Manchester United - The End of an Era?

Pierre Littbarski wrote:

L.r.d wrote:

Pierre Littbarski wrote:They may have slipped up v Yids but if Chelsea could get 3 points out of a very tough fixture this evening I can't see United or 'pool getting that near to them.

What is so good about Chelsea?

The players.

Behave. Good squad and unit, nothing to really make you stand up or hurt teams.

L.r.d wrote:

Glenn Hysén wrote:

L.r.d wrote:

Pierre Littbarski wrote:They may have slipped up v Yids but if Chelsea could get 3 points out of a very tough fixture this evening I can't see United or 'pool getting that near to them.

What is so good about Chelsea?

I personally don't think they'll get 3 points or more combined out of the next 2 fixtures.

the last 2 predictions I saw you make were for Murray and United wins.

Going for a hat trick?

I wasn't making a prediction?

it that a question or a statement?

A prediction is a statement or claim that a particular event will occur in the future. A good example of this is your belief that Murray would beat Federer, or that United would beat Liverpool, or that Chelsea wont get 3 points or more combined out of the next 2 fixtures.

Glenn Hysén wrote:

L.r.d wrote:

Glenn Hysén wrote:

L.r.d wrote:

Pierre Littbarski wrote:They may have slipped up v Yids but if Chelsea could get 3 points out of a very tough fixture this evening I can't see United or 'pool getting that near to them.

What is so good about Chelsea?

I personally don't think they'll get 3 points or more combined out of the next 2 fixtures.

the last 2 predictions I saw you make were for Murray and United wins.

Going for a hat trick?

I wasn't making a prediction?

it that a question or a statement?

A prediction is a statement or claim that a particular event will occur in the future. A good example of this is your belief that Murray would beat Federer, or that United would beat Liverpool, or that Chelsea wont get 3 points or more combined out of the next 2 fixtures.

I said Man Utd would win 0-4, i say Man Utd will win every game 0-4, it's not a literal serious prediction, im sorry you cannot quite get that.

I predicted Murray would beat Federer i was wrong, but he was a huge underdog.

Now im just giving my opinion on what i think will happen with Chelsea's next two games, this is a forum where you give opinions i thought? i didn't know if you get one thing wrong it should be said on a totally unrelated topic a week later.

Thanks for paying such attention to me though.

Yes this is a forum where you give our opinions! But when your opinions are so regularly proved to be incorrect don't be suprised if people remind you

have a great day I know I will

Glenn Hysén wrote:Yes this is a forum where you give our opinions! But when your opinions are so regularly proved to be incorrect don't be suprised if people remind you

have a great day I know I will

Thanks i will do Getting one wrong is not regularly incorrect mate. But no worries.

L.r.d wrote:

Pierre Littbarski wrote:

L.r.d wrote:

Pierre Littbarski wrote:They may have slipped up v Yids but if Chelsea could get 3 points out of a very tough fixture this evening I can't see United or 'pool getting that near to them.

What is so good about Chelsea?

The players.

Behave. Good squad and unit, nothing to really make you stand up or hurt teams.

We'd be a real force if only we could swap Deco and Essien for Fletcher and O'Shea. Kenyon's a real wanker though so I can't see it happening.

S4P - 13 wrote:

L.r.d wrote:

Pierre Littbarski wrote:

L.r.d wrote:

Pierre Littbarski wrote:They may have slipped up v Yids but if Chelsea could get 3 points out of a very tough fixture this evening I can't see United or 'pool getting that near to them.

What is so good about Chelsea?

The players.

Behave. Good squad and unit, nothing to really make you stand up or hurt teams.

We'd be a real force if only we could swap Deco and Essien for Fletcher and O'Shea. Kenyon's a real wanker though so I can't see it happening.

One has been shite for two years, the other is out for the next 5 months s4p. Really you'd compare those two to Anderson and Hargreaves anyway.

Didn't Deco get player of the month?

Luis wrote:Didn't Deco get player of the month?

Check on the bbc site or something? bizarre question.

L.r.d wrote:

S4P - 13 wrote:

L.r.d wrote:

Pierre Littbarski wrote:

L.r.d wrote:

Pierre Littbarski wrote:They may have slipped up v Yids but if Chelsea could get 3 points out of a very tough fixture this evening I can't see United or 'pool getting that near to them.

What is so good about Chelsea?

The players.

Behave. Good squad and unit, nothing to really make you stand up or hurt teams.

We'd be a real force if only we could swap Deco and Essien for Fletcher and O'Shea. Kenyon's a real wanker though so I can't see it happening.

One has been shite for two years, the other is out for the next 5 months s4p. Really you'd compare those two to Anderson and Hargreaves anyway.

Hargreaves isn't out for the next 5 months though.

O'Shea is?

Chelsea's midfield is vastly to superior to United's, the only player who would get near to the Chelsea first team is Ronaldo or Hargreaves if he could get fit. Deco > Scholes, Cole > Nani, Lampard > Carrick, Ballack > Anderson, Mikel > Fletcher. it's not even a discussion.

L.r.d wrote:O'Shea is?

Nope but I was comparing Anderson and Hargreaves to Deco (who has apparently been $h!t for the last 2 years) and Essien (who is now out for 5 months).

Glenn Hysén wrote:Chelsea's midfield is vastly to superior to United's, the only player who would get near to the Chelsea first team is Ronaldo or Hargreaves if he could get fit. Deco > Scholes, Cole > Nani, Lampard > Carrick, Ballack > Anderson, Mikel > Fletcher. it's not even a discussion.

That's simplistic and silly. I'd take Anderson over Ballack. Ronaldo over Cole. Carrick over Mikel Hargreaves over lampard. Nani over kalou. Scholes deco is similar. It is not really a great way to distinguish between anything.

S4P - 13 wrote:
Hargreaves isn't out for the next 5 months though.

may as well be, he only starts about 15 games a season

L.r.d wrote:

Glenn Hysén wrote:Chelsea's midfield is vastly to superior to United's, the only player who would get near to the Chelsea first team is Ronaldo or Hargreaves if he could get fit. Deco > Scholes, Cole > Nani, Lampard > Carrick, Ballack > Anderson, Mikel > Fletcher. it's not even a discussion.

That's simplistic and silly. I'd take Anderson over Ballack. Ronaldo over Cole. Carrick over Mikel Hargreaves over lampard. Nani over kalou. Scholes deco is similar. It is not really a great way to distinguish between anything.

You're talking out your arse mate, give up now.

You forgot O'Shea over Essien lerd.

S4P - 13 wrote:

L.r.d wrote:O'Shea is?

Nope but I was comparing Anderson and Hargreaves to Deco (who has apparently been $h!t for the last 2 years) and Essien (who is now out for 5 months).

I figured you were saying Anderson has been shite for two years. But im really not sure whats your point overall with bizarre comparisons

S4P - 13 wrote:You forgot O'Shea over Essien lerd.

O'Shea over Essien, because Essien will be out for 5 months

Luis wrote:

L.r.d wrote:

Glenn Hysén wrote:Chelsea's midfield is vastly to superior to United's, the only player who would get near to the Chelsea first team is Ronaldo or Hargreaves if he could get fit. Deco > Scholes, Cole > Nani, Lampard > Carrick, Ballack > Anderson, Mikel > Fletcher. it's not even a discussion.

That's simplistic and silly. I'd take Anderson over Ballack. Ronaldo over Cole. Carrick over Mikel Hargreaves over lampard. Nani over kalou. Scholes deco is similar. It is not really a great way to distinguish between anything.

You're talking out your arse mate, give up now.

Am i? what one do you disagree with?

What is the obsession with Anderson Lrd

If they are brazilian do you instantly think they are world beaters.

I don't think I have ever seen this guy influence a game in anything other than a pure defensive sense

L.r.d wrote:

S4P - 13 wrote:You forgot O'Shea over Essien lerd.

O'Shea over Essien, because Essien will be out for 5 months

I was also going to say Campbell over Drogba, but that's unfair since Didier is a midfielder not a striker. It's gonna have to be Campbell over Anelka.

L.r.d wrote:

Luis wrote:

L.r.d wrote:

Glenn Hysén wrote:Chelsea's midfield is vastly to superior to United's, the only player who would get near to the Chelsea first team is Ronaldo or Hargreaves if he could get fit. Deco > Scholes, Cole > Nani, Lampard > Carrick, Ballack > Anderson, Mikel > Fletcher. it's not even a discussion.

That's simplistic and silly. I'd take Anderson over Ballack. Ronaldo over Cole. Carrick over Mikel Hargreaves over lampard. Nani over kalou. Scholes deco is similar. It is not really a great way to distinguish between anything.

You're talking out your arse mate, give up now.

Am i? what one do you disagree with?

Ballack is miles better than Anderson ever will be. Ronaldo over Cole is fair enough. Not much to choose between Carrick and Mikel, Lampard will win you so many more games than Hargreaves will (he's too injury prone anyway) and Nani and Kalou are both too inconsistent.

L.r.d wrote:

Glenn Hysén wrote:Chelsea's midfield is vastly to superior to United's, the only player who would get near to the Chelsea first team is Ronaldo or Hargreaves if he could get fit. Deco > Scholes, Cole > Nani, Lampard > Carrick, Ballack > Anderson, Mikel > Fletcher. it's not even a discussion.

That's simplistic and silly. I'd take Anderson over Ballack. Ronaldo over Cole. Carrick over Mikel Hargreaves over lampard. Nani over kalou. Scholes deco is similar. It is not really a great way to distinguish between anything.

would it be silly if it came out in United's favour?

ok put it this way, all of Chelsea's midfielders would get into any EPL side. Only Ronaldo and a fit Hargreaves fit this description. Yes Scholes and Giggs were awesome in the 90's but so was Denzel Washington and I wouldn't want him in my first team either

COTR wrote:What is the obsession with Anderson Lrd

If they are brazilian do you instantly think they are world beaters.

I don't think I have ever seen this guy influence a game in anything other than a pure defensive sense

No Obsession he's a very good player and ive seen enough signs he will be a great player. He's influenced quite a few games in an attacking sense. The comparison was more to do with not rating Ballack anyway.

Luis wrote:

L.r.d wrote:

Luis wrote:

L.r.d wrote:

Glenn Hysén wrote:Chelsea's midfield is vastly to superior to United's, the only player who would get near to the Chelsea first team is Ronaldo or Hargreaves if he could get fit. Deco > Scholes, Cole > Nani, Lampard > Carrick, Ballack > Anderson, Mikel > Fletcher. it's not even a discussion.

That's simplistic and silly. I'd take Anderson over Ballack. Ronaldo over Cole. Carrick over Mikel Hargreaves over lampard. Nani over kalou. Scholes deco is similar. It is not really a great way to distinguish between anything.

You're talking out your arse mate, give up now.

Am i? what one do you disagree with?

Ballack is miles better than Anderson ever will be. Ronaldo over Cole is fair enough. Not much to choose between Carrick and Mikel, Lampard will win you so many more games than Hargreaves will (he's too injury prone anyway) and Nani and Kalou are both too inconsistent.

Obviously Lampard will, but Hargreaves is a better player so i'd rather him in my team. It's not a match for match comparison that one so your argument is ridiculous. And Ballack is nothing special he's just a name, Anderson will be.

S4P - 13 wrote:

L.r.d wrote:

S4P - 13 wrote:You forgot O'Shea over Essien lerd.

O'Shea over Essien, because Essien will be out for 5 months

I was also going to say Campbell over Drogba, but that's unfair since Didier is a midfielder not a striker. It's gonna have to be Campbell over Anelka.

No that's just silly.

Anderson may become a great player but Ballack already is a great player, otherwise Fergie would not have tried to sign him.

Glenn Hysén wrote:

L.r.d wrote:

Glenn Hysén wrote:Chelsea's midfield is vastly to superior to United's, the only player who would get near to the Chelsea first team is Ronaldo or Hargreaves if he could get fit. Deco > Scholes, Cole > Nani, Lampard > Carrick, Ballack > Anderson, Mikel > Fletcher. it's not even a discussion.

That's simplistic and silly. I'd take Anderson over Ballack. Ronaldo over Cole. Carrick over Mikel Hargreaves over lampard. Nani over kalou. Scholes deco is similar. It is not really a great way to distinguish between anything.

would it be silly if it came out in United's favour?

ok put it this way, all of Chelsea's midfielders would get into any EPL side. Only Ronaldo and a fit Hargreaves fit this description. Yes Scholes and Giggs were awesome in the 90's but so was Denzel Washington and I wouldn't want him in my first team either

Wouldn't get into ours. Maybe Essien that's about it.

Anderson will be a name when Villa sign him for £3m in 2010