play. Not sure how you can possibly come to that conclusion. You guys just do not get it, forget all that shite. Rangers lost it, end of. WIFI password is all you need to know. Honest question , what do you make of teams outwith Rangers who visit Parkhead ? Yep, forget all the facts that demonstrate that this is, at worst, a good side that dispatches lesser sides with efficiency and has matched an alledgedly superior Rangers side all season. You didn't answer my question. How is this Celtic side the "Worst team ever" to win the title? Literally every measure I can think of suggests that is absurd. Read it again, and you will see that I said “ the worst team that I have seen “ . BTW, how many have you seen in the ONE season you have been watching ? Yes, I've read it. Hence my question, on what basis have you made that assertion? Saying Rangers bottled it might be somewhat true but it doesn't cut it when Celtic have amassed enough points to have one the league in almost any other season over the past decade. My opinion, that not enough for you. Europe for starters, no - oops, I just ate my own poop... gives a monkeys how they play against teams like Dundee that barely try against them. Most Scottish managers say the same thing, THe results against the old firm DON’T matter. What a load of tripe. You stick with St Mirren. So a team that conceded the most goals in the group stages for the second year running ,then get pumped out of the conference by a team no one had heard of before are a good team ? Europe is where we were told you are judged on when we did 9 in a row in the nineties. Does this apply anymore ? Why? So far this season Celtic have scored 10 more goals than Sevco and conceded 9 fewer. That suggests both a better attack and a better defence. Both are decent teams. Their home competition is the SPL and to say "this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league" is nonsense. If you don't perform at home you don't get the chance to play in Europe. Before you bring up Bodo Glimt, have you forgotten about Rangers v that part time powerhouse from Luxemborg, Progres Niederkorn This year in the Europa League Group Stage: Rangers Played 6 Won 2 Drew 1 Lost 2 Points 8 Celtic Played 6 Won 3 Lost 3 Points 9 Celtic had a stronger group than Rangers. Rangers Group European Rankings: 33 Rangers 41 Lyon 71 Sparta Prague 307 Brondby Celtic Group European Rankings: 24 Leverkusen 34 Real Betis 45 Celtic 112 Ferencvaros Hail hail. Fail fail, you gout humped out of THREE European competitions in one season, Meanwhile we awit the the second leg of a semi final on Friday morning. BTW , did that Sparta Prague covid hit XI not knock EIGHT past you last season ?
|
|
|
|
|
Lurker
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 810,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGee, that was a tight match and Celtic should have killed it in the first half but wasted at least three chances. Rangers easily had the better second half and also butchered two clear chances. Hart made one cracking save. A classic game of two halves. So Celtic maintain a six point lead with three rounds and nine points up for grab for each side. Harry, i am 57 years old and can honestly say that this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league, ok may the 86 team was worse. Celtic are equal to or already have more points than most title winning sides over the last few years and have 3 games left to play. Not sure how you can possibly come to that conclusion. You guys just do not get it, forget all that shite. Rangers lost it, end of. WIFI password is all you need to know. Honest question , what do you make of teams outwith Rangers who visit Parkhead ? Yep, forget all the facts that demonstrate that this is, at worst, a good side that dispatches lesser sides with efficiency and has matched an alledgedly superior Rangers side all season. You didn't answer my question. How is this Celtic side the "Worst team ever" to win the title? Literally every measure I can think of suggests that is absurd. Read it again, and you will see that I said “ the worst team that I have seen “ . BTW, how many have you seen in the ONE season you have been watching ? Yes, I've read it. Hence my question, on what basis have you made that assertion? Saying Rangers bottled it might be somewhat true but it doesn't cut it when Celtic have amassed enough points to have one the league in almost any other season over the past decade. My opinion, that not enough for you. Europe for starters, no - oops, I just ate my own poop... gives a monkeys how they play against teams like Dundee that barely try against them. Most Scottish managers say the same thing, THe results against the old firm DON’T matter. What a load of tripe. You stick with St Mirren. So a team that conceded the most goals in the group stages for the second year running ,then get pumped out of the conference by a team no one had heard of before are a good team ? Europe is where we were told you are judged on when we did 9 in a row in the nineties. Does this apply anymore ? Why? So far this season Celtic have scored 10 more goals than Sevco and conceded 9 fewer. That suggests both a better attack and a better defence. Both are decent teams. Their home competition is the SPL and to say "this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league" is nonsense. If you don't perform at home you don't get the chance to play in Europe. Before you bring up Bodo Glimt, have you forgotten about Rangers v that part time powerhouse from Luxemborg, Progres Niederkorn This year in the Europa League Group Stage: Rangers Played 6 Won 2 Drew 1 Lost 2 Points 8 Celtic Played 6 Won 3 Lost 3 Points 9 Celtic had a stronger group than Rangers. Rangers Group European Rankings: 33 Rangers 41 Lyon 71 Sparta Prague 307 Brondby Celtic Group European Rankings: 24 Leverkusen 34 Real Betis 45 Celtic 112 Ferencvaros Hail hail. Fail fail, you gout humped out of THREE European competitions in one season, Meanwhile we awit the the second leg of a semi final on Friday morning. BTW , did that Sparta Prague covid hit XI not knock EIGHT past you last season ? Hardlly thumped out of it. The facts: Rangers finished 2nd by one point in the group stage over the two teams below them.scoring 6 goals and conceding 5. You finished 8 points behind Lyon. Celtic finished third by one point 6 points ahead of the team below it scoring 13 goals and conceding 15. Celtic was in a much stronger group. You go into the second game of the semi final having lost the first leg. Sure, you are at home but if Leipzig score first it is going to be a tough ask of you. it was a long time ago but, weren’t Rangers dispatched 6 1 and 6 3 by Eintracht Frankfurt in a European cup semi final. That is 12 4 on aggregate. And how embarrassed you must have been to finish bottom of your group with only 2 points in 2010. Have you forgotten that? .
|
|
|
|
|
BrisbaneBhoy
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.9K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGee, that was a tight match and Celtic should have killed it in the first half but wasted at least three chances. Rangers easily had the better second half and also butchered two clear chances. Hart made one cracking save. A classic game of two halves. So Celtic maintain a six point lead with three rounds and nine points up for grab for each side. Harry, i am 57 years old and can honestly say that this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league, ok may the 86 team was worse. Celtic are equal to or already have more points than most title winning sides over the last few years and have 3 games left to play. Not sure how you can possibly come to that conclusion. You guys just do not get it, forget all that shite. Rangers lost it, end of. WIFI password is all you need to know. Honest question , what do you make of teams outwith Rangers who visit Parkhead ? Yep, forget all the facts that demonstrate that this is, at worst, a good side that dispatches lesser sides with efficiency and has matched an alledgedly superior Rangers side all season. You didn't answer my question. How is this Celtic side the "Worst team ever" to win the title? Literally every measure I can think of suggests that is absurd. Read it again, and you will see that I said “ the worst team that I have seen “ . BTW, how many have you seen in the ONE season you have been watching ? Yes, I've read it. Hence my question, on what basis have you made that assertion? Saying Rangers bottled it might be somewhat true but it doesn't cut it when Celtic have amassed enough points to have one the league in almost any other season over the past decade. My opinion, that not enough for you. Europe for starters, no - oops, I just ate my own poop... gives a monkeys how they play against teams like Dundee that barely try against them. Most Scottish managers say the same thing, THe results against the old firm DON’T matter. What a load of tripe. You stick with St Mirren. So a team that conceded the most goals in the group stages for the second year running ,then get pumped out of the conference by a team no one had heard of before are a good team ? Europe is where we were told you are judged on when we did 9 in a row in the nineties. Does this apply anymore ? Why? So far this season Celtic have scored 10 more goals than Sevco and conceded 9 fewer. That suggests both a better attack and a better defence. Both are decent teams. Their home competition is the SPL and to say "this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league" is nonsense. If you don't perform at home you don't get the chance to play in Europe. Before you bring up Bodo Glimt, have you forgotten about Rangers v that part time powerhouse from Luxemborg, Progres Niederkorn This year in the Europa League Group Stage: Rangers Played 6 Won 2 Drew 1 Lost 2 Points 8 Celtic Played 6 Won 3 Lost 3 Points 9 Celtic had a stronger group than Rangers. Rangers Group European Rankings: 33 Rangers 41 Lyon 71 Sparta Prague 307 Brondby Celtic Group European Rankings: 24 Leverkusen 34 Real Betis 45 Celtic 112 Ferencvaros Hail hail. Fail fail, you gout humped out of THREE European competitions in one season, Meanwhile we awit the the second leg of a semi final on Friday morning. BTW , did that Sparta Prague covid hit XI not knock EIGHT past you last season ? Hardlly thumped out of it. The facts: Rangers finished 2nd by one point in the group stage over the two teams below them.scoring 6 goals and conceding 5. You finished 8 points behind Lyon. Celtic finished third by one point 6 points ahead of the team below it scoring 13 goals and conceding 15.Celtic was in a much stronger group. The defence (or lack of it in Celtic's case) tells the story, and all you need to know as to why we failed in Europe (all three competitions), and the other mob got it right. It's as simple as that. Also, it doesn't matter how many points you may have missed out by (be it by one or ten), because in the end, failing to progress is still failure to progress. It also doesn't matter what another team does in a different group. As for now, here's hoping that a team from Germany or London lifts the Cup come the Final.
🇮🇪Hail Hail🇮🇪
|
|
|
|
|
BrisbaneBhoy
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.9K,
Visits: 0
|
+xToo funny :) I used to take that upcoming off ramp in the photo as I used to live nearby. Ah the memories 😊
🇮🇪Hail Hail🇮🇪
|
|
|
|
|
LFC.
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGee, that was a tight match and Celtic should have killed it in the first half but wasted at least three chances. Rangers easily had the better second half and also butchered two clear chances. Hart made one cracking save. A classic game of two halves. So Celtic maintain a six point lead with three rounds and nine points up for grab for each side. Harry, i am 57 years old and can honestly say that this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league, ok may the 86 team was worse. Celtic are equal to or already have more points than most title winning sides over the last few years and have 3 games left to play. Not sure how you can possibly come to that conclusion. You guys just do not get it, forget all that shite. Rangers lost it, end of. WIFI password is all you need to know. Honest question , what do you make of teams outwith Rangers who visit Parkhead ? Yep, forget all the facts that demonstrate that this is, at worst, a good side that dispatches lesser sides with efficiency and has matched an alledgedly superior Rangers side all season. You didn't answer my question. How is this Celtic side the "Worst team ever" to win the title? Literally every measure I can think of suggests that is absurd. Read it again, and you will see that I said “ the worst team that I have seen “ . BTW, how many have you seen in the ONE season you have been watching ? Yes, I've read it. Hence my question, on what basis have you made that assertion? Saying Rangers bottled it might be somewhat true but it doesn't cut it when Celtic have amassed enough points to have one the league in almost any other season over the past decade. My opinion, that not enough for you. Europe for starters, no - oops, I just ate my own poop... gives a monkeys how they play against teams like Dundee that barely try against them. Most Scottish managers say the same thing, THe results against the old firm DON’T matter. What a load of tripe. You stick with St Mirren. So a team that conceded the most goals in the group stages for the second year running ,then get pumped out of the conference by a team no one had heard of before are a good team ? Europe is where we were told you are judged on when we did 9 in a row in the nineties. Does this apply anymore ? Why? So far this season Celtic have scored 10 more goals than Sevco and conceded 9 fewer. That suggests both a better attack and a better defence. Both are decent teams. Their home competition is the SPL and to say "this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league" is nonsense. If you don't perform at home you don't get the chance to play in Europe. Before you bring up Bodo Glimt, have you forgotten about Rangers v that part time powerhouse from Luxemborg, Progres Niederkorn This year in the Europa League Group Stage: Rangers Played 6 Won 2 Drew 1 Lost 2 Points 8 Celtic Played 6 Won 3 Lost 3 Points 9 Celtic had a stronger group than Rangers. Rangers Group European Rankings: 33 Rangers 41 Lyon 71 Sparta Prague 307 Brondby Celtic Group European Rankings: 24 Leverkusen 34 Real Betis 45 Celtic 112 Ferencvaros Hail hail. Fail fail, you gout humped out of THREE European competitions in one season, Meanwhile we awit the the second leg of a semi final on Friday morning. BTW , did that Sparta Prague covid hit XI not knock EIGHT past you last season ? Hardlly thumped out of it. The facts: Rangers finished 2nd by one point in the group stage over the two teams below them.scoring 6 goals and conceding 5. You finished 8 points behind Lyon. Celtic finished third by one point 6 points ahead of the team below it scoring 13 goals and conceding 15.Celtic was in a much stronger group. The defence (or lack of it in Celtic's case) tells the story, and all you need to know as to why we failed in Europe (all three competitions), and the other mob got it right. It's as simple as that. Also it doesn't matter how many points you may have missed out by (be it by one or ten), because in the end, failing to progress is still failure to progress. It also doesn't matter what another team does in a different group. As for now, here's hoping that a team from Germany or London lifts the Cup come the Final. Spot on BB, all the stats in world don't change the actual result. Like winning a game without much possesion and hardly a shot on goal but the 1 shot that counted come FT.
Love Football
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGee, that was a tight match and Celtic should have killed it in the first half but wasted at least three chances. Rangers easily had the better second half and also butchered two clear chances. Hart made one cracking save. A classic game of two halves. So Celtic maintain a six point lead with three rounds and nine points up for grab for each side. Harry, i am 57 years old and can honestly say that this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league, ok may the 86 team was worse. Celtic are equal to or already have more points than most title winning sides over the last few years and have 3 games left to play. Not sure how you can possibly come to that conclusion. You guys just do not get it, forget all that shite. Rangers lost it, end of. WIFI password is all you need to know. Honest question , what do you make of teams outwith Rangers who visit Parkhead ? Yep, forget all the facts that demonstrate that this is, at worst, a good side that dispatches lesser sides with efficiency and has matched an alledgedly superior Rangers side all season. You didn't answer my question. How is this Celtic side the "Worst team ever" to win the title? Literally every measure I can think of suggests that is absurd. Read it again, and you will see that I said “ the worst team that I have seen “ . BTW, how many have you seen in the ONE season you have been watching ? Yes, I've read it. Hence my question, on what basis have you made that assertion? Saying Rangers bottled it might be somewhat true but it doesn't cut it when Celtic have amassed enough points to have one the league in almost any other season over the past decade. My opinion, that not enough for you. Europe for starters, no - oops, I just ate my own poop... gives a monkeys how they play against teams like Dundee that barely try against them. Most Scottish managers say the same thing, THe results against the old firm DON’T matter. What a load of tripe. You stick with St Mirren. So a team that conceded the most goals in the group stages for the second year running ,then get pumped out of the conference by a team no one had heard of before are a good team ? Europe is where we were told you are judged on when we did 9 in a row in the nineties. Does this apply anymore ? Why? So far this season Celtic have scored 10 more goals than Sevco and conceded 9 fewer. That suggests both a better attack and a better defence. Both are decent teams. Their home competition is the SPL and to say "this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league" is nonsense. If you don't perform at home you don't get the chance to play in Europe. Before you bring up Bodo Glimt, have you forgotten about Rangers v that part time powerhouse from Luxemborg, Progres Niederkorn This year in the Europa League Group Stage: Rangers Played 6 Won 2 Drew 1 Lost 2 Points 8 Celtic Played 6 Won 3 Lost 3 Points 9 Celtic had a stronger group than Rangers. Rangers Group European Rankings: 33 Rangers 41 Lyon 71 Sparta Prague 307 Brondby Celtic Group European Rankings: 24 Leverkusen 34 Real Betis 45 Celtic 112 Ferencvaros Hail hail. Fail fail, you gout humped out of THREE European competitions in one season, Meanwhile we awit the the second leg of a semi final on Friday morning. BTW , did that Sparta Prague covid hit XI not knock EIGHT past you last season ? Hardlly thumped out of it. The facts: Rangers finished 2nd by one point in the group stage over the two teams below them.scoring 6 goals and conceding 5. You finished 8 points behind Lyon. Celtic finished third by one point 6 points ahead of the team below it scoring 13 goals and conceding 15. Celtic was in a much stronger group. You go into the second game of the semi final having lost the first leg. Sure, you are at home but if Leipzig score first it is going to be a tough ask of you. it was a long time ago but, weren’t Rangers dispatched 6 1 and 6 3 by Eintracht Frankfurt in a European cup semi final. That is 12 4 on aggregate. And how embarrassed you must have been to finish bottom of your group with only 2 points in 2010. Have you forgotten that? . You really are "Bunch of Hacks " aren't you ? Sorry, did you forget the 7-1 and 5-0 against PSG in 2017 ? Red Imps (1st leg under Brenda )?
|
|
|
|
|
CanberraHarry
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 0
|
I quite like this thread because it is focusses on Ange AND one of football’s greatest rivalries. I have grown to enjoy Scottish football this year (passion and style). Aside from having only been an occasional observer in previous seasons while watching or reading about the exploits of Mark Viduka, Craig Moore, Kevin Muscat or Tom Rogic, I have never really obsessed like I have this season about Scottish football. Some would call my support this season ‘plastic’ but I don’t care, I have had fun and appreciate Ange even more. He ain’t perfect or the best manager in the world but he is Australia’s best ever and now much more widely respected. I guess what has amused and at times annoyed me is the one-eyed bias and sometimes abject hatred that is like nothing else I have seen in football or other sports for that matter. There is no reason to it - i say this being reasonably well-read regarding the sectarian, economic, historical, social and cultural differences at play. Anyway, as a 52 year old man I wonder if any of the protagonists just get tired of the hate and/or can even acknowledge their own biases? Maybe or maybe not. There’s a well known phrase that politics is war by other means … so is Glasgow football it seems.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+xI quite like this thread because it is focusses on Ange AND one of football’s greatest rivalries. I have grown to enjoy Scottish football this year (passion and style). Aside from having only been an occasional observer in previous seasons while watching or reading about the exploits of Mark Viduka, Craig Moore, Kevin Muscat or Tom Rogic, I have never really obsessed like I have this season about Scottish football. Some would call my support this season ‘plastic’ but I don’t care, I have had fun and appreciate Ange even more. He ain’t perfect or the best manager in the world but he is Australia’s best ever and now much more widely respected. I guess what has amused and at times annoyed me is the one-eyed bias and sometimes abject hatred that is like nothing else I have seen in football or other sports for that matter. There is no reason to it - i say this being reasonably well-read regarding the sectarian, economic, historical, social and cultural differences at play. Anyway, as a 52 year old man I wonder if any of the protagonists just get tired of the hate and/or can even acknowledge their own biases? Maybe or maybe not. There’s a well known phrase that politics is war by other means … so is Glasgow football it seems. TBF to our Scottish pals Harry ALL football globally is "war by other means" its not just a Glasgow thing... 'Gers v Celts is certainly a spicy meatball but you dont have to look very far to find dozens of other equally vitriolic rivalries... Aleague and I guess the MLS are really the only countries I can think of that do vanilla rivalries...
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+xI quite like this thread because it is focusses on Ange AND one of football’s greatest rivalries. I have grown to enjoy Scottish football this year (passion and style). Aside from having only been an occasional observer in previous seasons while watching or reading about the exploits of Mark Viduka, Craig Moore, Kevin Muscat or Tom Rogic, I have never really obsessed like I have this season about Scottish football. Some would call my support this season ‘plastic’ but I don’t care, I have had fun and appreciate Ange even more. He ain’t perfect or the best manager in the world but he is Australia’s best ever and now much more widely respected. I guess what has amused and at times annoyed me is the one-eyed bias and sometimes abject hatred that is like nothing else I have seen in football or other sports for that matter. There is no reason to it - i say this being reasonably well-read regarding the sectarian, economic, historical, social and cultural differences at play. Anyway, as a 52 year old man I wonder if any of the protagonists just get tired of the hate and/or can even acknowledge their own biases? Maybe or maybe not. There’s a well known phrase that politics is war by other means … so is Glasgow football it seems. My hatred for them gets worse as i get older Harry, i know. The past 10 years has seen the hatred rise 10 fold in Glasgow. The internet certainly does not help.Trouble at the games is starting to return from both sides of the divide, not good at all. Still love it though .
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xI quite like this thread because it is focusses on Ange AND one of football’s greatest rivalries. I have grown to enjoy Scottish football this year (passion and style). Aside from having only been an occasional observer in previous seasons while watching or reading about the exploits of Mark Viduka, Craig Moore, Kevin Muscat or Tom Rogic, I have never really obsessed like I have this season about Scottish football. Some would call my support this season ‘plastic’ but I don’t care, I have had fun and appreciate Ange even more. He ain’t perfect or the best manager in the world but he is Australia’s best ever and now much more widely respected. I guess what has amused and at times annoyed me is the one-eyed bias and sometimes abject hatred that is like nothing else I have seen in football or other sports for that matter. There is no reason to it - i say this being reasonably well-read regarding the sectarian, economic, historical, social and cultural differences at play. Anyway, as a 52 year old man I wonder if any of the protagonists just get tired of the hate and/or can even acknowledge their own biases? Maybe or maybe not. There’s a well known phrase that politics is war by other means … so is Glasgow football it seems. TBF to our Scottish pals Harry ALL football globally is "war by other means" its not just a Glasgow thing... 'Gers v Celts is certainly a spicy meatball but you dont have to look very far to find dozens of other equally vitriolic rivalries... Aleague and I guess the MLS are really the only countries I can think of that do vanilla rivalries... On your "vanilla rivalries " in AU & the USA, it is only right to point out that National leagues in both countries never started until 1977 in AU and 1978 in the USA. So a long way behind the British for example who started national football leagues in the 1800's.
|
|
|
|
|
BrisbaneBhoy
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.9K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xI quite like this thread because it is focusses on Ange AND one of football’s greatest rivalries. I have grown to enjoy Scottish football this year (passion and style). Aside from having only been an occasional observer in previous seasons while watching or reading about the exploits of Mark Viduka, Craig Moore, Kevin Muscat or Tom Rogic, I have never really obsessed like I have this season about Scottish football. Some would call my support this season ‘plastic’ but I don’t care, I have had fun and appreciate Ange even more. He ain’t perfect or the best manager in the world but he is Australia’s best ever and now much more widely respected. I guess what has amused and at times annoyed me is the one-eyed bias and sometimes abject hatred that is like nothing else I have seen in football or other sports for that matter. There is no reason to it - i say this being reasonably well-read regarding the sectarian, economic, historical, social and cultural differences at play. Anyway, as a 52 year old man I wonder if any of the protagonists just get tired of the hate and/or can even acknowledge their own biases? Maybe or maybe not. There’s a well known phrase that politics is war by other means … so is Glasgow football it seems. TBF to our Scottish pals Harry ALL football globally is "war by other means" its not just a Glasgow thing... 'Gers v Celts is certainly a spicy meatball but you dont have to look very far to find dozens of other equally vitriolic rivalries... Aleague and I guess the MLS are really the only countries I can think of that do vanilla rivalries... On your "vanilla rivalries " in AU & the USA, it is only right to point out that National leagues in both countries never started until 1977 in AU and 1978 in the USA. So a long way behind the British for example who started national football leagues in the 1800's. Very much this. I can only speak from a Brisbane POV... The early years of the A-League the "hatred" towards the likes of Sydney and the Gold Coast (when they were a thing) felt very much forced/commercially manufactured, rather than something natural. The strange thing being it was mostly coming from the scarfers, and not the casuals, which was both funny and odd at the same time. I have enjoyed some of the atmosphere from the old world clubs, even if they lack the numbers. Proper rivalries (regardless of type) takes time to build. It's not something that can be manufactured or forced (IMO).
🇮🇪Hail Hail🇮🇪
|
|
|
|
|
Kamaryn
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xI quite like this thread because it is focusses on Ange AND one of football’s greatest rivalries. I have grown to enjoy Scottish football this year (passion and style). Aside from having only been an occasional observer in previous seasons while watching or reading about the exploits of Mark Viduka, Craig Moore, Kevin Muscat or Tom Rogic, I have never really obsessed like I have this season about Scottish football. Some would call my support this season ‘plastic’ but I don’t care, I have had fun and appreciate Ange even more. He ain’t perfect or the best manager in the world but he is Australia’s best ever and now much more widely respected. I guess what has amused and at times annoyed me is the one-eyed bias and sometimes abject hatred that is like nothing else I have seen in football or other sports for that matter. There is no reason to it - i say this being reasonably well-read regarding the sectarian, economic, historical, social and cultural differences at play. Anyway, as a 52 year old man I wonder if any of the protagonists just get tired of the hate and/or can even acknowledge their own biases? Maybe or maybe not. There’s a well known phrase that politics is war by other means … so is Glasgow football it seems. TBF to our Scottish pals Harry ALL football globally is "war by other means" its not just a Glasgow thing... 'Gers v Celts is certainly a spicy meatball but you dont have to look very far to find dozens of other equally vitriolic rivalries... Aleague and I guess the MLS are really the only countries I can think of that do vanilla rivalries... On your "vanilla rivalries " in AU & the USA, it is only right to point out that National leagues in both countries never started until 1977 in AU and 1978 in the USA. So a long way behind the British for example who started national football leagues in the 1800's. Meh. I love football, but I'm happy to have vanilla rivalries. It is only a game at the end of the day. I think it's pathetic when people don't just love their team, but hate rivals and enjoy watching others suffer - all for a sport.
|
|
|
|
|
CanberraHarry
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xI quite like this thread because it is focusses on Ange AND one of football’s greatest rivalries. I have grown to enjoy Scottish football this year (passion and style). Aside from having only been an occasional observer in previous seasons while watching or reading about the exploits of Mark Viduka, Craig Moore, Kevin Muscat or Tom Rogic, I have never really obsessed like I have this season about Scottish football. Some would call my support this season ‘plastic’ but I don’t care, I have had fun and appreciate Ange even more. He ain’t perfect or the best manager in the world but he is Australia’s best ever and now much more widely respected. I guess what has amused and at times annoyed me is the one-eyed bias and sometimes abject hatred that is like nothing else I have seen in football or other sports for that matter. There is no reason to it - i say this being reasonably well-read regarding the sectarian, economic, historical, social and cultural differences at play. Anyway, as a 52 year old man I wonder if any of the protagonists just get tired of the hate and/or can even acknowledge their own biases? Maybe or maybe not. There’s a well known phrase that politics is war by other means … so is Glasgow football it seems. My hatred for them gets worse as i get older Harry, i know. The past 10 years has seen the hatred rise 10 fold in Glasgow. The internet certainly does not help.Trouble at the games is starting to return from both sides of the divide, not good at all. Still love it though . SB, I reckon you are onto something with the Internet observation. We are all exposed to instant information and can also spew our own views out instantly and it is a remedy for even more discontent than normal. We are an angry opinionated world. It actually bothers me but I know I can’t change it. Anyway, good luck to Rangers Friday morning.
|
|
|
|
|
CanberraHarry
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xI quite like this thread because it is focusses on Ange AND one of football’s greatest rivalries. I have grown to enjoy Scottish football this year (passion and style). Aside from having only been an occasional observer in previous seasons while watching or reading about the exploits of Mark Viduka, Craig Moore, Kevin Muscat or Tom Rogic, I have never really obsessed like I have this season about Scottish football. Some would call my support this season ‘plastic’ but I don’t care, I have had fun and appreciate Ange even more. He ain’t perfect or the best manager in the world but he is Australia’s best ever and now much more widely respected. I guess what has amused and at times annoyed me is the one-eyed bias and sometimes abject hatred that is like nothing else I have seen in football or other sports for that matter. There is no reason to it - i say this being reasonably well-read regarding the sectarian, economic, historical, social and cultural differences at play. Anyway, as a 52 year old man I wonder if any of the protagonists just get tired of the hate and/or can even acknowledge their own biases? Maybe or maybe not. There’s a well known phrase that politics is war by other means … so is Glasgow football it seems. TBF to our Scottish pals Harry ALL football globally is "war by other means" its not just a Glasgow thing... 'Gers v Celts is certainly a spicy meatball but you dont have to look very far to find dozens of other equally vitriolic rivalries... Aleague and I guess the MLS are really the only countries I can think of that do vanilla rivalries... Fair points MSC! I know some of the ultras in some places can be very nasty. But I question whether that passes a point of even being related to football. Anyway, yes, there are many downright nasty rivalries. While I would love Australian football to have more passion and more money and more mainstream media, I don’t regret the absence of this type of nastiness. And to be fair, some of the banter of Celtic and Rangers fans is funny and well intentioned and plenty of people have friends from the other side, so it isn’t all at the nasty and senseless end.
|
|
|
|
|
BrisbaneBhoy
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.9K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xI quite like this thread because it is focusses on Ange AND one of football’s greatest rivalries. I have grown to enjoy Scottish football this year (passion and style). Aside from having only been an occasional observer in previous seasons while watching or reading about the exploits of Mark Viduka, Craig Moore, Kevin Muscat or Tom Rogic, I have never really obsessed like I have this season about Scottish football. Some would call my support this season ‘plastic’ but I don’t care, I have had fun and appreciate Ange even more. He ain’t perfect or the best manager in the world but he is Australia’s best ever and now much more widely respected. I guess what has amused and at times annoyed me is the one-eyed bias and sometimes abject hatred that is like nothing else I have seen in football or other sports for that matter. There is no reason to it - i say this being reasonably well-read regarding the sectarian, economic, historical, social and cultural differences at play. Anyway, as a 52 year old man I wonder if any of the protagonists just get tired of the hate and/or can even acknowledge their own biases? Maybe or maybe not. There’s a well known phrase that politics is war by other means … so is Glasgow football it seems. My hatred for them gets worse as i get older Harry, i know. The past 10 years has seen the hatred rise 10 fold in Glasgow. The internet certainly does not help.Trouble at the games is starting to return from both sides of the divide, not good at all. Still love it though . SB, I reckon you are onto something with the Internet observation. We are all exposed to instant information and can also spew our own views out instantly and it is a remedy for even more discontent than normal. We are an angry opinionated world. It actually bothers me but I know I can’t change it. Anyway, good luck to Rangers RB Leipzig Friday morning. Fixed it for you 😉
🇮🇪Hail Hail🇮🇪
|
|
|
|
|
BrisbaneBhoy
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.9K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xI quite like this thread because it is focusses on Ange AND one of football’s greatest rivalries. I have grown to enjoy Scottish football this year (passion and style). Aside from having only been an occasional observer in previous seasons while watching or reading about the exploits of Mark Viduka, Craig Moore, Kevin Muscat or Tom Rogic, I have never really obsessed like I have this season about Scottish football. Some would call my support this season ‘plastic’ but I don’t care, I have had fun and appreciate Ange even more. He ain’t perfect or the best manager in the world but he is Australia’s best ever and now much more widely respected. I guess what has amused and at times annoyed me is the one-eyed bias and sometimes abject hatred that is like nothing else I have seen in football or other sports for that matter. There is no reason to it - i say this being reasonably well-read regarding the sectarian, economic, historical, social and cultural differences at play. Anyway, as a 52 year old man I wonder if any of the protagonists just get tired of the hate and/or can even acknowledge their own biases? Maybe or maybe not. There’s a well known phrase that politics is war by other means … so is Glasgow football it seems. TBF to our Scottish pals Harry ALL football globally is "war by other means" its not just a Glasgow thing... 'Gers v Celts is certainly a spicy meatball but you dont have to look very far to find dozens of other equally vitriolic rivalries... Aleague and I guess the MLS are really the only countries I can think of that do vanilla rivalries... Fair points MSC! I know some of the ultras in some places can be very nasty. But I question whether that passes a point of even being related to football. Anyway, yes, there are many downright nasty rivalries. While I would love Australian football to have more passion and more money and more mainstream media, I don’t regret the absence of this type of nastiness. And to be fair, some of the banter of Celtic and Rangers fans is funny and well intentioned and plenty of people have friends from the other side, so it isn’t all at the nasty and senseless end. There are definitely those who have other agendas, and use football as a tool for said agendas. But there are some who are just that extreme when it comes to their respective team and/or rival. There is a reason for the use of the term "Tribalism" when it comes to football and it's supporters.
🇮🇪Hail Hail🇮🇪
|
|
|
|
|
huddo
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xI quite like this thread because it is focusses on Ange AND one of football’s greatest rivalries. I have grown to enjoy Scottish football this year (passion and style). Aside from having only been an occasional observer in previous seasons while watching or reading about the exploits of Mark Viduka, Craig Moore, Kevin Muscat or Tom Rogic, I have never really obsessed like I have this season about Scottish football. Some would call my support this season ‘plastic’ but I don’t care, I have had fun and appreciate Ange even more. He ain’t perfect or the best manager in the world but he is Australia’s best ever and now much more widely respected. I guess what has amused and at times annoyed me is the one-eyed bias and sometimes abject hatred that is like nothing else I have seen in football or other sports for that matter. There is no reason to it - i say this being reasonably well-read regarding the sectarian, economic, historical, social and cultural differences at play. Anyway, as a 52 year old man I wonder if any of the protagonists just get tired of the hate and/or can even acknowledge their own biases? Maybe or maybe not. There’s a well known phrase that politics is war by other means … so is Glasgow football it seems. TBF to our Scottish pals Harry ALL football globally is "war by other means" its not just a Glasgow thing... 'Gers v Celts is certainly a spicy meatball but you dont have to look very far to find dozens of other equally vitriolic rivalries... Aleague and I guess the MLS are really the only countries I can think of that do vanilla rivalries... On your "vanilla rivalries " in AU & the USA, it is only right to point out that National leagues in both countries never started until 1977 in AU and 1978 in the USA. So a long way behind the British for example who started national football leagues in the 1800's. What the fuck are you on about, AFC Wimbledon was established in 2002 there part of one of the biggest rivalries in the UK lower leagues, the time involved in the league has nothing to do with the animosity in a rivalry. As for vanilla rivalries dunno what you are talking about???Crystal Palace literally has a vanilla rivalry with every other club from London. Why are eurosnobs so insecure about their own leagues that that they feel a need to try and talk down emerging and development leagues? Literally a coach from one of these emerging leagues just made the spfl his bitch.
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xI quite like this thread because it is focusses on Ange AND one of football’s greatest rivalries. I have grown to enjoy Scottish football this year (passion and style). Aside from having only been an occasional observer in previous seasons while watching or reading about the exploits of Mark Viduka, Craig Moore, Kevin Muscat or Tom Rogic, I have never really obsessed like I have this season about Scottish football. Some would call my support this season ‘plastic’ but I don’t care, I have had fun and appreciate Ange even more. He ain’t perfect or the best manager in the world but he is Australia’s best ever and now much more widely respected. I guess what has amused and at times annoyed me is the one-eyed bias and sometimes abject hatred that is like nothing else I have seen in football or other sports for that matter. There is no reason to it - i say this being reasonably well-read regarding the sectarian, economic, historical, social and cultural differences at play. Anyway, as a 52 year old man I wonder if any of the protagonists just get tired of the hate and/or can even acknowledge their own biases? Maybe or maybe not. There’s a well known phrase that politics is war by other means … so is Glasgow football it seems. TBF to our Scottish pals Harry ALL football globally is "war by other means" its not just a Glasgow thing... 'Gers v Celts is certainly a spicy meatball but you dont have to look very far to find dozens of other equally vitriolic rivalries... Aleague and I guess the MLS are really the only countries I can think of that do vanilla rivalries... On your "vanilla rivalries " in AU & the USA, it is only right to point out that National leagues in both countries never started until 1977 in AU and 1978 in the USA. So a long way behind the British for example who started national football leagues in the 1800's. What the fuck are you on about, AFC Wimbledon was established in 2002 there part of one of the biggest rivalries in the UK lower leagues, the time involved in the league has nothing to do with the animosity in a rivalry. As for vanilla rivalries dunno what you are talking about???Crystal Palace literally has a vanilla rivalry with every other club from London. Why are eurosnobs so insecure about their own leagues that that they feel a need to try and talk down emerging and development leagues? Literally a coach from one of these emerging leagues just made the spfl his bitch. You mean "re established surely ? Vanilla rivarly is from Mono, not me.
|
|
|
|
|
CanberraHarry
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xI quite like this thread because it is focusses on Ange AND one of football’s greatest rivalries. I have grown to enjoy Scottish football this year (passion and style). Aside from having only been an occasional observer in previous seasons while watching or reading about the exploits of Mark Viduka, Craig Moore, Kevin Muscat or Tom Rogic, I have never really obsessed like I have this season about Scottish football. Some would call my support this season ‘plastic’ but I don’t care, I have had fun and appreciate Ange even more. He ain’t perfect or the best manager in the world but he is Australia’s best ever and now much more widely respected. I guess what has amused and at times annoyed me is the one-eyed bias and sometimes abject hatred that is like nothing else I have seen in football or other sports for that matter. There is no reason to it - i say this being reasonably well-read regarding the sectarian, economic, historical, social and cultural differences at play. Anyway, as a 52 year old man I wonder if any of the protagonists just get tired of the hate and/or can even acknowledge their own biases? Maybe or maybe not. There’s a well known phrase that politics is war by other means … so is Glasgow football it seems. TBF to our Scottish pals Harry ALL football globally is "war by other means" its not just a Glasgow thing... 'Gers v Celts is certainly a spicy meatball but you dont have to look very far to find dozens of other equally vitriolic rivalries... Aleague and I guess the MLS are really the only countries I can think of that do vanilla rivalries... Fair points MSC! I know some of the ultras in some places can be very nasty. But I question whether that passes a point of even being related to football. Anyway, yes, there are many downright nasty rivalries. While I would love Australian football to have more passion and more money and more mainstream media, I don’t regret the absence of this type of nastiness. And to be fair, some of the banter of Celtic and Rangers fans is funny and well intentioned and plenty of people have friends from the other side, so it isn’t all at the nasty and senseless end. There are definitely those who have other agendas, and use football as a tool for said agendas. But there are some who are just that extreme when it comes to their respective team and/or rival. There is a reason for the use of the term "Tribalism" when it comes to football and it's supporters. That’s true!
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xI quite like this thread because it is focusses on Ange AND one of football’s greatest rivalries. I have grown to enjoy Scottish football this year (passion and style). Aside from having only been an occasional observer in previous seasons while watching or reading about the exploits of Mark Viduka, Craig Moore, Kevin Muscat or Tom Rogic, I have never really obsessed like I have this season about Scottish football. Some would call my support this season ‘plastic’ but I don’t care, I have had fun and appreciate Ange even more. He ain’t perfect or the best manager in the world but he is Australia’s best ever and now much more widely respected. I guess what has amused and at times annoyed me is the one-eyed bias and sometimes abject hatred that is like nothing else I have seen in football or other sports for that matter. There is no reason to it - i say this being reasonably well-read regarding the sectarian, economic, historical, social and cultural differences at play. Anyway, as a 52 year old man I wonder if any of the protagonists just get tired of the hate and/or can even acknowledge their own biases? Maybe or maybe not. There’s a well known phrase that politics is war by other means … so is Glasgow football it seems. TBF to our Scottish pals Harry ALL football globally is "war by other means" its not just a Glasgow thing... 'Gers v Celts is certainly a spicy meatball but you dont have to look very far to find dozens of other equally vitriolic rivalries... Aleague and I guess the MLS are really the only countries I can think of that do vanilla rivalries... Fair points MSC! I know some of the ultras in some places can be very nasty. But I question whether that passes a point of even being related to football. Anyway, yes, there are many downright nasty rivalries. While I would love Australian football to have more passion and more money and more mainstream media, I don’t regret the absence of this type of nastiness. And to be fair, some of the banter of Celtic and Rangers fans is funny and well intentioned and plenty of people have friends from the other side, so it isn’t all at the nasty and senseless end. There are definitely those who have other agendas, and use football as a tool for said agendas. But there are some who are just that extreme when it comes to their respective team and/or rival. There is a reason for the use of the term "Tribalism" when it comes to football and it's supporters. That’s true! 100% Harry & BB. Nothing matters more to me than Rangers, not even my hatred of them ( IRA fitba club ).
|
|
|
|
|
SUTHERLANDBEAR
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xGee, that was a tight match and Celtic should have killed it in the first half but wasted at least three chances. Rangers easily had the better second half and also butchered two clear chances. Hart made one cracking save. A classic game of two halves. So Celtic maintain a six point lead with three rounds and nine points up for grab for each side. Harry, i am 57 years old and can honestly say that this is the worst Celtic team i have ever saw winning the league, ok may the 86 team was worse. Celtic are equal to or already have more points than most title winning sides over the last few years and have 3 games left to play. Not sure how you can possibly come to that conclusion. Celtic are winning this title because they’ve largely dominated the rest of the competition whilst Rangers went into sleep mode after the winter break. I do think Rangers have a more pacey/physical side that suits them for derby games, but their bad can be really awful, you don’t go from 6 points up to 6 points down if you aren’t dishing up crap. Rangers have ran over the top of Celtic twice now but both games had the same pattern, Celtic a goal up and missed sitters to bury Rangers before they could equalise. A lot of those players didn’t even do a pre season with Ange, they’re limping over the line, but the job is all but done. I suspect both sides will look different next season, I think a lot of the signings Ange made in a rush was just to try and be competitive and not finish 25 points behind again. I highly doubt he thought he was getting anywhere near the title at Christmas.
He did spend 25-30 million pounds TBF. And was it only Celtic that missed chances ? Actually, Celtic's net spend was £11.6m. Rangers was £12.6m and they were not in a position where they required a rebuild. They had won the 2020/21 title by 25 points. £12.6m on who for this season ? I didn't write they spent £12..6m . I said net . But, I made a mistake, It was actually £8.6 million. £6.3 incoming players, £14.9 million outgoing players. So they brought in £8.6m more than they spent. Celtic brought in £11.6m more than they spent. £26.4m paid £38m received. The Rangers money was spent on: Juninho Bacuna £4.8 m. Charlie McCann £.9 m. Mateuz Zujowkski £.6 m. 7 other players came in on a free or on loan. Source: Footballtransfers.com You might want to check the Juninho fee again, it seems you have made another mistake. Remember to state what teams actually spent on the individual transfer ,not the net, we are not accountant’s. Footballtransfers.com clearly displays the amount paid under paid. So you are saying they have got it wrong? "What teams actually spent on the individual transfer"? Where is that information disclosed? To get that you need to know the costs over and above the actual fee for an individual player. Who knows that other than the administrators in the club? I don't and neither do you. Celtic received €16.3 m for Edouard and €15.7 m for Ajer alone. They then spent 83.5% of those two fees on incomings. So the replacements cost them nothing, as did Rangers replacements. You made big deal of the money Celtic paid. So what? If you lose a player of a certain value then it makes sense to replace him with a player or players of similar value if you can afford it, assuming the money received reflects ability. You were clearly wrong on the Juninho fee. You are starting to ramble on like "Bunch of hacks " with your "net "spends. Not important to supporters like me. So you say. As I said the figure is as per the quoted sources website and I would believe them before I believe you. Net spends not important? LOL you are as fiscally ignorant as the administrators of the skint team you follow. So, how much was it really ?
|
|
|
|
|
huddo
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xI quite like this thread because it is focusses on Ange AND one of football’s greatest rivalries. I have grown to enjoy Scottish football this year (passion and style). Aside from having only been an occasional observer in previous seasons while watching or reading about the exploits of Mark Viduka, Craig Moore, Kevin Muscat or Tom Rogic, I have never really obsessed like I have this season about Scottish football. Some would call my support this season ‘plastic’ but I don’t care, I have had fun and appreciate Ange even more. He ain’t perfect or the best manager in the world but he is Australia’s best ever and now much more widely respected. I guess what has amused and at times annoyed me is the one-eyed bias and sometimes abject hatred that is like nothing else I have seen in football or other sports for that matter. There is no reason to it - i say this being reasonably well-read regarding the sectarian, economic, historical, social and cultural differences at play. Anyway, as a 52 year old man I wonder if any of the protagonists just get tired of the hate and/or can even acknowledge their own biases? Maybe or maybe not. There’s a well known phrase that politics is war by other means … so is Glasgow football it seems. TBF to our Scottish pals Harry ALL football globally is "war by other means" its not just a Glasgow thing... 'Gers v Celts is certainly a spicy meatball but you dont have to look very far to find dozens of other equally vitriolic rivalries... Aleague and I guess the MLS are really the only countries I can think of that do vanilla rivalries... On your "vanilla rivalries " in AU & the USA, it is only right to point out that National leagues in both countries never started until 1977 in AU and 1978 in the USA. So a long way behind the British for example who started national football leagues in the 1800's. What the fuck are you on about, AFC Wimbledon was established in 2002 there part of one of the biggest rivalries in the UK lower leagues, the time involved in the league has nothing to do with the animosity in a rivalry. As for vanilla rivalries dunno what you are talking about???Crystal Palace literally has a vanilla rivalry with every other club from London. Why are eurosnobs so insecure about their own leagues that that they feel a need to try and talk down emerging and development leagues? Literally a coach from one of these emerging leagues just made the spfl his bitch. You mean "re established surely ? Vanilla rivarly is from Mono, not me. Noting Wimbledon FCs relocation to MK, The establishment of AFC Wimbledon is, I believe, the creation of a completely different club. As the original entity still exists just in a different form. This is nothing like the Sevco Phenioxing that occurred at Rangers.
|
|
|
|