Man Utd - Chelsea in Russia - Page 5

Mancie · 23-05-2008, 06:43

Champions of the world!!!!!

cashman · 23-05-2008, 10:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by jambutty

Why?

What has United done to you?

well 1962 has a bearing on it.

Bagpuss · 23-05-2008, 14:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mancie

Champions of the world!!!!!

Did I miss that game?

18-17 - 5-3

MargaretR · 23-05-2008, 15:31

A cartoon that might amuse

Nickelson · 23-05-2008, 16:34

Tense Finale Glad I Dont Support Chelsea

mthead · 23-05-2008, 17:18

Yes Chelski hit the woodwork twice,but are you forgeting the Giggs effort on goal which John Terry cleared with his head ? Dont agree with penalty shoot outs but thats the way it goes

Just glad it was Anelka that got his saved found that as funny as hell

derekgas · 23-05-2008, 17:29

Terry missed. His shot went wide.

John Terry hit the post, united battered chelsea in the first half and should have been 2 or 3 up, Lampards goal was very lucky, and extra time was even, niether team had anything left due to a heavy pitch, Ronaldo did the same as he always has, (it wasnt a problem when john aldridge used to do it), and anelka didnt want to score, no interest because he didnt start the game, the result going either way would have been fair, even if I would have detested chelski and romans millions winning it, incidentally, the only time rovers did anything significant was with jacks millions, but in the same situation, I would have supported the local team.

fc:stanley · 23-05-2008, 18:12

nemanja vidic said the european cup is like chocolate orange, its not terrys its mine

jaysay · 23-05-2008, 18:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by derekgas

Terry missed. His shot went wide.

John Terry hit the post, united battered chelsea in the first half and should have been 2 or 3 up, Lampards goal was very lucky, and extra time was even, niether team had anything left due to a heavy pitch, Ronaldo did the same as he always has, (it wasnt a problem when john aldridge used to do it), and anelka didnt want to score, no interest because he didnt start the game, the result going either way would have been fair, even if I would have detested chelski and romans millions winning it, incidentally, the only time rovers did anything significant was with jacks millions, but in the same situation, I would have supported the local team.

There was just one difference with the Rovers derek, Jack Walker was a lifelong Rovers fan and stood on the terraces as a lad, not a Yank or a Russian who just want a toy train set to amuse thmselves

derekgas · 23-05-2008, 20:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

There was just one difference with the Rovers derek, Jack Walker was a lifelong Rovers fan and stood on the terraces as a lad, not a Yank or a Russian who just want a toy train set to amuse thmselves

I dont disagree, my comment was really to say that it makes sense to me for neutrals to support the most local team when playing in an important game, northerners supporting southern teams is a nonsense, just because its united, (abu's, anyone but united), a little like foreigners buying english teams for playthings, and the fame they generate.

jaysay · 24-05-2008, 10:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by derekgas

I dont disagree, my comment was really to say that it makes sense to me for neutrals to support the most local team when playing in an important game, northerners supporting southern teams is a nonsense, just because its united, (abu's, anyone but united), a little like foreigners buying english teams for playthings, and the fame they generate.

I've always supported English teams in Europe derek, but northern teams come first, except Burnley, but they won't be playing in Europe any time soon, nearest they come is the Isle of Man tournament

Can't say I like Chelski either. Its surprising how times change, I remember when Rovers signed Chris Sutton in 1994, Jimmy Grease writting in the Sun said he hope Rovers didn't win anything because they were trying to buy the league, Can't remember him saying to much about Chelski's spending can you. I've always said you can't buy the league, if they could why have Liverpool, Leeds, Newcastle ect never won it, money helps but buying the right players and the right coaching is the main ingredient

Bagpuss · 24-05-2008, 10:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

I've always supported English teams in Europe derek, but northern teams come first, except Burnley

I've always said you can't buy the league, if they could why have Liverpool, Leeds, Newcastle ect never won it

And I've always supported English teams in Europe except Man U Scum and Leeds, what's the difference?

For the record Liverpool have won the LEAGUE 18 times.

jaysay · 24-05-2008, 10:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bagpuss

And I've always supported English teams in Europe except Man U Scum and Leeds, what's the difference?

For the record Liverpool have won the LEAGUE 18 times.

Ya but that's history, ain't won the prem yet, haven't come close, yet little old Rovers managed it,

but I agree with you on Leeds

Bagpuss · 24-05-2008, 11:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

Ya but that's history, ain't won the prem yet, haven't come close, yet little old Rovers managed it,

but I agree with you on Leeds

I see, so all the clubs who won the European Cup can't really count those victories as it's now called the Champions League, I can see why you show an interest in politics.

jaysay · 24-05-2008, 12:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bagpuss

I see, so all the clubs who won the European Cup can't really count those victories as it's now called the Champions League, I can see why you show an interest in politics.

Its called lateral thinking bagpuss, Manchest United have won the Champions League twice, Liverpool once