Discussion:
France still sore losers
(too old to reply)
Mr. NightRider
2006-10-10 15:05:39 UTC
Permalink
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final but Saturday they showed it evenn more. Henry said Scotland
was lucky to win. How was Scotland lucky?? I watched the second half
and Scotland was as good if not better than France. France needs a
reality check. The world cup they won and the euro is all they win ever.
e***@yahoo.com
2006-10-10 15:44:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. NightRider
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final but Saturday they showed it evenn more. Henry said Scotland
was lucky to win. How was Scotland lucky?? I watched the second half
and Scotland was as good if not better than France. France needs a
reality check. The world cup they won and the euro is all they win ever.
Unless France can find a playmaker to replace Zidane, they will
have trouble repeating their successes.

Yes, I know there is plenty of talent, but talent is not the same as
consistent production at the highest level. Henry and Trezeguet
have had poor records with the NT, despite their obvious talent.
I would myself start looking for people to replace them starting now!
MH
2006-10-10 17:07:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Post by Mr. NightRider
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final but Saturday they showed it evenn more. Henry said Scotland
was lucky to win. How was Scotland lucky?? I watched the second half
and Scotland was as good if not better than France. France needs a
reality check. The world cup they won and the euro is all they win ever.
Unless France can find a playmaker to replace Zidane, they will
have trouble repeating their successes.
Personally, I think the role of Zidane in their successes is greatly
exaggerated. They owe their good results in 1996,1998, and 2000 first
and foremost to a well organised defensive set-up with a strong back
four and two strong defensive midfielders.
While Thuram's days are numbered, Gallas, Abidal, and Sagnol are looking
very solid, and the successors to Makele and Vieira (themselves
successors to Deschamps and Petit) look very promising too.

They have the added bonus now of being able to play a large contigent of
Lyon players who are highly familiar with each other, and seasoned by a
number of champions league campaigns.

Finally, they still have one of the best youth development systems in
the world, and keep turning out good players.

Sure, a player of genius only comes along every now and then, but many
teams have won World Cups and Euros without a playmaker in the Zidane
mould. (Germany 1974, 1980, 1990, 1996; England 1966, Italy 1982,
Denmark 1992, Greece 2004 etc.)
It is not as though many other teams have players like Zidane.
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Yes, I know there is plenty of talent, but talent is not the same as
consistent production at the highest level. Henry and Trezeguet
have had poor records with the NT, despite their obvious talent.
Trezeguet should be dumped for good. Henry may not score that many in
big games for France, but then neither do Klose, Rooney, Owen, Torres,
Gilardino, Toni etc for their teams.
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I would myself start looking for people to replace them starting now!
Matthias Mühlich
2006-10-10 17:54:03 UTC
Permalink
Personally, I think the role of Zidane in their successes is greatly exaggerated. They owe their good results in 1996,1998, and 2000 first
and foremost to a well organised defensive set-up

100% ACK.
Sure, a player of genius only comes along every now and then, but many
teams have won World Cups and Euros without a playmaker in the Zidane
mould. (Germany 1974, 1980, 1990, 1996; England 1966, Italy 1982,
Denmark 1992, Greece 2004 etc.)
I can only speak of newer campaigns, but Germany WC90 and EC96 had an
obvious key player. Not a Zidane type, but nevertheless extremely
crucial for their success. Both Matthäus and Sammer were elected
European player of the year in 1990 resp. 1996 -- and not without any
reason.

MM
MH
2006-10-10 19:26:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by MH
Post by MH
Personally, I think the role of Zidane in their successes is greatly
exaggerated. They owe their good results in 1996,1998, and 2000 first
and foremost to a well organised defensive set-up
100% ACK.
Post by MH
Sure, a player of genius only comes along every now and then, but many
teams have won World Cups and Euros without a playmaker in the Zidane
mould. (Germany 1974, 1980, 1990, 1996; England 1966, Italy 1982,
Denmark 1992, Greece 2004 etc.)
I can only speak of newer campaigns, but Germany WC90 and EC96 had an
obvious key player. Not a Zidane type, but nevertheless extremely
crucial for their success. Both Matthäus and Sammer were elected
European player of the year in 1990 resp. 1996 -- and not without any
reason.
Definitely deserved - but neither was a "spielmacher" or "fantasista"
in the sense that Zidane is accepted to be one. Magath, Häßler and
Netzer might be closer approximations to that position. My point is
that teams can organise themselves successfully in a wide variety of
ways, and they don't need a Platini or a Zidane to do so. Clinging to
the past and hoping a certain type of player will replace a previous one
is usually a big mistake, of which Germany is arguably a good illustration.

It seemed to me, living in Germany in the later 70s and early 80s, that
there was a ridiculous overemphasis on finding a Libero like
Beckenbauer, and a Spielführer like Netzer. Hence the constant chopping
and changing of players like Cullman, Herget, Hannes, Stielecke,
Augenthaler, etc at one position, and Magath, Müller and others at the
other. Beckenbauer himself as coach finally got away from this model,
and played 3 conservative centre backs, none of whom was a real Libero,
and had success by using the players available to him in a system that
worked.
Post by MH
MM
Dotstir
2006-10-11 06:59:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by MH
Post by MH
Personally, I think the role of Zidane in their successes is greatly
exaggerated. They owe their good results in 1996,1998, and 2000 first
and foremost to a well organised defensive set-up
100% ACK.
Post by MH
Sure, a player of genius only comes along every now and then, but many
teams have won World Cups and Euros without a playmaker in the Zidane
mould. (Germany 1974, 1980, 1990, 1996; England 1966, Italy 1982, Denmark
1992, Greece 2004 etc.)
I can only speak of newer campaigns, but Germany WC90 and EC96 had an
obvious key player. Not a Zidane type, but nevertheless extremely crucial
for their success. Both Matthäus and Sammer were elected European player
of the year in 1990 resp. 1996 -- and not without any reason.
Sammer the defender?
Matthias Mühlich
2006-10-11 07:55:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by MH
Post by MH
Personally, I think the role of Zidane in their successes is greatly
exaggerated. They owe their good results in 1996,1998, and 2000 first
and foremost to a well organised defensive set-up
100% ACK.
Post by MH
Sure, a player of genius only comes along every now and then, but many
teams have won World Cups and Euros without a playmaker in the Zidane
mould. (Germany 1974, 1980, 1990, 1996; England 1966, Italy 1982, Denmark
1992, Greece 2004 etc.)
I can only speak of newer campaigns, but Germany WC90 and EC96 had an
obvious key player. Not a Zidane type, but nevertheless extremely crucial
for their success. Both Matthäus and Sammer were elected European player
of the year in 1990 resp. 1996 -- and not without any reason.
Sammer the defender?
Matthias Sammer, the midfielder.
Dotstir
2006-10-11 09:14:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthias Mühlich
Post by Dotstir
Post by MH
Post by MH
Personally, I think the role of Zidane in their successes is greatly
exaggerated. They owe their good results in 1996,1998, and 2000 first
and foremost to a well organised defensive set-up
100% ACK.
Post by MH
Sure, a player of genius only comes along every now and then, but many
teams have won World Cups and Euros without a playmaker in the Zidane
mould. (Germany 1974, 1980, 1990, 1996; England 1966, Italy 1982,
Denmark 1992, Greece 2004 etc.)
I can only speak of newer campaigns, but Germany WC90 and EC96 had an
obvious key player. Not a Zidane type, but nevertheless extremely crucial
for their success. Both Matthäus and Sammer were elected European player
of the year in 1990 resp. 1996 -- and not without any reason.
Sammer the defender?
Matthias Sammer, the midfielder.
He also played CB if I am not mistaken did he not, and wasn't he DM?
Bruce Scott TOK
2006-10-11 11:23:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by Matthias Mühlich
Matthias Sammer, the midfielder.
He also played CB if I am not mistaken did he not, and wasn't he DM?
Classic case of a team built around the DM that carries them to the
title. Like Dunga.
--
ciao,
Bruce

drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
Dotstir
2006-10-11 20:19:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bruce Scott TOK
Post by Dotstir
Post by Matthias Mühlich
Matthias Sammer, the midfielder.
He also played CB if I am not mistaken did he not, and wasn't he DM?
Classic case of a team built around the DM that carries them to the
title. Like Dunga.
Well there's nothing wrong with that.
e***@yahoo.com
2006-10-10 23:48:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Unless France can find a playmaker to replace Zidane, they will
have trouble repeating their successes.
Personally, I think the role of Zidane in their successes is greatly
exaggerated. They owe their good results in 1996,1998, and 2000 first
and foremost to a well organised defensive set-up with a strong back
four and two strong defensive midfielders.
France '98, WC final. Zidane 2 goals. Critical to their win over
Brasil.
Let me say, with no hope of ever being able to prove myself right,
that they would have probably lost that game if they didnt have Zidane.

EC '00. A string of superlative performances by Zidane. Dont remember
the exact details, though.

Sure Deschamps, Thuram, Barthez, Blanc etc were very important cogs
in the wheel. But even today they have replacements, while it will be
difficult to replace ZZ. I categorically disagree with the assertion
that
the back 4 + midfield 2 won the WC and the EC. Without ZZ, they would
have won neither.

Heck, without ZZ, France wouldnt even be in the '06 final game.
And thats not to say Vieira, Makalele, Gallas etc are not very good
players.
Post by MH
While Thuram's days are numbered, Gallas, Abidal, and Sagnol are looking
very solid, and the successors to Makele and Vieira (themselves
successors to Deschamps and Petit) look very promising too.
When France do win a major honor again without a ZZ replacement,
I will retract my words! Till then, chew on this :- no WC ( not sure of
EC )
was ever won with a team of water-carriers!
MH
2006-10-11 15:25:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Unless France can find a playmaker to replace Zidane, they will
have trouble repeating their successes.
Personally, I think the role of Zidane in their successes is greatly
exaggerated. They owe their good results in 1996,1998, and 2000 first
and foremost to a well organised defensive set-up with a strong back
four and two strong defensive midfielders.
France '98, WC final. Zidane 2 goals. Critical to their win over
Brasil.
Two headed goals from corners. If they had played Vieira instead of
Zidane from the start, he would probably have scored from corners too,
since he is taller and a better header of the ball than Zidane, and
Brazil was defending (and playing) like a pack of amateurs anyway.
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Let me say, with no hope of ever being able to prove myself right,
that they would have probably lost that game if they didnt have Zidane.
Well, what you say is possible but seems very unlikely to me, given how
Brazil played.
Post by e***@yahoo.com
EC '00. A string of superlative performances by Zidane. Dont remember
the exact details, though.
Sure Deschamps, Thuram, Barthez, Blanc etc were very important cogs
in the wheel.
No Blanc or Thuram and they wouldn't even have reached the final, using
your own logic above !


But even today they have replacements, while it will be
Post by e***@yahoo.com
difficult to replace ZZ. I categorically disagree with the assertion
that
the back 4 + midfield 2 won the WC and the EC. Without ZZ, they would
have won neither.
Heck, without ZZ, France wouldnt even be in the '06 final game.
And thats not to say Vieira, Makalele, Gallas etc are not very good
players.
Post by MH
While Thuram's days are numbered, Gallas, Abidal, and Sagnol are looking
very solid, and the successors to Makele and Vieira (themselves
successors to Deschamps and Petit) look very promising too.
When France do win a major honor again without a ZZ replacement,
I will retract my words! Till then, chew on this :- no WC ( not sure of
EC )
was ever won with a team of water-carriers!
The EC has been won by Czechoslovakia, Denmark and Greece. While
calling them all water-carriers would be harsh, they didn't all have
players of Zidane's alleged calibre.

England in 1966 might even be considered a team of water carriers plus
the inconsistent Charlton.
a***@hotmail.com
2006-10-11 16:50:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Unless France can find a playmaker to replace Zidane, they will
have trouble repeating their successes.
Personally, I think the role of Zidane in their successes is greatly
exaggerated. They owe their good results in 1996,1998, and 2000 first
and foremost to a well organised defensive set-up with a strong back
four and two strong defensive midfielders.
France '98, WC final. Zidane 2 goals. Critical to their win over
Brasil.
Two headed goals from corners. If they had played Vieira instead of
Zidane from the start, he would probably have scored from corners too,
since he is taller and a better header of the ball than Zidane, and
Brazil was defending (and playing) like a pack of amateurs anyway.
I doubt Vieira would have played as an attacking midfielder. Besides,
even if he had, it's crazy to assume that he would have had the the
same exact same positioning and movement to the second as Zidane did.
But OTOH Brazil's marking was dismal on those corners, so maybe they
were just accidents waiting to happen (to support your assertion that
it was no particular brilliance on Zidane's part).
e***@yahoo.com
2006-10-13 05:28:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Unless France can find a playmaker to replace Zidane, they will
have trouble repeating their successes.
Personally, I think the role of Zidane in their successes is greatly
exaggerated. They owe their good results in 1996,1998, and 2000 first
and foremost to a well organised defensive set-up with a strong back
four and two strong defensive midfielders.
France '98, WC final. Zidane 2 goals. Critical to their win over
Brasil.
Two headed goals from corners. If they had played Vieira instead of
Zidane from the start, he would probably have scored from corners too,
since he is taller and a better header of the ball than Zidane, and
Brazil was defending (and playing) like a pack of amateurs anyway.
You know, MH, I respect you a lot. But what you say above is
akin to saying "so what, if Rossi hadnt scored that hattrick,
Bettega would have!"
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Let me say, with no hope of ever being able to prove myself right,
that they would have probably lost that game if they didnt have Zidane.
Well, what you say is possible but seems very unlikely to me, given how
Brazil played.
Actually they werent playing all that bad till Zidane put those goals
in. Once it was 1-0, they were exposed. 2-0, they were dead!

Football is a strange game, that way.
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
EC '00. A string of superlative performances by Zidane. Dont remember
the exact details, though.
Sure Deschamps, Thuram, Barthez, Blanc etc were very important cogs
in the wheel.
No Blanc or Thuram and they wouldn't even have reached the final, using
your own logic above !
Sorry I dont understand this.
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
When France do win a major honor again without a ZZ replacement,
I will retract my words! Till then, chew on this :- no WC ( not sure of
EC )
was ever won with a team of water-carriers!
The EC has been won by Czechoslovakia, Denmark and Greece. While
calling them all water-carriers would be harsh, they didn't all have
players of Zidane's alleged calibre.
England in 1966 might even be considered a team of water carriers plus
the inconsistent Charlton.
There are, should I dare to commit this kind of categorization which
I dont really like to do, two kinds of teams, the type that doesnt rely
on a playmaker ( most north European teams since the days of
Cruijff and Beckenbauer ) and those that do ( most Southern teams ).

When I say a team of water carriers, I mean it in the context of
the latter.
MH
2006-10-15 21:06:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Unless France can find a playmaker to replace Zidane, they will
have trouble repeating their successes.
Personally, I think the role of Zidane in their successes is greatly
exaggerated. They owe their good results in 1996,1998, and 2000 first
and foremost to a well organised defensive set-up with a strong back
four and two strong defensive midfielders.
France '98, WC final. Zidane 2 goals. Critical to their win over
Brasil.
Two headed goals from corners. If they had played Vieira instead of
Zidane from the start, he would probably have scored from corners too,
since he is taller and a better header of the ball than Zidane, and
Brazil was defending (and playing) like a pack of amateurs anyway.
You know, MH, I respect you a lot. But what you say above is
akin to saying "so what, if Rossi hadnt scored that hattrick,
Bettega would have!"
A little different as I don't recall his goals all coming from set pieces.
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Let me say, with no hope of ever being able to prove myself right,
that they would have probably lost that game if they didnt have Zidane.
Well, what you say is possible but seems very unlikely to me, given how
Brazil played.
Actually they werent playing all that bad till Zidane put those goals
in. Once it was 1-0, they were exposed. 2-0, they were dead!
Football is a strange game, that way.
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
EC '00. A string of superlative performances by Zidane. Dont remember
the exact details, though.
Sure Deschamps, Thuram, Barthez, Blanc etc were very important cogs
in the wheel.
No Blanc or Thuram and they wouldn't even have reached the final, using
your own logic above !
You were introducing the fact that Zidane scored two goals in the final
as evidence of how important he was. Since Thuram scored two goals in
the semi-final, a game the French were actually losing, surely the same
argument applied to him. Plus there was Blanc with the golden goal vs.
Paraguay. I don't see why goals in a final in which France were never
really in trouble should weigh more.
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Sorry I dont understand this.
You were introducing the fact that Zidane scored two goals in the final
as evidence of how important he was. Since Thuram scored two goals in
the semi-final, a game the French were actually losing, surely the same
argument applied to him. Plus there was Blanc with the golden goal vs.
Paraguay. I don't see why goals in a final in which France were never
really in trouble should weigh more.
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
When France do win a major honor again without a ZZ replacement,
I will retract my words! Till then, chew on this :- no WC ( not sure of
EC )
was ever won with a team of water-carriers!
The EC has been won by Czechoslovakia, Denmark and Greece. While
calling them all water-carriers would be harsh, they didn't all have
players of Zidane's alleged calibre.
England in 1966 might even be considered a team of water carriers plus
the inconsistent Charlton.
There are, should I dare to commit this kind of categorization which
I dont really like to do, two kinds of teams, the type that doesnt rely
on a playmaker ( most north European teams since the days of
Cruijff and Beckenbauer ) and those that do ( most Southern teams ).
When I say a team of water carriers, I mean it in the context of
the latter.
Enzo
2006-10-19 20:50:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Unless France can find a playmaker to replace Zidane, they will
have trouble repeating their successes.
Personally, I think the role of Zidane in their successes is greatly
exaggerated. They owe their good results in 1996,1998, and 2000 first
and foremost to a well organised defensive set-up with a strong back
four and two strong defensive midfielders.
France '98, WC final. Zidane 2 goals. Critical to their win over
Brasil.
Two headed goals from corners. If they had played Vieira instead of
Zidane from the start, he would probably have scored from corners too,
since he is taller and a better header of the ball than Zidane, and
Brazil was defending (and playing) like a pack of amateurs anyway.
You know, MH, I respect you a lot. But what you say above is
akin to saying "so what, if Rossi hadnt scored that hattrick,
Bettega would have!"
A little different as I don't recall his goals all coming from set pieces.
I dont think that makes any difference.
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Let me say, with no hope of ever being able to prove myself right,
that they would have probably lost that game if they didnt have Zidane.
Well, what you say is possible but seems very unlikely to me, given how
Brazil played.
Actually they werent playing all that bad till Zidane put those goals
in. Once it was 1-0, they were exposed. 2-0, they were dead!
Football is a strange game, that way.
Post by MH
Post by e***@yahoo.com
EC '00. A string of superlative performances by Zidane. Dont remember
the exact details, though.
Sure Deschamps, Thuram, Barthez, Blanc etc were very important cogs
in the wheel.
No Blanc or Thuram and they wouldn't even have reached the final, using
your own logic above !
Sorry I dont understand this.
You were introducing the fact that Zidane scored two goals in the final
as evidence of how important he was. Since Thuram scored two goals in
the semi-final, a game the French were actually losing, surely the same
argument applied to him. Plus there was Blanc with the golden goal vs.
Paraguay. I don't see why goals in a final in which France were never
really in trouble should weigh more.
Ok I understand now. Yes I agree Thuram and Blanc were hugely
influential figures in the entire campaign. But I dont think the
absence of either would have been as critical as if Zidane was
absent. Thats just my opinion. France mostly plays Latin style,
in which the playmaker is the most important piece. Without
a top playmaker, the system rarely works.
Yitzak
2006-10-11 23:39:50 UTC
Permalink
X-No-archive: yes
Post by e***@yahoo.com
France '98, WC final. Zidane 2 goals. Critical to their win over
Brasil.
Let me say, with no hope of ever being able to prove myself right,
that they would have probably lost that game if they didnt have Zidane.
True but how many knockout games in the world cup have you seen that
one sided let alone the final. France had so many chances - Givarch and
Dugarry missed so many. ZZ was quite poor for that WC - where was ZZ
when France were down against Croatia. Thuram stepped up in that game.
That was a surreal game its as if it were France aginst Saudia Arabia..
Post by e***@yahoo.com
EC '00. A string of superlative performances by Zidane. Dont remember
the exact details, though.
Zidane was excellent against (really great) against Spain and portugal
in Euro 00. In the final he wasn't marked. Yet he did nothing it was
Henry who destroyed Italy with his surges down the left. Cannivaro was
a tad impetious back then and kept being pulled wide by Henry.
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Sure Deschamps, Thuram, Barthez, Blanc etc were very important cogs
in the wheel. But even today they have replacements, while it will be
difficult to replace ZZ. I categorically disagree with the assertion
that
the back 4 + midfield 2 won the WC and the EC. Without ZZ, they would
have won neither.
Totally disagree I think France have been successfully becuase of their
solid defense and defensive midfield. (See my point about ZZ in Euro
2000) but in this WC I would put Viera and Gallas possibly Thuram ahead
of ZZ. Viera was awesome in fact ZZ IMO was only good against Brasil.
But hey he had retired so was a good performance considering.

You are talking about a French team that defended v.well and scored few
goals. Euro 2000 excepted I thought ZZ was more important for Real.
f***@yahoo.com
2006-10-11 23:01:53 UTC
Permalink
MH ha scritto:


[WARNING: EURO U-21 SPOILER AHEAD]
Post by MH
Finally, they still have one of the best youth development systems in
the world, and keep turning out good players.
ahem....


Euro U-21 Playoff for final tournament:

FT: Israel - France 1-0 (Taga, 92)

Israel win 2-1 on aggregate and qualify for their first ever European
U-21 Final Tournament.

Other qualifiers:

Czech Republic
Serbia (beat Sweden 5-0 in Sweden, after losing their home match 0-3
!!!)
England (beat Germany in both legs)
Italy (qualified over Spain by winning its away match)
Portugal (beats Russia 3-0 and qualifies on away goals, after losing in
Russia 4-1)
Belgium
Netherands (hosts).



Daniele
p***@yahoo.com
2006-10-11 23:48:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@yahoo.com
FT: Israel - France 1-0 (Taga, 92)
Israel win 2-1 on aggregate and qualify for their first ever European
U-21 Final Tournament.
Terrific result; iirc, this cohort of French players ('84s and up) won
the world championship as U-17s.

Incidentally, the starting Israeli keeper, Tom Al Madon, is also a US
citizen, although I don't know anything about him beyond that ... and
while I'm on this subject, might Israel attempt to bring a US-raised
Jewish player into this team? The most prominent option would be
Jonathan Bornstein, who is almost certain to be named MLS Rookie of the
Year.

P
Futbolmetrix
2006-10-15 09:03:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Terrific result; iirc, this cohort of French players ('84s and up) won
the world championship as U-17s.
Yes, and the current team features quite a few players with current or past
experience in CL caliber teams: Diarra, Benzema, Sinama-Pongolle, Le Tallec,
Zubar.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Incidentally, the starting Israeli keeper, Tom Al Madon, is also a US
citizen, although I don't know anything about him beyond that ... and
while I'm on this subject, might Israel attempt to bring a US-raised
Jewish player into this team? The most prominent option would be
Jonathan Bornstein, who is almost certain to be named MLS Rookie of the
Year.
It could be a good idea (what position does he play in?), but why would
Bornstein want to play for Israel? As MLS Rookie of the Year, wouldn't he
have a better chance of finding a spot on the US roster? How have previous
MLS ROTY's developed?

Daniele
p***@yahoo.com
2006-10-15 16:18:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Futbolmetrix
Might Israel attempt to bring a US-raised
Jewish player into this team? The most prominent option would be
Jonathan Bornstein, who is almost certain to be named MLS Rookie of the
Year.
It could be a good idea (what position does he play in?), but why would
Bornstein want to play for Israel? As MLS Rookie of the Year, wouldn't he
have a better chance of finding a spot on the US roster? How have previous
MLS ROTY's developed?
Bornstein is small and quick and plays on the left flank. From a US
national team standpoint, that's the worst possible fit. His skills are
largely redundant to Convey's and Beasley's, and he also faces
competition from top prospects like Mapp, Gaven, and Adu.

As for previous ROTY, a player's future prospects seem to depend
heavily upon his age. The 21-year-old winners have fared well, while
the 23-year-olds (and one 24-year-old) have not. As for how this
applies to Bornstein, he'll turn 22 in November, which puts him closer
to the young end.

MLS Rookies of the Year, from Youngest to Oldest*
---
+%Carlos Bocanegra '00
+%Ben Olsen, '98
+%Clint Dempsey '04
%Kyle Martino '02
Michael Parkhurst '05
(Jonathan Bornstein '06 would go here)
%Steve Ralston, '96
%Damani Ralph, '03 (Jamaican)
Jay Heaps '99
Mike Duhaney, '97
Rodrigo Faria, '01 (Brazilian)

*By age in year of award
+Player appeared at World Cup Finals
%Player appeared in World Cup Qualifying

P
Futbolmetrix
2006-10-15 21:00:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Bornstein is small and quick and plays on the left flank. From a US
national team standpoint, that's the worst possible fit. His skills are
largely redundant to Convey's and Beasley's, and he also faces
competition from top prospects like Mapp, Gaven, and Adu.
But is he more of a support striker, or a left flank midfielder with
offensive propensities?
In the second category, he would face less competition. All this of course
assuming that a good US prospect would prefer playing for a middling UEFA
side with a slim chance of ever making it to a major international
tournament rather than for the Yanks.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
MLS Rookies of the Year, from Youngest to Oldest*
---
+%Carlos Bocanegra '00
+%Ben Olsen, '98
+%Clint Dempsey '04
Interesting list. None of these seems to have become a bona fide superstar
of the national team, though.

Daniele
p***@yahoo.com
2006-10-15 23:40:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Futbolmetrix
But is he more of a support striker, or a left flank midfielder with
offensive propensities?
At this point, it's not 100% clear. He's versatile and has been shifted
around to suit his team's needs. This season, he has 22 starts as an
attacking-minded left back, 5 at left mid, and 5 as a second striker.
That said, he is awfully small for a defender and is listed as a
midfielder, so mid is probably the first place he'd get a look. As you
say, though, that's getting awfully speculative.

As youth players, he and Benny Feilhaber (who is also Jewish) were
stars on a team that won a national championship; however, neither of
them was regarded as much of a prospect, probably due to their small
stature. As a result, it's fun to see them turning the tables now ...
Feilhaber debuted yesterday for Hannover.
Post by Futbolmetrix
Post by p***@yahoo.com
+%Carlos Bocanegra '00
+%Ben Olsen, '98
+%Clint Dempsey '04
Interesting list. None of these seems to have become a bona fide superstar
of the national team, though.
I'd agree with that assessment, although by US standards they've done
well. Dempsey was just voted national player of the year; Bocanegra
deserved the award in 2003 (media chose Donovan); and Olsen, while not
on the same level, was headed for bigger things before he suffered a
devastating ankle injury. For a while, there were questions about
whether he would play again.

P
p***@yahoo.com
2006-10-16 00:50:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Feilhaber debuted yesterday for Hannover.
Oops ... I mean Hamburg.

P
MH
2006-10-15 21:11:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@yahoo.com
[WARNING: EURO U-21 SPOILER AHEAD]
Post by MH
Finally, they still have one of the best youth development systems in
the world, and keep turning out good players.
ahem....
FT: Israel - France 1-0 (Taga, 92)
Israel win 2-1 on aggregate and qualify for their first ever European
U-21 Final Tournament.
That's wonderful, great result. However, I don't think it can be used
to counter my argument that France's youth development is excellent.
Look at the number of championships they have won at U19 and U21 level.

Scotland made it to the final of the U19 this year, but they don't do
that sort of thing consistently. France and Spain do.
Post by f***@yahoo.com
Czech Republic
Serbia (beat Sweden 5-0 in Sweden, after losing their home match 0-3
!!!)
England (beat Germany in both legs)
Italy (qualified over Spain by winning its away match)
Portugal (beats Russia 3-0 and qualifies on away goals, after losing in
Russia 4-1)
Belgium
Netherands (hosts).
Daniele
Futbolmetrix
2006-10-16 00:29:50 UTC
Permalink
That's wonderful, great result. However, I don't think it can be used to
counter my argument that France's youth development is excellent.
Of course. I just couldn't miss the opportunity to brag a little about that
result :-)

Daniele
f***@yahoo.com
2006-10-11 23:06:33 UTC
Permalink
MH ha scritto:


[WARNING: EURO U-21 SPOILER AHEAD]
Post by MH
Finally, they still have one of the best youth development systems in
the world, and keep turning out good players.
ahem....


Euro U-21 Playoff for final tournament:

FT: Israel - France 1-0 (Taga, 92)

Israel win 2-1 on aggregate and qualify for their first ever European
U-21 Final Tournament.

Other qualifiers:

Czech Republic
Serbia (beat Sweden 5-0 in Sweden, after losing their home match 0-3
!!!)
England (beat Germany in both legs)
Italy (qualified over Spain by winning its away match)
Portugal (beats Russia 3-0 and qualifies on away goals, after losing in
Russia 4-1)
Belgium
Netherands (hosts).



Daniele
anders t
2006-10-12 05:02:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@yahoo.com
Serbia (beat Sweden 5-0 in Sweden, after losing their home match 0-3
!!!)
The WOFF GODS punished Sweden severely in furious anger. Everybody already
talked about next year after the 3-0 away victory.

Be very, very warned; DO not mess with the WOFF GODS.
--
All that we see, or seem,
is but a dream, within a dream,
installed by the Machine
FairFootball
2006-10-10 18:22:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. NightRider
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final
Yeah, well, Italy are sore winners.
Anyway, the french are no way close to being as sore losers as the
italians in 2000 and 2002.
Post by Mr. NightRider
The world cup they won and the euro is all they win ever.
I wouldn't bet on it. Probably they won't win it for a while any more,
but they have a habit to produce a brilliant player every 20 years or
so. And IMO Zidane and Platini can reasonably be considered the best
european players ever.
Anyway, what they won they won without cheating.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To see how the refs messed up World Cup 2006, visit
http://www.FairFootball.com
Dotstir
2006-10-11 07:02:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by FairFootball
Post by Mr. NightRider
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final
Yeah, well, Italy are sore winners.
Anyway, the french are no way close to being as sore losers as the
italians in 2000 and 2002.
Are you kidding? They shit talked supreme in 2000 after being truly
dominated for the whole match. Not once would they admit it.

2002 is another story. Any team who had 4 goals called back that were
legitimate would have gripes. Just look at how badley England
complained about the call back vs Portugal in 2004 as an example, and that
was a good call. Where is that on your fairfootball page John
Shocker?
Post by FairFootball
Anyway, what they won they won without cheating.
Italy are deserving champions, I agree.
SHUSSBAR
2006-10-11 14:36:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by FairFootball
Post by Mr. NightRider
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final
Yeah, well, Italy are sore winners.
Anyway, the french are no way close to being as sore losers as the
italians in 2000 and 2002.
Are you kidding? They shit talked supreme in 2000 after being truly
dominated for the whole match. Not once would they admit it.
Dominated maybe, but France prevailed at the end. Nothing can beat the
sight of Italians after the goal scored in Euro 2000 final in
overtime. Tons of pizzas, pastas dishes already warm to celebrate,
thrown in the dumpster.

Italy got revenge in 2006. After being truly dominated, they hang on to
scrap the win by 2 inches in Pks.

Not more not less sour or gracious losers.
last time Italy WON a game vs France was in 1978.
Post by Dotstir
2002 is another story. Any team who had 4 goals called back that were
legitimate would have gripes. Just look at how badley England
complained about the call back vs Portugal in 2004 as an example, and that
was a good call. Where is that on your fairfootball page John
Shocker?
Post by FairFootball
Anyway, what they won they won without cheating.
Italy are deserving champions, I agree.
Dotstir
2006-10-11 20:24:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by FairFootball
Post by Mr. NightRider
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final
Yeah, well, Italy are sore winners.
Anyway, the french are no way close to being as sore losers as the
italians in 2000 and 2002.
Are you kidding? They shit talked supreme in 2000 after being truly
dominated for the whole match. Not once would they admit it.
Dominated maybe, but France prevailed at the end.
Pure luck in the strike going between Nesta's legs and under Toldo's arms.
You win in the extra time though.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Nothing can beat the
sight of Italians after the goal scored in Euro 2000 final in
overtime. Tons of pizzas, pastas dishes already warm to celebrate,
thrown in the dumpster.
Winning a World Cup and seeing Thuram cry like a baby was all the
consolation we needed :)))
Post by SHUSSBAR
Italy got revenge in 2006. After being truly dominated,
Italy owned France 67% possession in the first half, after the charity goal
to Zidane was granted. We could have been up 2-0 had Toni hit his
header over the horrible horrible Barthez, but you must beat the bar too.

BTW, possession stats were 53/47 in Italy's favor in the end. Where was this
domination? How many goal scoring opps did it create ;)

Wank wank wank wank ;)))
Post by SHUSSBAR
they hang on to
scrap the win by 2 inches in Pks.
France couldn't score in regular time if you were gifted an open net and 2
men down, that's how shitty your strikers are and deep down you know it :))

You're lucky that Platini is sitting next to Blatter otherwise you wouldn't
have gotten the charity results that you did and you would have lost 2-0
like you should have if Del Piero hit his chances in 2000. France is lucky,
indeed. You should be happy that you get the luck other teams fail to get.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Not more not less sour or gracious losers.
last time Italy WON a game vs France was in 1978.
6-4 2006 World Cup Champions....

I'd rather have four stars than one, and that's all people will remember.
Live with it :))

So how about them cheating Scottish ballboys Shusshybar? :))) If it weren't
for them, surely you guys could have won right?
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
2002 is another story. Any team who had 4 goals called back that were
legitimate would have gripes. Just look at how badley England
complained about the call back vs Portugal in 2004 as an example, and that
was a good call. Where is that on your fairfootball page John
Shocker?
Post by FairFootball
Anyway, what they won they won without cheating.
Italy are deserving champions, I agree.
Yup!
FairFootball
2006-10-12 18:00:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Just look at how badley England
complained about the call back vs Portugal in 2004 as an example, and that
was a good call. Where is that on your fairfootball page John Shocker?
John Shocked has nothing to do with FairFootball.
We weren't around in 2004 and didn't yet get to do past tournaments, as
we'd like to be able someday. Anyway, we won't be covering the Euro
since we think it's too minor a tournament. Only World Cup and UCL,
this is all that really matters in our opinion.
Post by Dotstir
2002 is another story. Any team who had 4 goals called back that were
legitimate would have gripes.
We agree this much, as you can see on our site (the page that explains
our scheme). But then, so would any team that should have won the final
3 - 0 and was instead handed a 1 - 1 by the ref and then went on to
lose at penalties.
Post by Dotstir
Post by FairFootball
Anyway, what they won they won without cheating.
Italy are deserving champions, I agree.
Is this the best you can do ? Pretending I was talking about Italy when
I was in fact about the french ? Pathetic.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To see how the refs messed up World Cup 2006, visit
http://www.FairFootball.com
Yitzak
2006-10-12 18:41:59 UTC
Permalink
X-No-archive: yes

I actually was quite enthusiastic upon hearing of Fairfootball website.
Actually visiting it was very disappointing to say the least.

its an England fan site (no disrespect to other eng fans) I guess,
judging from your site.
"Its all England were robbed". I guess you're quite young as well? I
apologise if not correct.

You are right Italy completely overeacted in 2002 well beyond
proportion. The consequences were not as bad though as Eng against
Portugal (death threats etc). But was embarassing in italy.

They took 2000 defeat pretty well though. Even though 5 mins extra time
were played - its since then UEFA mention 30secs per sub (NEVER
before), its now taken as granted. Or Desailly should have been sent
off for a heinous elbow in his Pen Area.
Independant (nerds if you ask me) have counted the time and it should
have been closer to 2mins.

But what surprised me - Italy had Totti banned for spitting. Even
though hugely popular in Italy he was roundly critisced and many
italians (poles in newspapers) wanted him sent home - he was being
wound up from minute one of that game by Poulsen with his Illary Blasi
jibes. ZZ on the other hand has one confrontation 10mins form the end
flips and the French think its great. These things (ill discipline)
come back to haunt you in the end - carefull. Rooney should be carefull
as well.

I was geniunely v.disappointed with the French and esp ZZ on this
point. I wonder if the Eng kids against Germany could have done a ZZ
and got away with it - after allegedly being racially abused by the
Germany players in the U21 game.

Platini ONLY after this world cup said France dominated but italy won
the final just like the reverse was true in 2000. Pity he didn't say
that after 2000 final :-)

So yes very poor in 2002, but the French and (apart from their sporting
behaviour in stade di France last month which I congratulate them for)
and the Eng cannot give sporting leasons in behaviour to Italy w.r.t
football.
Post by FairFootball
Post by Dotstir
Just look at how badley England
complained about the call back vs Portugal in 2004 as an example, and that
was a good call. Where is that on your fairfootball page John Shocker?
John Shocked has nothing to do with FairFootball.
We weren't around in 2004 and didn't yet get to do past tournaments, as
we'd like to be able someday. Anyway, we won't be covering the Euro
since we think it's too minor a tournament. Only World Cup and UCL,
this is all that really matters in our opinion.
Post by Dotstir
2002 is another story. Any team who had 4 goals called back that were
legitimate would have gripes.
We agree this much, as you can see on our site (the page that explains
our scheme). But then, so would any team that should have won the final
3 - 0 and was instead handed a 1 - 1 by the ref and then went on to
lose at penalties.
Post by Dotstir
Post by FairFootball
Anyway, what they won they won without cheating.
Italy are deserving champions, I agree.
Is this the best you can do ? Pretending I was talking about Italy when
I was in fact about the french ? Pathetic.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To see how the refs messed up World Cup 2006, visit
http://www.FairFootball.com
FairFootball
2006-10-12 20:02:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yitzak
X-No-archive: yes
I actually was quite enthusiastic upon hearing of Fairfootball website.
Thank you. Feels good to hear it, even in this context. Too bad yo
don't want it to be archived. :)
Post by Yitzak
Actually visiting it was very disappointing to say the least.
Why is this, may I ask ? We'd be really interested about it. As you may
know we have a feedback link that's exactly for this purpose but nobody
has used it yet. And I'd like to ask also if you recorded the games in
question and looked closely at each play before forming an opinion, and
from the right angle. I can tell you from my personal experience that
it can look very different if you do this. This goes to all other
critics on this forum.
Post by Yitzak
its an England fan site (no disrespect to other eng fans) I guess,
judging from your site.
This I really cannot understand, how can you say this ? Who is our
corrected WCup winner, is it England by any chance ? Have we said
anything about the Portugal - England game ? Don't you think we could
have if it was like you say ? Have we taken part of Arsenal in our UCL
covering ? Please go look at what we wrote about their semi-final with
Villarreal as well as the final with Barcelona. BTW this applies as
well to those who say we were biased towards the french. Look at our
covering of the Portugal - France semi-final. You could only assume
reasonably that we are pro-portuguese if you insist to think like this.
The only thing I can tell you is that if we go on long enough you'll
see that this is not the case (not that we aren't portuguese, I'm not
making any assertion as to what we are, but we try our best to be
neutral and we think so far we've done a pretty good job).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To see how the refs messed up World Cup 2006, visit
http://www.FairFootball.com
Zlata Militaru
2006-10-12 22:50:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by FairFootball
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To see how the refs messed up World Cup 2006, visit
http://www.FairFootball.com
You had me there on the World Cup, until the end when you give Portugal
as the "moral" winner in a final played against Germany.

Even if the refereeing had gone perfectly, I am not sure Portugal would
have beaten Germany in the finals.

In the third place match, the Germans totally bitch-slapped the
Portuguese.

Granted, it was the third place match, and you could argue that the
Germans were just better at channeling their anger and not necessarily
the better team (which I disagree with BTW). I know that both sides had
pretty tweaked lineups in the third place game, but I am not ready to go
along with you on the whole Portugal-wins-the-whole-thing thing. I'd
still say Germany wins it - especially when you factor in the
hypothetical win over Italy is in regulation time, which means less
fatigue and maybe even Ballack able to play in the final (he wouldn't
have been limping around that extra half hour). Plus you have the whole
home field thing going, which I have heard is pretty helpful for these
things. You say you think the final would have been more even, which I
can see happening, but I think you are assuming too much in giving
Portugal the "win"

Unless you have some kind of explanation for it, in which case, I'd be
happy to hear it.

Zlata
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
FairFootball
2006-10-12 23:05:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Zlata Militaru
Post by FairFootball
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To see how the refs messed up World Cup 2006, visit
http://www.FairFootball.com
You had me there on the World Cup, until the end when you give Portugal
as the "moral" winner in a final played against Germany.
Even if the refereeing had gone perfectly, I am not sure Portugal would
have beaten Germany in the finals.
In the third place match, the Germans totally bitch-slapped the
Portuguese.
Granted, it was the third place match, and you could argue that the
Germans were just better at channeling their anger and not necessarily
the better team (which I disagree with BTW). I know that both sides had
pretty tweaked lineups in the third place game, but I am not ready to go
along with you on the whole Portugal-wins-the-whole-thing thing. I'd
still say Germany wins it - especially when you factor in the
hypothetical win over Italy is in regulation time, which means less
fatigue and maybe even Ballack able to play in the final (he wouldn't
have been limping around that extra half hour). Plus you have the whole
home field thing going, which I have heard is pretty helpful for these
things. You say you think the final would have been more even, which I
can see happening, but I think you are assuming too much in giving
Portugal the "win"
Unless you have some kind of explanation for it, in which case, I'd be
happy to hear it.
Zlata
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
A clever comment. Thank you.
You still missed the point though. We designated Portugal as the winner
because this is how it resulted by rigorously applying our correction
scheme. What we explained there with the Portugal - Germany match was
that because of the special circumstances of the 3-rd place game we
cannot take that game and simply consider it as the big final. Had
Italy won the final correctly, then Germany would have been the
FairFootball winner because in that game Italy represented Germany.
That said, I disagree with you that Germany would have been the likely
winner. The way I saw it, Germany were lucky to have that penalty at
that moment, that is, if they had won it by that penalty it would have
been correct but it would have been lucky. Italy were on the whole
better than Germany. On the other hand I stand by my previous position
that I find it unquestionalble that France was a class above Italy in
the final and they only lost it because of lousy refereeing. Whereas
the France - Portugal game was very even, Portugal looked very
professional though not incredibly spectacular, you could see the hand
of Felipe. So, judging by transitivity, which I agree is not always a
correct thing to do in football but under the circumstances there's
nothing else to do, I'd say I'm pretty sure Portugal would have won.
Germany's win would have been a surprise, sure surprises happen but you
cannot assume them until they do happen because that's why they are
called surprises.
James Farrar
2006-10-13 00:09:25 UTC
Permalink
On 12 Oct 2006 16:05:39 -0700, "FairFootball"
Post by FairFootball
in that game Italy represented Germany.
This is even more bullshit than the rest of your thesis. It's
logically equivalent to A beat B, B beat C, C beat D, A is better than
D; logic which would, in 1994, have made my then-third-level English
club better than the champions of Europe.
FairFootball
2006-10-13 00:21:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Farrar
On 12 Oct 2006 16:05:39 -0700, "FairFootball"
Post by FairFootball
in that game Italy represented Germany.
This is even more bullshit than the rest of your thesis. It's
logically equivalent to A beat B, B beat C, C beat D, A is better than
D; logic which would, in 1994, have made my then-third-level English
club better than the champions of Europe.
I'm not sure what you're referring to, I gues you're taking games into
account from some third-grade competition, and played at lengthy
intervals from one another. If this is what you're saying then I dare
say you're pathetically bullshit yourself; obviously this applies only
in the same competition and not any competition but only those every
team is willing to spit their guts up to win, such as the WCup and the
UCL (and only in the knock-out rounds when it's win or die). Truly, I
don't know why I even bothered to respond to such a post.
James Farrar
2006-10-13 00:24:22 UTC
Permalink
On 12 Oct 2006 17:21:27 -0700, "FairFootball"
Post by FairFootball
Post by James Farrar
On 12 Oct 2006 16:05:39 -0700, "FairFootball"
Post by FairFootball
in that game Italy represented Germany.
This is even more bullshit than the rest of your thesis. It's
logically equivalent to A beat B, B beat C, C beat D, A is better than
D; logic which would, in 1994, have made my then-third-level English
club better than the champions of Europe.
I'm not sure what you're referring to, I gues you're taking games into
account from some third-grade competition, and played at lengthy
intervals from one another.
Actually, one FA Cup game, the rest from the FAPL, Serie A and the
Champions League.
Post by FairFootball
If this is what you're saying then I dare
say you're pathetically bullshit yourself;
I'm saying the "logic" is unworthy of the name.
Post by FairFootball
obviously this applies only
in the same competition and not any competition but only those every
team is willing to spit their guts up to win, such as the WCup and the
UCL (and only in the knock-out rounds when it's win or die). Truly, I
don't know why I even bothered to respond to such a post.
Nor do I. It seems almost like you've made it up as you've gone along,
and then have to cling to defending it dogmatically despite the fact
that it makes no sense.
FairFootball
2006-10-13 00:40:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Farrar
I'm saying the "logic" is unworthy of the name.
Look, I agree this doesn't always work, as I already said. Under the
circumstances I think it would be OK to judge like this because IMO
France was so much better than Italy that any other distorsions matter
little. Of course there is no absolute saying, as I repeatedly stated
here as well as we've written on our site.
Anyway, this has little to do with FairFootball. We don't apply this
"logic" there but our correction scheme. Which is also far from being
perfect or certain. Everything you and others point here out we've
already addressed on our site, I don't have to make up anything as I go
since I merely only have to repeat what we've said there already. We
only claim our winner is a better guess as to which team played best in
the tournament than is the official winner we can see with our own eyes
is based on referee mistakes. If you can understand this, fine, if you
cannot than that's fine also, nobody forces you to like FairFootball if
you're happy with how things are now.
Dotstir
2006-10-13 04:38:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by FairFootball
Post by James Farrar
I'm saying the "logic" is unworthy of the name.
Look, I agree this doesn't always work, as I already said. Under the
circumstances I think it would be OK to judge like this because IMO
France was so much better than Italy that any other distorsions matter
little
Distortions indeed.

ITA FRA
3 Shots on Goal 5
5 Shots 13
17 Fouls 24
5 Corner Kicks 7
1 Free Kicks 0
4 Offsides 2
0 Own Goals 0
1 Yellow Cards 3
0 Red Cards 1
55% Ball Possession 45%



begin 666 ita.gif
M1TE&.#EA$@`,`)$``)F9F?___Q",&/\``"'Y! ``````+ `````2``P```(E
GE ^IPWT7HFSN"3GIL!<'O5G>IW$C:'JHJ)8LMCZG*[<4IRQ:`0`[
`
end

begin 666 fra.gif
M1TE&.#EA$@`,`)$``)F9F?___P``I?\``"'Y! ``````+ `````2``P```(E
GE ^IPWT7HFSN"3GIL!<'O5G>IW$C:'JHJ)8LMCZG*[<4IRQ:`0`[
`
end
Dotstir
2006-10-13 04:35:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Farrar
On 12 Oct 2006 17:21:27 -0700, "FairFootball"
Post by FairFootball
Post by James Farrar
On 12 Oct 2006 16:05:39 -0700, "FairFootball"
Post by FairFootball
in that game Italy represented Germany.
This is even more bullshit than the rest of your thesis. It's
logically equivalent to A beat B, B beat C, C beat D, A is better than
D; logic which would, in 1994, have made my then-third-level English
club better than the champions of Europe.
I'm not sure what you're referring to, I gues you're taking games into
account from some third-grade competition, and played at lengthy
intervals from one another.
Actually, one FA Cup game, the rest from the FAPL, Serie A and the
Champions League.
Post by FairFootball
If this is what you're saying then I dare
say you're pathetically bullshit yourself;
I'm saying the "logic" is unworthy of the name.
Post by FairFootball
obviously this applies only
in the same competition and not any competition but only those every
team is willing to spit their guts up to win, such as the WCup and the
UCL (and only in the knock-out rounds when it's win or die). Truly, I
don't know why I even bothered to respond to such a post.
Nor do I. It seems almost like you've made it up as you've gone along,
Welcome to John Shocked's world :))
Post by James Farrar
and then have to cling to defending it dogmatically despite the fact
that it makes no sense.
Paranoiacs never make sense, although they truly believe they do. If you
would just take the time to look at it
from the right angle that is, they're sure you'll agree too.
Zlata Militaru
2006-10-17 02:43:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by FairFootball
A clever comment. Thank you.
You're welcome. Assuming you're not taking the piss.
Post by FairFootball
You still missed the point though. We designated Portugal as the winner
because this is how it resulted by rigorously applying our correction
scheme. What we explained there with the Portugal - Germany match was
that because of the special circumstances of the 3-rd place game we
cannot take that game and simply consider it as the big final.
Why can't you do that? I mean, take into account that Portugal actually
got their asses handed to them by Germany? I mean, surely you have to
take reality into account at some point or another, no?

And you never answered my main point - if we are in an entirely
hypothetical situation, then hypothetically - Germany defeats Argentina
in regulation time --> no brawl (sucks cuz that was the best part of the
game) and no brawl--> Frings not suspended, which would have made a
difference in the way the next game against Italy went (much better
German defense, Germans less fatigued) which could have potentially
influenced the result.

I guess my problem with your analysis is that you're looking at each
individual game in a vacuum, when in fact the events in the previous
game could influence the next game. I already mentioned the lack of
overtime and the impact that would have had on Ballack's fitness for the
final. And yet you're leaving these pretty crucial details out. They
make a difference.
Post by FairFootball
that I find it unquestionalble that France was a class above Italy in
the final and they only lost it because of lousy refereeing.
But just because France was better than Italy doesn't mean Portugal was
better than Germany. They have nothing to do with one another.
Post by FairFootball
I'd say I'm pretty sure Portugal would have won.
Germany's win would have been a surprise, sure surprises happen but you
cannot assume them until they do happen because that's why they are
called surprises.
Were you actually surprised Germany beat Portugal? For real?

I mean, I was surprised too, but not at the result but at the fact that
it turned into a total smackdown, with their B-side in.

Portugal barely got past England on penalties, got past Holland partly
due to some dodgy refereeing and some possibly poor decision-making on
the Dutch coach's part. You expected them to beat a team, which, in your
mind, shoulda coulda woulda defeated both Italy and Argentina in
regulation time? Who, after two regulation wins, would not be hampered
by injuries? Who were playing at home? Are you serious?

My younger sister, who knows fuck-all about the world cup, said to me
before the third place game "I think Portugal's in for it. The Germans
are gonna be so pissed off." While a pretty simplistic statement,
actually ended up capturing the reality of the game better than your
hypothetical A>B B>C A>C analogy.

I mean, I find your project interesting in concept, but I think your
methodology (using transitive results rather than real results, looking
at each game individually rather than as a product of the previous game,
ignoring other issues like injuries, suspensions etc) needs some work.

Zlata
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Dotstir
2006-10-13 04:30:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Zlata Militaru
Post by FairFootball
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To see how the refs messed up World Cup 2006, visit
http://www.FairFootball.com
You had me there on the World Cup, until the end when you give Portugal
as the "moral" winner in a final played against Germany.
John Shocked doesn't understand that the chain of events post a certain
event would likely have been completely different
had that even been changed. For example he talks about send offs that should
not have happened, or sending offs that should
have but did not. Regardless of whether his perceptions are right or wrong,
being the latter 100% of the time, goals that came
after the event that he wants changed may not have happened that way or at
all.

His fairfootball site is a worthless site that just proves an idiot and a
computer can register a completely worthless and irrelevant website
and have their dellusional thoughts published in cyberspace.
Zlata Militaru
2006-10-19 23:48:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by Zlata Militaru
You had me there on the World Cup, until the end when you give Portugal
as the "moral" winner in a final played against Germany.
John Shocked doesn't understand that the chain of events post a certain
event would likely have been completely different
had that even been changed. For example he talks about send offs that should
not have happened, or sending offs that should
have but did not. Regardless of whether his perceptions are right or wrong,
being the latter 100% of the time, goals that came
after the event that he wants changed may not have happened that way or at
all.
Wait - Shocked and Fairfootball are the same person?

Damn, I'm a retard for missing that.

Anyway - one problem I see with basing an entire world cup
hypothetically only on sending offs and calls is that he is ignoring
other events which also may have been influenced by previous games which
would have an impact on the next game. I mean, it's impossible to change
the refereeing results while leaving everything else constant.
Refereeing decisions and the events that follow afterwards are NOT
independent variables. In a tournament, one change in events in a single
game can have repercussions in the match itself, and in the matches that
follow. It's not advanced chaos mathematics here - it's basic
probability.

In my apparently wasted post I used the example of Germany - he thinks
Germany should have beat Argentina in regular time - now *whether*
Germany should have beat Argentina if the reffing was "better," that is
another question. So, anyway, leave that aside and let's assume that in
Shocked's parallel universe Germany wins against Argentina in regulation
time. This means no extra time, which means 30 minutes of rest going
into the next game. Regulation time also means no penalties which means
no post-match fight, which means Frings wouldn't have been suspended.
This means, going into the semi's, they're better rested, full side and
Ballack less injured. Does it mean they win? Who the hell knows?
Furthermore - who the hell cares, it already happened? But, would having
more rest, Ballack healthier and Frings in the match have made a
difference in the way the Germans played? Yes, definitely. Would it have
also made a difference in the way the Italians played? Well, duh, of
course it would. So the play ITSELF would have been impacted. I mean, in
his version during the Italy match Podolski was denied a penalty toward
the end of regulation time. But, in reality, if the events in the
Argentina match had been different, then the play against Italy would
have been different. In this alternate universe it may be that Lukas
Podolski was not in the penalty area during the exact moment as he was
in real life. Maybe the play would be in the midfield, maybe the
Italians would be taking a free kick, maybe the Germans would have
already scored - we CAN'T know based on the changes already made in the
previous match. So it's really stupid to even bother constructing a
"parallel universe" world cup!

Zlata
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Dotstir
2006-10-13 04:26:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by FairFootball
Post by Yitzak
X-No-archive: yes
I actually was quite enthusiastic upon hearing of Fairfootball website.
Thank you. Feels good to hear it, even in this context. Too bad yo
don't want it to be archived. :)
Post by Yitzak
Actually visiting it was very disappointing to say the least.
Why is this, may I ask ? We'd be really interested about it. As you may
know we have a feedback link that's exactly for this purpose but nobody
has used it yet. And I'd like to ask also if you recorded the games in
question and looked closely at each play before forming an opinion, and
from the right angle.
hahahaha..."the right angle" undoutedly meaning from the perspective that
someone like yourself with pre-set filters are looking for.
Post by FairFootball
I can tell you from my personal experience that
it can look very different if you do this.
No shit...
Post by FairFootball
This goes to all other
critics on this forum.
Post by Yitzak
its an England fan site (no disrespect to other eng fans) I guess,
judging from your site.
This I really cannot understand, how can you say this ? Who is our
corrected WCup winner, is it England by any chance?
Stop trying to present the illusion of a conglomerate effort for your
one-man site with whimsical outcomes.
FairFootball
2006-10-14 20:09:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Stop trying to present the illusion of a conglomerate effort for your
one-man site with whimsical outcomes.
Dotstir and all you other italian trolls out there, all I can tell you
is this: I bet the only reason you hate FairFootball is that it
happened that we had to decide this year Italy is a wrong winner. Which
it is. So, let's hope Milan loses to Barcelona in the UCL final next
may by a wrongly awarded penalty. Then we'll correct it on our web
site, of course, so you'll see we are not anti-Italy and you'll
probably get to like it. Until then, have a nice troll life.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To see how the refs messed up World Cup 2006, visit
http://www.FairFootball.com
Dotstir
2006-10-15 02:51:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by FairFootball
Post by Dotstir
Stop trying to present the illusion of a conglomerate effort for your
one-man site with whimsical outcomes.
Dotstir and all you other italian trolls out there, all I can tell you
is this: I bet the only reason you hate FairFootball is that it
happened that we had to decide this year Italy is a wrong winner.
Not only us Italians recognize that your one man site is a joke.

Distortions indeed.

ITA FRA
3 Shots on Goal 5
5 Shots 13
17 Fouls 24
5 Corner Kicks 7
1 Free Kicks 0
4 Offsides 2
0 Own Goals 0
1 Yellow Cards 3
0 Red Cards 1
55% Ball Possession 45%

Your site is so full of logical distortions that a 5 year old could pick it
apart. No one has the attention span to waste on such an endeavour otherwise
you'd disappear as fast as you made that site, which probably took no longer
than 5 minutes.

That's the nature of imagination. What of it? I could imagine that you're a
40 year old loser living in his mothers home still, dressing in her clothes.
Would it make it real? There's the quality of your site.
FairFootball
2006-10-15 23:37:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by FairFootball
Post by Dotstir
Stop trying to present the illusion of a conglomerate effort for your
one-man site with whimsical outcomes.
Dotstir and all you other italian trolls out there, all I can tell you
is this: I bet the only reason you hate FairFootball is that it
happened that we had to decide this year Italy is a wrong winner.
Not only us Italians recognize that your one man site is a joke.
You are certainly right at this point, unfortunately. My previous
message was a little exaggerated, intentionally. And there are of
course also italians who don't like it for, let's say, valid reasons.
This is hardly a surprise to anybody. Well, as I said, if you don't
like it then don't like it, it's your loss.

You are definitely wrong about one thing, FairFootball is not one-man,
and it certainly took more than 5 minutes to make; though the work-time
is indeed hardly an impressive one. I'm not going to go into more
details or arguments about this, however, as it is of little relevance
anyway.

I'm just curious what someone like you would have thought if
FairFootball had started in 2002 when Italy and Spain were thrown out.
But I guess we'll never know.
Post by Dotstir
That's the nature of imagination. What of it? ...
What's stone real and there for all to see OTOH are the many referee
errors and wrong winners because of them.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------­--

To see how the refs messed up World Cup 2006, visit
http://www.FairFootball.com
Dotstir
2006-10-16 05:59:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by FairFootball
Post by Dotstir
Post by FairFootball
Post by Dotstir
Stop trying to present the illusion of a conglomerate effort for your
one-man site with whimsical outcomes.
Dotstir and all you other italian trolls out there, all I can tell you
is this: I bet the only reason you hate FairFootball is that it
happened that we had to decide this year Italy is a wrong winner.
Not only us Italians recognize that your one man site is a joke.
You are certainly right at this point, unfortunately. My previous
message was a little exaggerated, intentionally. And there are of
course also italians who don't like it for, let's say, valid reasons.
This is hardly a surprise to anybody. Well, as I said, if you don't
like it then don't like it, it's your loss.
You're right, no one will give me back the 5 minutes I lost looking at your
hair brained site.
Post by FairFootball
I'm just curious what someone like you would have thought if
FairFootball had started in 2002 when Italy and Spain were thrown out.
But I guess we'll never know.
LOL. If you and your crew wanted to do an "expose" on 2002, you could easily
do it. That's the nature of imagination. Pull up a few tapes, smoke another
one and type away. What's holding you back?
Post by FairFootball
Post by Dotstir
That's the nature of imagination. What of it? ...
What's stone real and there for all to see OTOH are the many referee
errors and wrong winners because of them.
Stones aren't clear, but anyhow you keep failing to address the issue that
if there was a different call made at say the 30th minute of a game, it does
no guarantee that the chain of events following would be precisely the same
as occured in real time. In fact, that one different decision would probably
change the course of
events. You fail to address this. That's the nature of imagination. What of
it? I could imagine that you are a lonely 40 year old virgin and make a
website about
that too. Does it make it real?
FairFootball
2006-10-16 21:47:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Stones aren't clear, but anyhow you keep failing to address the issue that
if there was a different call made at say the 30th minute of a game, it does
no guarantee that the chain of events following would be precisely the same
as occured in real time. In fact, that one different decision would probably
change the course of events. You fail to address this. ...
We did address it, on our site as well as here on RSS, even in this
discussion. Let me try to be more specific, though I have little hope
it will help.
True, one cannot know what would have happened had the ref decided
correctly, as we do say on our site. (I'm not going to give you an
exact pointer, go look for it if you're interested, which I guess
you're not. This is typical troll behaviour, not taking time to see
what it's all about but quick to criticise.) So we don't know whether
Italy would have won it either. In fact, in our particular case we can
be more than reasonably sure Italy wouldn't have won it; had the
germans been given that penalty it's almost sure they would have scored
and Italy wouldn't have had time to equalise. Plus I'm 99,99% sure they
would have clearly lost to France in the final if there had been
correct refereeing. So, the only teams which could reasonably have been
champions are Portugal, Brazil and France (maybe also Germany, on the
grounds that you cannot know what they would have done in the final,
but as I said I think they are less likely). Our scheme has indicated
Portugal, which is OK. Actually IMO they have been the most consistent
and professional throughout the whole tournament.
Bottom line, as I already said more than once, the FairFootball winner
is not certain but he is more likely than the official one. This is
true generally, and it's particularly true in the case of the World Cup
06.

FairFootball is not pure imagination, it's reasonable estimation based
on the known facts. What you don't get is that the actual fantasy is
believing Italy are the champions, given how they won. You believe it
because FIFA tells you so (and, in your particular case, because you
want to believe it). But, you know, a billion people believing a
fantasy doesn't make it real.
Post by Dotstir
Post by FairFootball
I'm just curious what someone like you would have thought if
FairFootball had started in 2002 when Italy and Spain were thrown out.
But I guess we'll never know.
LOL. If you and your crew wanted to do an "expose" on 2002, you could easily
do it. ...
That's not the same thing and you know it. I don't think I have to
explain it to you in detail.
Dotstir
2006-10-17 20:55:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by FairFootball
We did address it, on our site as well as here on RSS, even in this
discussion. Let me try to be more specific, though I have little hope
it will help.
1 - There is no "we" there is just 'you'
2 - The quality of your fantasies can be bettered with a good bottle of
scotch and an additional 5 minutes added to the inital 5 it took for you to
come up with it.
FairFootball
2006-10-20 16:51:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by FairFootball
We did address it, on our site as well as here on RSS, even in this
discussion. Let me try to be more specific, though I have little hope
it will help.
1 - There is no "we" there is just 'you'
2 - The quality of your fantasies can be bettered with a good bottle of
scotch and an additional 5 minutes added to the inital 5 it took for you to
come up with it.
Just when I was thinking we might be able to have a constructive
conversation. Guess I was wrong. No surprise, after all.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To see how the refs messed up World Cup 2006, visit
http://www.FairFootball.com
Dotstir
2006-10-27 06:27:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by FairFootball
Post by Dotstir
Post by FairFootball
We did address it, on our site as well as here on RSS, even in this
discussion. Let me try to be more specific, though I have little hope
it will help.
1 - There is no "we" there is just 'you'
2 - The quality of your fantasies can be bettered with a good bottle of
scotch and an additional 5 minutes added to the inital 5 it took for you to
come up with it.
Just when I was thinking we might be able to have a constructive
conversation. Guess I was wrong. No surprise, after all.
What sort of constructive conversations are you looking for when you are
promoting a site
chalk full of logical failings. Almost everyone here has pointed it out to
you, and you are
widely regarded as a kook John.
FairFootball
2006-10-16 21:47:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Stones aren't clear, but anyhow you keep failing to address the issue that
if there was a different call made at say the 30th minute of a game, it does
no guarantee that the chain of events following would be precisely the same
as occured in real time. In fact, that one different decision would probably
change the course of events. You fail to address this. ...
We did address it, on our site as well as here on RSS, even in this
discussion. Let me try to be more specific, though I have little hope
it will help.
True, one cannot know what would have happened had the ref decided
correctly, as we do say on our site. (I'm not going to give you an
exact pointer, go look for it if you're interested, which I guess
you're not. This is typical troll behaviour, not taking time to see
what it's all about but quick to criticise.) So we don't know whether
Italy would have won it either. In fact, in our particular case we can
be more than reasonably sure Italy wouldn't have won it; had the
germans been given that penalty it's almost sure they would have scored
and Italy wouldn't have had time to equalise. Plus I'm 99,99% sure they
would have clearly lost to France in the final if there had been
correct refereeing. So, the only teams which could reasonably have been
champions are Portugal, Brazil and France (maybe also Germany, on the
grounds that you cannot know what they would have done in the final,
but as I said I think they are less likely). Our scheme has indicated
Portugal, which is OK. Actually IMO they have been the most consistent
and professional throughout the whole tournament.
Bottom line, as I already said more than once, the FairFootball winner
is not certain but he is more likely than the official one. This is
true generally, and it's particularly true in the case of the World Cup
06.

FairFootball is not pure imagination, it's reasonable estimation based
on the known facts. What you don't get is that the actual fantasy is
believing Italy are the champions, given how they won. You believe it
because FIFA tells you so (and, in your particular case, because you
want to believe it). But, you know, a billion people believing a
fantasy doesn't make it real.
Post by Dotstir
Post by FairFootball
I'm just curious what someone like you would have thought if
FairFootball had started in 2002 when Italy and Spain were thrown out.
But I guess we'll never know.
LOL. If you and your crew wanted to do an "expose" on 2002, you could easily
do it. ...
That's not the same thing and you know it. I don't think I have to
explain it to you in detail.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------­--
To see how the refs messed up World Cup 2006, visit
http://www.FairFootball.com
Dotstir
2006-10-17 20:55:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by FairFootball
Post by Dotstir
Post by FairFootball
Post by Dotstir
Stop trying to present the illusion of a conglomerate effort for your
one-man site with whimsical outcomes.
Dotstir and all you other italian trolls out there, all I can tell you
is this: I bet the only reason you hate FairFootball is that it
happened that we had to decide this year Italy is a wrong winner.
Not only us Italians recognize that your one man site is a joke.
You are certainly right at this point, unfortunately. My previous
message was a little exaggerated, intentionally. And there are of
course also italians who don't like it for, let's say, valid reasons.
This is hardly a surprise to anybody. Well, as I said, if you don't
like it then don't like it, it's your loss.
You're right, no one will give me back the 5 minutes I lost looking at your
hair brained site.
Post by FairFootball
I'm just curious what someone like you would have thought if
FairFootball had started in 2002 when Italy and Spain were thrown out.
But I guess we'll never know.
LOL. If you and your crew wanted to do an "expose" on 2002, you could easily
do it. That's the nature of imagination. Pull up a few tapes, smoke another
one and type away. What's holding you back?
Post by FairFootball
Post by Dotstir
That's the nature of imagination. What of it? ...
What's stone real and there for all to see OTOH are the many referee
errors and wrong winners because of them.
Stones aren't clear, but anyhow you keep failing to address the issue that
if there was a different call made at say the 30th minute of a game, it does
no guarantee that the chain of events following would be precisely the same
as occured in real time. In fact, that one different decision would probably
change the course of
events. You fail to address this. That's the nature of imagination. What of
it? I could imagine that you are a lonely 40 year old virgin and make a
website about
that too. Does it make it real?
Dotstir
2006-10-13 04:21:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yitzak
I actually was quite enthusiastic upon hearing of Fairfootball website.
Actually visiting it was very disappointing to say the least.
its an England fan site (no disrespect to other eng fans) I guess,
judging from your site.
"Its all England were robbed". I guess you're quite young as well? I
apologise if not correct.
You are right Italy completely overeacted in 2002 well beyond
proportion. The consequences were not as bad though as Eng against
Portugal (death threats etc). But was embarassing in italy.
English fans, media or whatever, complained more than Italians did for the
call made against their team in 2004. It was the right
call too, nevermind that Italy had 4 legitimate goals called back in 2002
due to careless mistakes, or otherwise if you are to take
a John Shocked view of things.
Post by Yitzak
They took 2000 defeat pretty well though. Even though 5 mins extra time
were played - its since then UEFA mention 30secs per sub (NEVER
before), its now taken as granted. Or Desailly should have been sent
off for a heinous elbow in his Pen Area.
France were totally outclassed in 2000, but sometimes sh*t happens. Desailly
did get away with a brutal
elbow.
Post by Yitzak
Independant (nerds if you ask me) have counted the time and it should
have been closer to 2mins.
maximum.
Post by Yitzak
But what surprised me - Italy had Totti banned for spitting. Even
though hugely popular in Italy he was roundly critisced and many
italians (poles in newspapers) wanted him sent home - he was being
wound up from minute one of that game by Poulsen with his Illary Blasi
jibes.
Uhm there was more. Poulsen was punching at him and pulling on his hair
whenever he had the opportunity.
At one point in the match Totti went to the linesman to complain about
Poulsen pulling on his hair and
was subsequently waved off.
Post by Yitzak
ZZ on the other hand has one confrontation 10mins form the end
flips and the French think its great. These things (ill discipline)
come back to haunt you in the end - carefull. Rooney should be carefull
as well.
Zidane was pissed off ever since Domenech wouldn't pull him off after he
requested a substitution. Buffon saving his header escalated it to where
only a minor provocation from Materazzi made him go cucoo. All that in
response to his own arrogant provocation.
Post by Yitzak
I was geniunely v.disappointed with the French and esp ZZ on this
point. I wonder if the Eng kids against Germany could have done a ZZ
and got away with it - after allegedly being racially abused by the
Germany players in the U21 game.
Platini ONLY after this world cup said France dominated but italy won
the final just like the reverse was true in 2000. Pity he didn't say
that after 2000 final :-)
France dominated? The possession statistics after the first half were
overwhelmingly in Italy's favor. Admittedly possession does not always
equate to who was the better or more impressive team, however Italy had to
recover a bogus penalty call and were the only team to recover a goal down
to France. Not Spain, Brazil, Portugal could do this. This genuinely took a
lot of effort and focus. It was easy to know why Italy was less energetic
than France because of this. We all know that it takes less energy to defend
than to go in an all out attack mode. France went into a defensive shell
after Malouda won his penalty on the dive. Italy needed to move forward and
attack, and as said recovered in less than 12 minutes but continued to pour
on the attack. Transitioning from attack to defense is not instantaneous.
After the half France came out of their defensive shell and Italy did not
immediately enter into one themselves, but it was obvious after about 5-10
minutes that France had more energy. I already explained why. Don't expect
idiots like Shocked to understand this. They are perpetually in a state of
shock, to probably almost everything around them :))
Post by Yitzak
Eng cannot give sporting leasons in behaviour to Italy w.r.t
football.
Dotstir
2006-10-15 02:48:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yitzak
X-No-archive: yes
I actually was quite enthusiastic upon hearing of Fairfootball website.
Actually visiting it was very disappointing to say the least.
You can't expect much more from the blinded by hatred John Shocked.
Dotstir
2006-10-13 04:11:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by FairFootball
Post by Dotstir
Just look at how badley England
complained about the call back vs Portugal in 2004 as an example, and that
was a good call. Where is that on your fairfootball page John Shocker?
John Shocked has nothing to do with FairFootball.
Oh give us a break John Shocked. Your obsession with hating Italy is not
shocking anymore.
Post by FairFootball
We weren't around in 2004 and didn't yet get to do past tournaments, as
we'd like to be able someday. Anyway, we won't be covering the Euro
since we think it's too minor a tournament. Only World Cup and UCL,
this is all that really matters in our opinion.
There is no "our" just a lonely bitter little person who doesn't have much
going on in his real life rather than
to succumb to products of a paranoid imagination. You're a shocked tool.
Take your finger out of the socket mate!
Post by FairFootball
Post by Dotstir
2002 is another story. Any team who had 4 goals called back that were
legitimate would have gripes.
We agree this much, as you can see on our site (the page that explains
our scheme). But then, so would any team that should have won the final
3 - 0 and was instead handed a 1 - 1 by the ref and then went on to
lose at penalties.
Wrong, Italy won on penalties not lost, and the score should have been 2-0
not 3-0 for Italy, unless of course the goalpost is
somehow part of this world wide conspiracy.
Post by FairFootball
Post by Dotstir
Post by FairFootball
Anyway, what they won they won without cheating.
Italy are deserving champions, I agree.
Is this the best you can do ?
Not much else has to be said. We have four stars, and I'm pretty sure the
team you support only has 1, be it England or France now...John Shocked.
SHUSSBAR
2006-10-16 13:30:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Not much else has to be said. We have four stars, and I'm pretty sure the
team you support only has 1, be it England or France now...John Shocked.
Proud of the first one you got in 1934, under Mussolini?.
Dotstir
2006-10-17 20:44:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not much else has to be said. We have four stars, and I'm pretty sure the
team you support only has 1, be it England or France now...John Shocked.
Proud of the first one you got in 1934, under Mussolini?.
Shows what bitter losers can do. Spanish defender created that lie, but it's
funny...we won 1936 and 1938 in France too. I guess we had no quality.

Also funny that Mussolini and then Fifa president hated each other.

It's OK, you can keep spreading rumors, but all it does it showcase how
bitter you really are Frenchie...I would offer you some cheese to go with
your whine, but I understand your kind likes the mouldy variety.
SHUSSBAR
2006-10-17 21:02:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not much else has to be said. We have four stars, and I'm pretty sure the
team you support only has 1, be it England or France now...John Shocked.
Proud of the first one you got in 1934, under Mussolini?.
Shows what bitter losers can do. Spanish defender created that lie, but it's
funny...we won 1936 and 1938 in France too. I guess we had no quality.
For you, everybody saying something about Italy is lying anyway.
Did not mentioned anything about 38, but you are right about 34, you
had no quality.
Post by Dotstir
Also funny that Mussolini and then Fifa president hated each other.
It's OK, you can keep spreading rumors,
It s not rumors, just facts that a quick search will amazingly reveal
to you.

but all it does it showcase how
Post by Dotstir
bitter you really are Frenchie...I would offer you some cheese to go with
your whine, but I understand your kind likes the mouldy variety.
Your vocabulary seems limited to the same words (bitter, sore..) and
your jokes are old and flat ( whine >> cheese) .

Please consult, you need help.
Dotstir
2006-10-17 23:36:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not much else has to be said. We have four stars, and I'm pretty sure the
team you support only has 1, be it England or France now...John Shocked.
Proud of the first one you got in 1934, under Mussolini?.
Shows what bitter losers can do. Spanish defender created that lie, but it's
funny...we won 1936 and 1938 in France too. I guess we had no quality.
For you, everybody saying something about Italy is lying anyway.
No. You could say that there was a scandal in Italian Serie A this summer,
and I wouldn't say it is a lie. Why?
Because there is cold-hard evidence.

This doesn't exist for the rumors spread about 1934. I looked into it
myself. They stemmed from a Spanish defender
claiming that it was fixed in their favor, and then spread in the newspapers
of that time. To date it's all rumorology,
which is bad science. What the likes of people like you do is still show how
ignorant we can be in today's day and age
putting our stock belief in rumors, false accusations and the like, rather
than hard science.

When you have the proof. Inspector Clouseau, then present it.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Did not mentioned anything about 38, but you are right about 34, you
had no quality.
Nice to see that you aren't beneath twisting my words around. Shows how
bitter you still are. Get over it.

The 1934 team was almost exactly the same as the gold medal winning team on
1936, when the Olympics were still
as big if not bigger than the World Cup, and 1938. I guess those were paid
and bought too? :))) Sore loser. Better
to not speak about something you don't know, than to open up your mouth and
show the world how stupid you
really are.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Also funny that Mussolini and then Fifa president hated each other.
It's OK, you can keep spreading rumors,
It s not rumors, just facts that a quick search will amazingly reveal
to you.
There are no facts. You don't seem to know the difference. I am not
surprised.
Post by SHUSSBAR
but all it does it showcase how
Post by Dotstir
bitter you really are Frenchie...I would offer you some cheese to go with
your whine, but I understand your kind likes the mouldy variety.
Your vocabulary seems limited to the same words (bitter, sore..) and
your jokes are old and flat ( whine >> cheese) .
Why should I try to be creative when they fit aptly? Go ahead and come up
with dysphemisms like
necrosed and the like, if it makes you feel better. I'll just keep pointing
out how bitter, sore, and what
a fucking wanker you really are....Frenchie :)))
Post by SHUSSBAR
Please consult, you need help.
FairFootball
2006-10-20 17:02:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not much else has to be said. We have four stars, and I'm pretty sure the
team you support only has 1, be it England or France now...John Shocked.
Proud of the first one you got in 1934, under Mussolini?.
Shows what bitter losers can do. Spanish defender created that lie, but it's
funny...we won 1936 and 1938 in France too. I guess we had no quality.
For you, everybody saying something about Italy is lying anyway.
Did not mentioned anything about 38, but you are right about 34, you
had no quality.
You might as well argue about whether the francs were right when taking
Gaulle away from the romans (which they did anyway).
Let him enjoy his three stars and one black hole, it's OK.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To see how the refs messed up World Cup 2006, visit
http://www.FairFootball.com
Dotstir
2006-10-17 20:57:05 UTC
Permalink
"SHUSSBAR" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:***@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

Enjoy you little bitch:

Loading Image...
SHUSSBAR
2006-10-17 21:05:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
http://img226.imageshack.us/img226/8467/8479px3hu8.jpg
The confirmation . You got only old jokes and now, the brain lacking
oxygen, only insults.
Dotstir
2006-10-17 23:31:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
http://img226.imageshack.us/img226/8467/8479px3hu8.jpg
The confirmation . You got only old jokes and now, the brain lacking
oxygen, only insults.
If insulting someone means that the brain lacks oxygen, you would be talking
for yourself there Shussybar.

I'm just giving you a dose of your own medicine, bi-atch!

You can confirm whatever you would like for this to mean. Wank-on :))))
FairFootball
2006-10-20 16:58:02 UTC
Permalink
Not much else has to be said. We have four stars, ...
Three stars and a black hole, that is.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To see how the refs messed up World Cup 2006, visit
http://www.FairFootball.com
Dotstir
2006-10-27 06:27:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by FairFootball
Not much else has to be said. We have four stars, ...
Three stars and a black hole, that is.
Lame troll, but I'll bite.

I'm willing to bet that even if it were 3 stars it's 2 more than your team
has ;)

Now, put that in your pipe and smoke it. The hallucinations
will be much better than the ones you currently suffer from.
Mr. NightRider
2006-10-11 17:05:20 UTC
Permalink
Actually in 2000 Italy was not sore losers. In 2002 however, the
referee did play a big part in not only Italy losing but Spain also.
Funny, how that ref that screwed Italy against South Korea was later
arrested in his home country for taking bribes and fixing games. The
fact is FIFA gave RAI money after the WC in 2002 because they did not
want to go to court. Since then FIFA has had a hard on for Italy as was
witnessed at this WC when Blatter did not present the cup to Italy.
Post by FairFootball
Post by Mr. NightRider
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final
Yeah, well, Italy are sore winners.
Anyway, the french are no way close to being as sore losers as the
italians in 2000 and 2002.
Post by Mr. NightRider
The world cup they won and the euro is all they win ever.
I wouldn't bet on it. Probably they won't win it for a while any more,
but they have a habit to produce a brilliant player every 20 years or
so. And IMO Zidane and Platini can reasonably be considered the best
european players ever.
Anyway, what they won they won without cheating.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To see how the refs messed up World Cup 2006, visit
http://www.FairFootball.com
Dotstir
2006-10-11 20:26:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. NightRider
Actually in 2000 Italy was not sore losers. In 2002 however, the
referee did play a big part in not only Italy losing but Spain also.
Funny, how that ref that screwed Italy against South Korea was later
arrested in his home country for taking bribes and fixing games. The
fact is FIFA gave RAI money after the WC in 2002 because they did not
want to go to court. Since then FIFA has had a hard on for Italy as was
witnessed at this WC when Blatter did not present the cup to Italy.
Let John Shocker and the French whine about non existant penalties and false
yellows, pretending they were better, creating their uncredible
"fairfootbal" sites as if anyone who actually matters is going to pay
attention to their drivel. Please, just enjoy their pain :)))
Post by Mr. NightRider
Post by FairFootball
Post by Mr. NightRider
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final
Yeah, well, Italy are sore winners.
Anyway, the french are no way close to being as sore losers as the
italians in 2000 and 2002.
Post by Mr. NightRider
The world cup they won and the euro is all they win ever.
I wouldn't bet on it. Probably they won't win it for a while any more,
but they have a habit to produce a brilliant player every 20 years or
so. And IMO Zidane and Platini can reasonably be considered the best
european players ever.
Anyway, what they won they won without cheating.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To see how the refs messed up World Cup 2006, visit
http://www.FairFootball.com
Dotstir
2006-10-13 04:08:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by FairFootball
Post by Mr. NightRider
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final
Yeah, well, Italy are sore winners.
Anyway, the french are no way close to being as sore losers as the
italians in 2000 and 2002.
You, being the same person who was unaware that Champions had to qualify for
World Cups since 2002 have no credibility
in making an assessment on the status of fans back then.
varois83
2006-10-10 22:48:00 UTC
Permalink
Mr. NightRider wrote:
France needs a
Post by Mr. NightRider
reality check. The world cup they won and the euro is all they win ever.
Wrong France has 2 euros and 1 world cup.

Patrick
Dotstir
2006-10-11 20:26:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. NightRider
France needs a
Post by Mr. NightRider
reality check. The world cup they won and the euro is all they win ever.
Wrong France has 2 euros and 1 world cup.
Right, and they truly deserved on Euro and one World cup.
Post by Mr. NightRider
Patrick
v***@yahoo.com
2006-10-11 03:31:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. NightRider
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final but Saturday they showed it evenn more. Henry said Scotland
was lucky to win. How was Scotland lucky?? I watched the second half
and Scotland was as good if not better than France. France needs a
reality check. The world cup they won and the euro is all they win ever.
Yes, World and Euro Championships is all France has won. Luckily for
Scotland and England, they are in no danger to do that.... But England
is still one of the 4 very best teams in Great Britain.
SHUSSBAR
2006-10-11 14:29:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by v***@yahoo.com
Post by Mr. NightRider
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final but Saturday they showed it evenn more. Henry said Scotland
was lucky to win. How was Scotland lucky?? I watched the second half
and Scotland was as good if not better than France. France needs a
reality check. The world cup they won and the euro is all they win ever.
Yes, World and Euro Championships is all France has won.
What else can you win as a european team? Confederation Cup? been there
, done that.

Luckily for
Post by v***@yahoo.com
Scotland and England, they are in no danger to do that.... But England
is still one of the 4 very best teams in Great Britain.
Dotstir
2006-10-15 02:52:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by v***@yahoo.com
Post by Mr. NightRider
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final but Saturday they showed it evenn more. Henry said Scotland
was lucky to win. How was Scotland lucky?? I watched the second half
and Scotland was as good if not better than France. France needs a
reality check. The world cup they won and the euro is all they win ever.
Yes, World and Euro Championships is all France has won.
What else can you win as a european team? Confederation Cup? been there
, done that.
The 'friendly' tournament? Congrats!! :)))
SHUSSBAR
2006-10-16 13:37:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by Mr. NightRider
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final but Saturday they showed it evenn more. Henry said Scotland
was lucky to win. How was Scotland lucky?? I watched the second half
and Scotland was as good if not better than France. France needs a
reality check. The world cup they won and the euro is all they win ever.
Yes, .
The 'friendly' tournament? Congrats!! :)))
Moron, instead of jumping on my reply, read what the guy said : ''World
and Euro Championships is all France has won.''

To that I replied : What else can you win as a european team?
Confederation Cup? been there , done that.
I could have said any other competitions in south america, but it would
have confused you more.

You probably don t get it due to your necrosis narrowminded oyster IQ.
Dotstir
2006-10-17 20:49:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Mr. NightRider
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final but Saturday they showed it evenn more. Henry said Scotland
was lucky to win. How was Scotland lucky?? I watched the second half
and Scotland was as good if not better than France. France needs a
reality check. The world cup they won and the euro is all they win ever.
Yes, .
What else can you win as a european team? Confederation Cup? been there
, done that.
The 'friendly' tournament? Congrats!! :)))
Moron, instead of jumping on my reply, read what the guy said : ''World
and Euro Championships is all France has won.''
You dishonest twat. I was responding to what you wrote:

" What else can you win as a european team? Confederation Cup? been there,
done that."

I've also put it back into the chain of events since you cut it out
dishonestly, proving again that you are bitter and would rather harp on
fabrications rather than truth. Tell us agan how if Trezeguet hit his PK,
France would have won. You failed to do anything with your charity in the
World Cup. You will also never win another.
I promise you that :)
Post by SHUSSBAR
You probably don t get it due to your necrosis narrowminded oyster IQ.
Not funny at all, but that's the best you got you wanker?
LOL...whine...cheese...enjoy!
SHUSSBAR
2006-10-17 21:12:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Mr. NightRider
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final but Saturday they showed it evenn more. Henry said Scotland
was lucky to win. How was Scotland lucky?? I watched the second half
and Scotland was as good if not better than France. France needs a
reality check. The world cup they won and the euro is all they win ever.
Yes, .
What else can you win as a european team? Confederation Cup? been there
, done that.
The 'friendly' tournament? Congrats!! :)))
Moron, instead of jumping on my reply, read what the guy said : ''World
and Euro Championships is all France has won.''
" What else can you win as a european team? Confederation Cup? been there,
done that."
So let me ask you the question : What else can you win as a european
team then?
Post by Dotstir
I've also put it back into the chain of events since you cut it out
dishonestly, proving again that you are bitter and would rather harp on
fabrications rather than truth.
Tell us agan how if Trezeguet hit his PK,
Post by Dotstir
France would have won. You failed to do anything with your charity in the
World Cup. You will also never win another.
I promise you that :)
I am very scared of this prediction Nostradamus!!
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
You probably don t get it due to your necrosis narrowminded oyster IQ.
Not funny at all, but that's the best you got you wanker?
LOL...whine...cheese...enjoy!
Safe! he did not forgot his usual old flat joke, topped with the
signature ''wanker'' . I was worried for a while.
Dotstir
2006-10-17 23:29:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by SHUSSBAR
So let me ask you the question : What else can you win as a european
team then?
That's not what I was responding to. I didn't care what Mr. Nightrider
implied. I just mentioned that the Confed Cup is regarded
as a "friendly" tournament, that's all.

No need to get all pissy about it.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not funny at all, but that's the best you got you wanker?
LOL...whine...cheese...enjoy!
Safe! he did not forgot his usual old flat joke, topped with the
signature ''wanker'' . I was worried for a while.
You talking, or more correctly whining to yourself again Frenchie?
SHUSSBAR
2006-10-18 13:58:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
So let me ask you the question : What else can you win as a european
team then?
That's not what I was responding to. I didn't care what Mr. Nightrider
implied. I just mentioned that the Confed Cup is regarded
as a "friendly" tournament, that's all.
Who said it was not? Who claim it was an accomplishment?
Post by Dotstir
No need to get all pissy about it.
Look who is talking !
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not funny at all, but that's the best you got you wanker?
LOL...whine...cheese...enjoy!
Safe! he did not forgot his usual old flat joke, topped with the
signature ''wanker'' . I was worried for a while.
You talking, or more correctly whining to yourself again Frenchie?
Did you gradute from a clown shool?
Dotstir
2006-10-19 06:14:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
So let me ask you the question : What else can you win as a european
team then?
That's not what I was responding to. I didn't care what Mr. Nightrider
implied. I just mentioned that the Confed Cup is regarded
as a "friendly" tournament, that's all.
Who said it was not? Who claim it was an accomplishment?
You, then you got insulting when I merely pointed out it was a friendly
tournament.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
No need to get all pissy about it.
Look who is talking !
Oh give it a rest.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not funny at all, but that's the best you got you wanker?
LOL...whine...cheese...enjoy!
Safe! he did not forgot his usual old flat joke, topped with the
signature ''wanker'' . I was worried for a while.
You talking, or more correctly whining to yourself again Frenchie?
Did you gradute from a clown shool?
No but I have a few tricks up my sleave.

Check this out...can you see who's flag is on the coffin Frenchie? :)))

http://media.putfile.com/celebrations-49


Po Po Po Po Po Po Poooooo :)))
SHUSSBAR
2006-10-19 13:11:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
So let me ask you the question : What else can you win as a european
team then?
That's not what I was responding to. I didn't care what Mr. Nightrider
implied. I just mentioned that the Confed Cup is regarded
as a "friendly" tournament, that's all.
Who said it was not? Who claim it was an accomplishment?
You, then you got insulting when I merely pointed out it was a friendly
tournament.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
No need to get all pissy about it.
Look who is talking !
Oh give it a rest.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not funny at all, but that's the best you got you wanker?
LOL...whine...cheese...enjoy!
Safe! he did not forgot his usual old flat joke, topped with the
signature ''wanker'' . I was worried for a while.
You talking, or more correctly whining to yourself again Frenchie?
Did you gradute from a clown shool?
No but I have a few tricks up my sleave.
Check this out...can you see who's flag is on the coffin Frenchie? :)))
http://media.putfile.com/celebrations-49
Po Po Po Po Po Po Poooooo :)))
Oh, it s terrible, i am hurt and scared. It s so much fun to see you
try so hard to explain your case. if it was that clear, may be you
would not have to do it.. Do you fear something? You amuse me everyday.

I am going to Italy next May, let s go see a game together. Where are
you from?
Dotstir
2006-10-20 08:27:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
So let me ask you the question : What else can you win as a european
team then?
That's not what I was responding to. I didn't care what Mr. Nightrider
implied. I just mentioned that the Confed Cup is regarded
as a "friendly" tournament, that's all.
Who said it was not? Who claim it was an accomplishment?
You, then you got insulting when I merely pointed out it was a friendly
tournament.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
No need to get all pissy about it.
Look who is talking !
Oh give it a rest.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not funny at all, but that's the best you got you wanker?
LOL...whine...cheese...enjoy!
Safe! he did not forgot his usual old flat joke, topped with the
signature ''wanker'' . I was worried for a while.
You talking, or more correctly whining to yourself again Frenchie?
Did you gradute from a clown shool?
No but I have a few tricks up my sleave.
Check this out...can you see who's flag is on the coffin Frenchie? :)))
http://media.putfile.com/celebrations-49
Po Po Po Po Po Po Poooooo :)))
Oh, it s terrible, i am hurt and scared. It s so much fun to see you
try so hard to explain your case.
What case are you talking about? Did I miss the trial? I thought it was the
circus we were auditioning for?

:))
Post by SHUSSBAR
if it was that clear, may be you
would not have to do it..
Are you trying to say something significant here?
Post by SHUSSBAR
Do you fear something? You amuse me everyday.
No I don't fear anything, why? Should I? I'm glad I amuse you, your pain
amuses me too :))
Post by SHUSSBAR
I am going to Italy next May, let s go see a game together.
Ok. If I'm still around these parts by then, remind me :))
SHUSSBAR
2006-10-22 00:59:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
So let me ask you the question : What else can you win as a european
team then?
That's not what I was responding to. I didn't care what Mr. Nightrider
implied. I just mentioned that the Confed Cup is regarded
as a "friendly" tournament, that's all.
Who said it was not? Who claim it was an accomplishment?
You, then you got insulting when I merely pointed out it was a friendly
tournament.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
No need to get all pissy about it.
Look who is talking !
Oh give it a rest.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not funny at all, but that's the best you got you wanker?
LOL...whine...cheese...enjoy!
Safe! he did not forgot his usual old flat joke, topped with the
signature ''wanker'' . I was worried for a while.
You talking, or more correctly whining to yourself again Frenchie?
Did you gradute from a clown shool?
No but I have a few tricks up my sleave.
Check this out...can you see who's flag is on the coffin Frenchie? :)))
http://media.putfile.com/celebrations-49
Po Po Po Po Po Po Poooooo :)))
Oh, it s terrible, i am hurt and scared. It s so much fun to see you
try so hard to explain your case.
What case are you talking about? Did I miss the trial? I thought it was the
circus we were auditioning for?
:))
You already graduated for the circus.
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
if it was that clear, may be you
would not have to do it..
Are you trying to say something significant here?
Something you won t understand, but that s fine.
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Do you fear something? You amuse me everyday.
No I don't fear anything, why? Should I? I'm glad I amuse you, your pain
amuses me too :))
I am in pain to see you have to go to such lenghts to try to
demonstrate something that you are the only one to believe in. Othe
than that, I am well. Thanks for asking
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
I am going to Italy next May, let s go see a game together.
Ok. If I'm still around these parts by then, remind me :))
So where are you and what team are we going to see?
Dotstir
2006-10-27 06:27:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
So let me ask you the question : What else can you win as a european
team then?
That's not what I was responding to. I didn't care what Mr. Nightrider
implied. I just mentioned that the Confed Cup is regarded
as a "friendly" tournament, that's all.
Who said it was not? Who claim it was an accomplishment?
You, then you got insulting when I merely pointed out it was a friendly
tournament.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
No need to get all pissy about it.
Look who is talking !
Oh give it a rest.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not funny at all, but that's the best you got you wanker?
LOL...whine...cheese...enjoy!
Safe! he did not forgot his usual old flat joke, topped with the
signature ''wanker'' . I was worried for a while.
You talking, or more correctly whining to yourself again Frenchie?
Did you gradute from a clown shool?
No but I have a few tricks up my sleave.
Check this out...can you see who's flag is on the coffin Frenchie? :)))
http://media.putfile.com/celebrations-49
Po Po Po Po Po Po Poooooo :)))
Oh, it s terrible, i am hurt and scared. It s so much fun to see you
try so hard to explain your case.
What case are you talking about? Did I miss the trial? I thought it was the
circus we were auditioning for?
:))
You already graduated for the circus.
Can't you do better than this you bitter French wanker? ;)
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
if it was that clear, may be you
would not have to do it..
Are you trying to say something significant here?
Something you won t understand, but that s fine.
You're right, I can't be bothered to try and decipher your grammatically
incorrect sentences. Please try harder.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Do you fear something? You amuse me everyday.
No I don't fear anything, why? Should I? I'm glad I amuse you, your pain
amuses me too :))
I am in pain
I know, but it's not for the reasons you cite below...
Post by SHUSSBAR
to see you have to go to such lenghts to try to
demonstrate something that you are the only one to believe in.
You're joking right? Since when have your opinions extrapolated to the
whole? Nevermind, I don't expect you to answer this,
rather than to present more trollish deflections.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Other
than that, I am well. Thanks for asking
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
I am going to Italy next May, let s go see a game together.
Ok. If I'm still around these parts by then, remind me :))
So where are you and what team are we going to see?
When you seriously are en route, contact me here and if I'm still around
responding to your gibberish we'll discuss.
SHUSSBAR
2006-10-27 13:33:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
So let me ask you the question : What else can you win as a european
team then?
That's not what I was responding to. I didn't care what Mr. Nightrider
implied. I just mentioned that the Confed Cup is regarded
as a "friendly" tournament, that's all.
Who said it was not? Who claim it was an accomplishment?
You, then you got insulting when I merely pointed out it was a friendly
tournament.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
No need to get all pissy about it.
Look who is talking !
Oh give it a rest.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not funny at all, but that's the best you got you wanker?
LOL...whine...cheese...enjoy!
Safe! he did not forgot his usual old flat joke, topped with the
signature ''wanker'' . I was worried for a while.
You talking, or more correctly whining to yourself again Frenchie?
Did you gradute from a clown shool?
No but I have a few tricks up my sleave.
Check this out...can you see who's flag is on the coffin Frenchie? :)))
http://media.putfile.com/celebrations-49
Po Po Po Po Po Po Poooooo :)))
Oh, it s terrible, i am hurt and scared. It s so much fun to see you
try so hard to explain your case.
What case are you talking about? Did I miss the trial? I thought it was the
circus we were auditioning for?
:))
You already graduated for the circus.
Can't you do better than this you bitter French wanker? ;)
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
if it was that clear, may be you
would not have to do it..
Are you trying to say something significant here?
Something you won t understand, but that s fine.
You're right, I can't be bothered to try and decipher your grammatically
incorrect sentences. Please try harder.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Do you fear something? You amuse me everyday.
No I don't fear anything, why? Should I? I'm glad I amuse you, your pain
amuses me too :))
I am in pain
I know, but it's not for the reasons you cite below...
Post by SHUSSBAR
to see you have to go to such lenghts to try to
demonstrate something that you are the only one to believe in.
You're joking right? Since when have your opinions extrapolated to the
whole? Nevermind, I don't expect you to answer this,
rather than to present more trollish deflections.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Other
than that, I am well. Thanks for asking
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
I am going to Italy next May, let s go see a game together.
Ok. If I'm still around these parts by then, remind me :))
So where are you and what team are we going to see?
When you seriously are en route, contact me here and if I'm still around
responding to your gibberish we'll discuss.
Since you are a troll, i am sure you ll disapear soon. As far as the
language, we can speak italian if you want. But maybe you don t even
speak italian...
Ciao!
Dotstir
2006-10-28 11:40:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
So let me ask you the question : What else can you win as a
european
team then?
That's not what I was responding to. I didn't care what Mr. Nightrider
implied. I just mentioned that the Confed Cup is regarded
as a "friendly" tournament, that's all.
Who said it was not? Who claim it was an accomplishment?
You, then you got insulting when I merely pointed out it was a friendly
tournament.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
No need to get all pissy about it.
Look who is talking !
Oh give it a rest.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not funny at all, but that's the best you got you wanker?
LOL...whine...cheese...enjoy!
Safe! he did not forgot his usual old flat joke, topped with the
signature ''wanker'' . I was worried for a while.
You talking, or more correctly whining to yourself again Frenchie?
Did you gradute from a clown shool?
No but I have a few tricks up my sleave.
Check this out...can you see who's flag is on the coffin Frenchie? :)))
http://media.putfile.com/celebrations-49
Po Po Po Po Po Po Poooooo :)))
Oh, it s terrible, i am hurt and scared. It s so much fun to see you
try so hard to explain your case.
What case are you talking about? Did I miss the trial? I thought it
was
the
circus we were auditioning for?
:))
You already graduated for the circus.
Can't you do better than this you bitter French wanker? ;)
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
if it was that clear, may be you
would not have to do it..
Are you trying to say something significant here?
Something you won t understand, but that s fine.
You're right, I can't be bothered to try and decipher your grammatically
incorrect sentences. Please try harder.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Do you fear something? You amuse me everyday.
No I don't fear anything, why? Should I? I'm glad I amuse you, your pain
amuses me too :))
I am in pain
I know, but it's not for the reasons you cite below...
Post by SHUSSBAR
to see you have to go to such lenghts to try to
demonstrate something that you are the only one to believe in.
You're joking right? Since when have your opinions extrapolated to the
whole? Nevermind, I don't expect you to answer this,
rather than to present more trollish deflections.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Other
than that, I am well. Thanks for asking
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
I am going to Italy next May, let s go see a game together.
Ok. If I'm still around these parts by then, remind me :))
So where are you and what team are we going to see?
When you seriously are en route, contact me here and if I'm still around
responding to your gibberish we'll discuss.
Since you are a troll,
Look you try hard, but this is where I draw the line. In this conversation
alone the only idiot doing the baiting is you. I merely give
you a piece of your own pie, even then you don't recognize it. But let me
put it this way you shit talker supreme, pick a rational
topic that you want to have a rational debate on, and I bet I'll wipe your
face and your ass. Go ahead, give er a go...or you can
ignore this and make another ad hominem attack on me like I predicted above,
and you fullfilled again.
Post by SHUSSBAR
i am sure you ll disapear soon. As far as the
language, we can speak italian if you want. But maybe you don t even
speak italian...
Pick a language too, and I'm certain I'll emberrass you in it also. You're
not as smart as you think. Balls in your court Frenchie!
Post by SHUSSBAR
Ciao!
Au Revoir dickhead.
Dotstir
2006-11-01 00:22:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
So let me ask you the question : What else can you win as a
european
team then?
That's not what I was responding to. I didn't care what Mr.
Nightrider
implied. I just mentioned that the Confed Cup is regarded
as a "friendly" tournament, that's all.
Who said it was not? Who claim it was an accomplishment?
You, then you got insulting when I merely pointed out it was a friendly
tournament.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
No need to get all pissy about it.
Look who is talking !
Oh give it a rest.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not funny at all, but that's the best you got you wanker?
LOL...whine...cheese...enjoy!
Safe! he did not forgot his usual old flat joke, topped with
the
signature ''wanker'' . I was worried for a while.
You talking, or more correctly whining to yourself again Frenchie?
Did you gradute from a clown shool?
No but I have a few tricks up my sleave.
Check this out...can you see who's flag is on the coffin
Frenchie?
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
:)))
http://media.putfile.com/celebrations-49
Po Po Po Po Po Po Poooooo :)))
Oh, it s terrible, i am hurt and scared. It s so much fun to see you
try so hard to explain your case.
What case are you talking about? Did I miss the trial? I thought it
was
the
circus we were auditioning for?
:))
You already graduated for the circus.
Can't you do better than this you bitter French wanker? ;)
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
if it was that clear, may be you
would not have to do it..
Are you trying to say something significant here?
Something you won t understand, but that s fine.
You're right, I can't be bothered to try and decipher your
grammatically
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
incorrect sentences. Please try harder.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Do you fear something? You amuse me everyday.
No I don't fear anything, why? Should I? I'm glad I amuse you, your pain
amuses me too :))
I am in pain
I know, but it's not for the reasons you cite below...
Post by SHUSSBAR
to see you have to go to such lenghts to try to
demonstrate something that you are the only one to believe in.
You're joking right? Since when have your opinions extrapolated to the
whole? Nevermind, I don't expect you to answer this,
rather than to present more trollish deflections.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Other
than that, I am well. Thanks for asking
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
I am going to Italy next May, let s go see a game together.
Ok. If I'm still around these parts by then, remind me :))
So where are you and what team are we going to see?
When you seriously are en route, contact me here and if I'm still around
responding to your gibberish we'll discuss.
Since you are a troll,
Look you try hard, but this is where I draw the line. In this conversation
alone the only idiot doing the baiting is you. I merely give
you a piece of your own pie, even then you don't recognize it. But let me
put it this way you shit talker supreme, pick a rational
topic that you want to have a rational debate on, and I bet I'll wipe your
face and your ass. Go ahead, give er a go...or you can
ignore this and make another ad hominem attack on me like I predicted above,
and you fullfilled again.
Post by SHUSSBAR
i am sure you ll disapear soon. As far as the
language, we can speak italian if you want. But maybe you don t even
speak italian...
Pick a language too, and I'm certain I'll emberrass you in it also. You're
not as smart as you think. Balls in your court Frenchie!
Post by SHUSSBAR
Ciao!
Au Revoir dickhead.
Just like I suspected, when the troll is challenged to put up or shut up, he
runs with his tail between his legs.
SHUSSBAR
2006-11-01 15:54:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
So let me ask you the question : What else can you win as a
european
team then?
That's not what I was responding to. I didn't care what Mr.
Nightrider
implied. I just mentioned that the Confed Cup is regarded
as a "friendly" tournament, that's all.
Who said it was not? Who claim it was an accomplishment?
You, then you got insulting when I merely pointed out it was a
friendly
tournament.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
No need to get all pissy about it.
Look who is talking !
Oh give it a rest.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not funny at all, but that's the best you got you wanker?
LOL...whine...cheese...enjoy!
Safe! he did not forgot his usual old flat joke, topped with
the
signature ''wanker'' . I was worried for a while.
You talking, or more correctly whining to yourself again
Frenchie?
Did you gradute from a clown shool?
No but I have a few tricks up my sleave.
Check this out...can you see who's flag is on the coffin
Frenchie?
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
:)))
http://media.putfile.com/celebrations-49
Po Po Po Po Po Po Poooooo :)))
Oh, it s terrible, i am hurt and scared. It s so much fun to see
you
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
try so hard to explain your case.
What case are you talking about? Did I miss the trial? I thought it
was
the
circus we were auditioning for?
:))
You already graduated for the circus.
Can't you do better than this you bitter French wanker? ;)
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
if it was that clear, may be you
would not have to do it..
Are you trying to say something significant here?
Something you won t understand, but that s fine.
You're right, I can't be bothered to try and decipher your
grammatically
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
incorrect sentences. Please try harder.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Do you fear something? You amuse me everyday.
No I don't fear anything, why? Should I? I'm glad I amuse you, your pain
amuses me too :))
I am in pain
I know, but it's not for the reasons you cite below...
Post by SHUSSBAR
to see you have to go to such lenghts to try to
demonstrate something that you are the only one to believe in.
You're joking right? Since when have your opinions extrapolated to the
whole? Nevermind, I don't expect you to answer this,
rather than to present more trollish deflections.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Other
than that, I am well. Thanks for asking
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
I am going to Italy next May, let s go see a game together.
Ok. If I'm still around these parts by then, remind me :))
So where are you and what team are we going to see?
When you seriously are en route, contact me here and if I'm still
around
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
responding to your gibberish we'll discuss.
Since you are a troll,
Look you try hard, but this is where I draw the line. In this conversation
alone the only idiot doing the baiting is you. I merely give
you a piece of your own pie, even then you don't recognize it. But let me
put it this way you shit talker supreme, pick a rational
topic that you want to have a rational debate on, and I bet I'll wipe your
face and your ass. Go ahead, give er a go...or you can
ignore this and make another ad hominem attack on me like I predicted
above,
Post by Dotstir
and you fullfilled again.
Post by SHUSSBAR
i am sure you ll disapear soon. As far as the
language, we can speak italian if you want. But maybe you don t even
speak italian...
Pick a language too, and I'm certain I'll emberrass you in it also. You're
not as smart as you think. Balls in your court Frenchie!
Post by SHUSSBAR
Ciao!
Au Revoir dickhead.
Just like I suspected, when the troll is challenged to put up or shut up, he
runs with his tail between his legs.
En fait, tu me prends vraiment la tête. Débattre sans fin avec un
moellon a des limites. Comme je le suspecte, tu disparaitra bientôt et
l'air deviendra plus respirable. Tu dois te sentir quand même bien
coupable de qq chose pour vouloir sans relache tenter désespérement
de justifier des causes non partagées. Tu sévis maintenant sur
d'autres cas, aux antipodes je vois. Bon voyage!
Dotstir
2006-11-02 13:34:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
So let me ask you the question : What else can you win as a
european
team then?
That's not what I was responding to. I didn't care what Mr.
Nightrider
implied. I just mentioned that the Confed Cup is regarded
as a "friendly" tournament, that's all.
Who said it was not? Who claim it was an accomplishment?
You, then you got insulting when I merely pointed out it was a
friendly
tournament.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
No need to get all pissy about it.
Look who is talking !
Oh give it a rest.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not funny at all, but that's the best you got you wanker?
LOL...whine...cheese...enjoy!
Safe! he did not forgot his usual old flat joke, topped
with
the
signature ''wanker'' . I was worried for a while.
You talking, or more correctly whining to yourself again
Frenchie?
Did you gradute from a clown shool?
No but I have a few tricks up my sleave.
Check this out...can you see who's flag is on the coffin
Frenchie?
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
:)))
http://media.putfile.com/celebrations-49
Po Po Po Po Po Po Poooooo :)))
Oh, it s terrible, i am hurt and scared. It s so much fun to see
you
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
try so hard to explain your case.
What case are you talking about? Did I miss the trial? I thought it
was
the
circus we were auditioning for?
:))
You already graduated for the circus.
Can't you do better than this you bitter French wanker? ;)
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
if it was that clear, may be you
would not have to do it..
Are you trying to say something significant here?
Something you won t understand, but that s fine.
You're right, I can't be bothered to try and decipher your
grammatically
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
incorrect sentences. Please try harder.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Do you fear something? You amuse me everyday.
No I don't fear anything, why? Should I? I'm glad I amuse you,
your
pain
amuses me too :))
I am in pain
I know, but it's not for the reasons you cite below...
Post by SHUSSBAR
to see you have to go to such lenghts to try to
demonstrate something that you are the only one to believe in.
You're joking right? Since when have your opinions extrapolated to the
whole? Nevermind, I don't expect you to answer this,
rather than to present more trollish deflections.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Other
than that, I am well. Thanks for asking
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
I am going to Italy next May, let s go see a game together.
Ok. If I'm still around these parts by then, remind me :))
So where are you and what team are we going to see?
When you seriously are en route, contact me here and if I'm still
around
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
responding to your gibberish we'll discuss.
Since you are a troll,
Look you try hard, but this is where I draw the line. In this conversation
alone the only idiot doing the baiting is you. I merely give
you a piece of your own pie, even then you don't recognize it. But let me
put it this way you shit talker supreme, pick a rational
topic that you want to have a rational debate on, and I bet I'll wipe your
face and your ass. Go ahead, give er a go...or you can
ignore this and make another ad hominem attack on me like I predicted
above,
Post by Dotstir
and you fullfilled again.
Post by SHUSSBAR
i am sure you ll disapear soon. As far as the
language, we can speak italian if you want. But maybe you don t even
speak italian...
Pick a language too, and I'm certain I'll emberrass you in it also. You're
not as smart as you think. Balls in your court Frenchie!
Post by SHUSSBAR
Ciao!
Au Revoir dickhead.
Just like I suspected, when the troll is challenged to put up or shut up, he
runs with his tail between his legs.
En fait, tu me prends vraiment la tête. Débattre sans fin avec >un moellon
a des limites.
Your limitations are your problem, but as I suspected when challenged you
run, or attack character. Troll-like, indeed.
Post by Dotstir
Comme je le suspecte, tu disparaitra bientôt et
l'air deviendra plus respirable.
Do you live in Paris? Last I was there the air was not very breathable. I'll
stay put for a while, how about that? ;)
Post by Dotstir
Tu dois te sentir quand même bien
coupable de qq chose pour vouloir sans relache tenter >désespérement
de justifier des causes non partagées. Tu sévis maintenant sur
d'autres cas, aux antipodes je vois. Bon voyage!
I have nothing to feel guilty about, and like I predicted you would ignore
what I said and change the parameters again with a lame character assault.
You just can't debate the topic because you know you are wrong.
SHUSSBAR
2006-11-02 20:08:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by Dotstir
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
So let me ask you the question : What else can you win as
a
european
team then?
That's not what I was responding to. I didn't care what Mr.
Nightrider
implied. I just mentioned that the Confed Cup is regarded
as a "friendly" tournament, that's all.
Who said it was not? Who claim it was an accomplishment?
You, then you got insulting when I merely pointed out it was a
friendly
tournament.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
No need to get all pissy about it.
Look who is talking !
Oh give it a rest.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not funny at all, but that's the best you got you wanker?
LOL...whine...cheese...enjoy!
Safe! he did not forgot his usual old flat joke, topped
with
the
signature ''wanker'' . I was worried for a while.
You talking, or more correctly whining to yourself again
Frenchie?
Did you gradute from a clown shool?
No but I have a few tricks up my sleave.
Check this out...can you see who's flag is on the coffin
Frenchie?
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
:)))
http://media.putfile.com/celebrations-49
Po Po Po Po Po Po Poooooo :)))
Oh, it s terrible, i am hurt and scared. It s so much fun to see
you
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
try so hard to explain your case.
What case are you talking about? Did I miss the trial? I thought it
was
the
circus we were auditioning for?
:))
You already graduated for the circus.
Can't you do better than this you bitter French wanker? ;)
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
if it was that clear, may be you
would not have to do it..
Are you trying to say something significant here?
Something you won t understand, but that s fine.
You're right, I can't be bothered to try and decipher your
grammatically
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
incorrect sentences. Please try harder.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Do you fear something? You amuse me everyday.
No I don't fear anything, why? Should I? I'm glad I amuse you,
your
pain
amuses me too :))
I am in pain
I know, but it's not for the reasons you cite below...
Post by SHUSSBAR
to see you have to go to such lenghts to try to
demonstrate something that you are the only one to believe in.
You're joking right? Since when have your opinions extrapolated to the
whole? Nevermind, I don't expect you to answer this,
rather than to present more trollish deflections.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Other
than that, I am well. Thanks for asking
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
I am going to Italy next May, let s go see a game together.
Ok. If I'm still around these parts by then, remind me :))
So where are you and what team are we going to see?
When you seriously are en route, contact me here and if I'm still
around
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
responding to your gibberish we'll discuss.
Since you are a troll,
Look you try hard, but this is where I draw the line. In this conversation
alone the only idiot doing the baiting is you. I merely give
you a piece of your own pie, even then you don't recognize it. But let me
put it this way you shit talker supreme, pick a rational
topic that you want to have a rational debate on, and I bet I'll wipe your
face and your ass. Go ahead, give er a go...or you can
ignore this and make another ad hominem attack on me like I predicted
above,
Post by Dotstir
and you fullfilled again.
Post by SHUSSBAR
i am sure you ll disapear soon. As far as the
language, we can speak italian if you want. But maybe you don t even
speak italian...
Pick a language too, and I'm certain I'll emberrass you in it also. You're
not as smart as you think. Balls in your court Frenchie!
Post by SHUSSBAR
Ciao!
Au Revoir dickhead.
Just like I suspected, when the troll is challenged to put up or shut up, he
runs with his tail between his legs.
En fait, tu me prends vraiment la tête. Débattre sans fin avec >un moellon
a des limites.
Your limitations are your problem, but as I suspected when challenged you
run, or attack character. Troll-like, indeed.
Je ne fais que repondre à ton challenge de puis le début. Tu ne vas
pas changer d'avis (ce que j'attends pas), ni même respecter le fait
que d'autres puissent avoir d'autres opinions que les tiennes.
Post by Dotstir
Post by Dotstir
Comme je le suspecte, tu disparaitra bientôt et
l'air deviendra plus respirable.
Do you live in Paris? Last I was there the air was not very breathable. I'll
stay put for a while, how about that? ;)
You are losing it man. I am not in Paris like you are not in Italy or
Italian for that matter.
Post by Dotstir
Post by Dotstir
Tu dois te sentir quand même bien
coupable de qq chose pour vouloir sans relache tenter >désespérement
de justifier des causes non partagées. Tu sévis maintenant sur
d'autres cas, aux antipodes je vois. Bon voyage!
I have nothing to feel guilty about, and like I predicted you would ignore
what I said and change the parameters again with a lame character assault.
You just can't debate the topic because you know you are wrong.
Depuis le début je ne fais que ne pas ignorer ce que tu dis. Je
m'efforce juste d'exposer mes opinions pour contrebalancer la
désinformation qui suinte de ta bouche.
Quand j a pris la parole, le topic était : EURO 200 final and you
Post by Dotstir
Dominated maybe, but France prevailed at the end. Nothing can beat the
sight of Italians after the goal scored in Euro 2000 final in
overtime. Tons of pizzas, pastas dishes already warm to celebrate,
thrown in the dumpster.
Italy got revenge in 2006. After being truly dominated, they hang on to
scrap the win by 2 inches in Pks.
Not more not less sour or gracious losers.
last time Italy WON a game vs France was in 1978.
After that reply, probably upset that someone dare confronting you, you
lost it, got berzeck more than once, multiplied the use of your
favorites words, poor and obsolete jokes that make laugh you only, and
other low punches about my english. I wish you could write french or
italian ...

I have other thing to do than waste my time trying to have a discussion
with someone that it s not even ready to listen to others.

Sans rancune aucune. Ciao
Dotstir
2006-11-03 02:43:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dotstir
Post by Dotstir
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
So let me ask you the question : What else can you win
as
a
european
team then?
That's not what I was responding to. I didn't care what Mr.
Nightrider
implied. I just mentioned that the Confed Cup is regarded
as a "friendly" tournament, that's all.
Who said it was not? Who claim it was an accomplishment?
You, then you got insulting when I merely pointed out it was a
friendly
tournament.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
No need to get all pissy about it.
Look who is talking !
Oh give it a rest.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Not funny at all, but that's the best you got you
wanker?
LOL...whine...cheese...enjoy!
Safe! he did not forgot his usual old flat joke, topped
with
the
signature ''wanker'' . I was worried for a while.
You talking, or more correctly whining to yourself again
Frenchie?
Did you gradute from a clown shool?
No but I have a few tricks up my sleave.
Check this out...can you see who's flag is on the coffin
Frenchie?
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
:)))
http://media.putfile.com/celebrations-49
Po Po Po Po Po Po Poooooo :)))
Oh, it s terrible, i am hurt and scared. It s so much fun to see
you
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
try so hard to explain your case.
What case are you talking about? Did I miss the trial? I thought it
was
the
circus we were auditioning for?
:))
You already graduated for the circus.
Can't you do better than this you bitter French wanker? ;)
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
if it was that clear, may be you
would not have to do it..
Are you trying to say something significant here?
Something you won t understand, but that s fine.
You're right, I can't be bothered to try and decipher your
grammatically
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
incorrect sentences. Please try harder.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Do you fear something? You amuse me everyday.
No I don't fear anything, why? Should I? I'm glad I amuse you,
your
pain
amuses me too :))
I am in pain
I know, but it's not for the reasons you cite below...
Post by SHUSSBAR
to see you have to go to such lenghts to try to
demonstrate something that you are the only one to believe in.
You're joking right? Since when have your opinions extrapolated to the
whole? Nevermind, I don't expect you to answer this,
rather than to present more trollish deflections.
Post by SHUSSBAR
Other
than that, I am well. Thanks for asking
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
I am going to Italy next May, let s go see a game together.
Ok. If I'm still around these parts by then, remind me :))
So where are you and what team are we going to see?
When you seriously are en route, contact me here and if I'm still
around
Post by Dotstir
Post by SHUSSBAR
Post by Dotstir
responding to your gibberish we'll discuss.
Since you are a troll,
Look you try hard, but this is where I draw the line. In this conversation
alone the only idiot doing the baiting is you. I merely give
you a piece of your own pie, even then you don't recognize it. But let me
put it this way you shit talker supreme, pick a rational
topic that you want to have a rational debate on, and I bet I'll wipe your
face and your ass. Go ahead, give er a go...or you can
ignore this and make another ad hominem attack on me like I predicted
above,
Post by Dotstir
and you fullfilled again.
Post by SHUSSBAR
i am sure you ll disapear soon. As far as the
language, we can speak italian if you want. But maybe you don t even
speak italian...
Pick a language too, and I'm certain I'll emberrass you in it also. You're
not as smart as you think. Balls in your court Frenchie!
Post by SHUSSBAR
Ciao!
Au Revoir dickhead.
Just like I suspected, when the troll is challenged to put up or shut
up,
he
runs with his tail between his legs.
En fait, tu me prends vraiment la tête. Débattre sans fin avec >un moellon
a des limites.
Your limitations are your problem, but as I suspected when challenged you
run, or attack character. Troll-like, indeed.
Je ne fais que repondre à ton challenge de puis le début. Tu ne vas
pas changer d'avis (ce que j'attends pas), ni même respecter le fait
que d'autres puissent avoir d'autres opinions que les tiennes.
Post by Dotstir
Post by Dotstir
Comme je le suspecte, tu disparaitra bientôt et
l'air deviendra plus respirable.
Do you live in Paris? Last I was there the air was not very breathable. I'll
stay put for a while, how about that? ;)
You are losing it man. I am not in Paris
Did I say you were? Who's losing what?
Post by Dotstir
like you are not in Italy or
Italian for that matter.
yawn
Post by Dotstir
Post by Dotstir
Tu dois te sentir quand même bien
coupable de qq chose pour vouloir sans relache tenter >désespérement
de justifier des causes non partagées. Tu sévis maintenant sur
d'autres cas, aux antipodes je vois. Bon voyage!
I have nothing to feel guilty about, and like I predicted you would ignore
what I said and change the parameters again with a lame character assault.
You just can't debate the topic because you know you are wrong.
Depuis le début je ne fais que ne pas ignorer
Only because you're a wind up merchant and troll, like your actions dictate.
Post by Dotstir
ce que tu dis. Je
m'efforce juste d'exposer mes opinions pour contrebalancer la
désinformation qui suinte de ta bouche.
Quand j a pris la parole, le topic était : EURO 200 final and you
Dominated maybe,
Not maybe, but 100%. You should enact statues to Del Piero for giving you
guys the option of making the fluke comeback.
Post by Dotstir
but France prevailed at the end.
Sometimes luck is luck.
Post by Dotstir
Nothing can beat the
sight of Italians after the goal scored in Euro 2000 final in
overtime.
Yes, one things can - the site of tears running down Thurams face and
Trezeguet's look of dejection after choking :)))
Post by Dotstir
Tons of pizzas, pastas dishes already warm to celebrate,
thrown in the dumpster.
Italy got revenge in 2006. After being truly dominated, they hang on to
scrap the win by 2 inches in Pks.
Italy had 55% possession at the end of the game, France had 45%. Italy had
67% percentage of possession at 40th minute of the first.

Dominated, lol....France generated 2 shots on net in the 2nd half, and
needed a penalty to score in two final games. You guys presented a neat
illusion and rode the enthusiasm generated after beating a lack luster
Brazil.
Post by Dotstir
Not more not less sour or gracious losers.
last time Italy WON a game vs France was in 1978.
6-4 2006 Four Time World Cup Champion. You need to find a way to live with
that, because you have one star, won by some luck in 98 with Blanc scoring
an extra time goal for Paraguay, Thuram scoring 2 of his only goals vs
Croatia. The penalty win vs us in the quarters after being pressed in your
own end. Hey, it happens, be happy about it.
Post by Dotstir
After that reply, probably upset that someone dare confronting you, you
lost it,
Empty assertion since you are unable to demonstrate this character attack.
Ad hominem is a sign of a loss, as always.
Post by Dotstir
got berzeck more than once,
What is berzeck? And can you prove this exists?
Post by Dotstir
multiplied the use of your
favorites words, poor and obsolete jokes that make laugh you only,
Like accusing someone of trying out for the circus...yes I'm sure that one
made everyone laugh Shushbar. I smiled, however, because I recognized it was
a product of a pain filled mind, your mind :)))
Post by Dotstir
and other low punches about my english. I wish you could write french or
italian ...
I never insulted your English, but when you put out two platitudes seperated
by a few adjectives are truly incomprehensible. Don't get all sensitive, I
just asked you to clarify yourself. Calm down.
Post by Dotstir
I have other thing to do than waste my time trying to have a discussion
with someone that it s not even ready to listen to others.
That's cute, because I even gave you free reign to pick a topic since you
accused me of being a troll. You were the only one that kept changing
parameters of the subject with ad hominem attacks, so indeed you do waste
your time shamelessly trying to run from the topic at hand. In fact, that's
all you've ever done.
Post by Dotstir
Sans rancune aucune. Ciao
Sucez mes boules D'azzure' Francois ;)

Dotstir
2006-10-11 20:27:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by v***@yahoo.com
Post by Mr. NightRider
You know, France showed wht aa bunch of sore losers they are after the
WC final but Saturday they showed it evenn more. Henry said Scotland
was lucky to win. How was Scotland lucky?? I watched the second half
and Scotland was as good if not better than France. France needs a
reality check. The world cup they won and the euro is all they win ever.
Yes, World and Euro Championships is all France has won. Luckily for
Scotland and England, they are in no danger to do that.... But England
is still one of the 4 very best teams in Great Britain.
England lost today to Croatia 2-0.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...