Bayern Munich vs. Manchester United

kryogen

starbelgrade wrote: »

Look, if your happy with the possiblity of a 4th place finish, a chance at the Champions League for the first time ever, and the warmth & happiness that the off-loading of an £18 million "donkey" makes in your heart, then who am I to argue?

We're both happy out, so can we leave it at that, or shall I leave you to win the one legged man arse kicking contest?

you would do well to get off this roundabout quickly as possible alright

Ush1

starbelgrade wrote: »

Look, if your happy with the possiblity of a 4th place finish, a chance at the Champions League for the first time ever, and the warmth & happiness that the off-loading of an £18 million "donkey" makes in your heart, then who am I to argue?

We're both happy out, so can we leave it at that, or shall I leave you to win the one legged man arse kicking contest?

Nothing to do with me wanting or believing anything, I'm not even Spurs fan so I don't know where you're getting that from. I'm not even debating Carrick as a player just that saying a player won trophies within a squad, doesn't justify diddly squat.

Rest of what you said is largely irrelevant.

Boggles

Ush1 wrote: »

I'm not even debating Carrick as a player just that saying a player won trophies within a squad, doesn't justify diddly squat.

What are you debating him as?

A Dolphin?

Grand Carrick is not a very good dolphin!

Ush1

Boggles wrote: »

What are you debating him as?

A Dolphin?

Grand Carrick is not a very good dolphin!

Not debating him at all really. Logic you see, saying someone won trophies don't make them worth 18 mill. Simple. You understand now?

Boggles

Ush1 wrote: »

Not debating him at all really

Well you are.

.

Ush1 wrote: »

Logic you see,

No I don't see

Ush1 wrote: »

saying someone won trophies don't make them worth 18 mill. Simple. You understand now?

He cost 16 million, rising to 18.6 on success.

Is it the money United paid for Carrick you have a problem with?

Ush1

Boggles wrote: »

Well you are.

.

No I don't see



He cost 16 million, rising to 18.6 on success.

Is it the money United paid for Carrick you have a problem with?

No I'm not.
I don't have a problem with anything. See earlier posts, maybe have a cup of coffee, then read again and you might understand. Mediocre players have won trophies before.

Boggles

Ush1 wrote: »

Mediocre players have won trophies before.

Yes they have, doesn't mean they were mediocre achieving a trophy though.

United are going for 4 league titles in a row, 3rd champions league final in a row and a sprinkling of domestic cup success.

Mediocrity does not exist in the United team.

At the highest constant level, there is no room for it.

To suggest anything different shows a distinct lack of knowledge of any sport when played at the levels United have consistently achieved.

Ush1

Boggles wrote: »

Yes they have, doesn't mean they were mediocre achieving a trophy though.

United are going for 4 league titles in a row, 3rd champions league final in a row and a sprinkling of domestic cup success.

Mediocrity does not exist in the United team.

At the highest constant level, there is no room for it.

To suggest anything different shows a distinct lack of knowledge of any sport when played at the levels United have consistently achieved.

And the trophies may have been won in spite of them rather than because of them. Oleguer has a CL and 2 Liga medals when he was with Barca, played quite alot of games and was mediocre by the standards of the club.

Depends what you're satisfied with, if you think Man. United can't get any better then change nothing? Funnily enough it's at the "highest level" when Carrick has been questioned. Maybe you could have won another CL?

Boggles

Ush1 wrote: »

Funnily enough it's at the "highest level" when Carrick has been questioned.

United play at the highest level regardless of who is being put in question

Ush1 wrote: »

Maybe you could have won another CL?

Or they might have won nothing.

Ush1

Boggles wrote: »

United play at the highest level regardless of who is being put in question



Or they might have won nothing.

So you see the point then now?

Boggles

Ush1 wrote: »

So you see the point then now?

So your point was United have had success despite Carrick, but might not have had the succes if he wasn't there.

Aprils Fools?

Ush1

Boggles wrote: »

So your point was United have had success despite Carrick, but might not have had the succes if he wasn't there.

Aprils Fools?

No, that wasn't my point.

Boggles

Ush1 wrote: »

No, that wasn't my point.

Okay. When you make up your mind what exactly is your point you might....forget it.

Ush1

Boggles wrote: »

Okay. When you make up your mind what exactly is your point you might....forget it.

It's fairly clear what my point is and it hasn't changed.

SlickRic

you guys are taking arguing tips from the Liverpool thread I see

Carrick's made a scapegoat a lot, when sometimes it's not actually his fault, but i do think he's sub-standard for Utd, regardless of the trophies he's won with them.

trophies equal great individual player.

that doesn't mean he's been carried, or any sh*t like that, it just means there is room for improvement in that area.

Boggles

SlickRic wrote: »

it just means there is room for improvement in that area.

That doesn't mean that Carrick needs to replaced.

You can bring the best out of a player by bringing in a certain type of player to play with him.

2 suggest Carrick is mediocre is moronic in the extreme.

To suggest United have mainted constant success with a player in the team and its only despite him, is moronic in the extreme, especially a central midfielder.

To brandish him muck and try use him as a scapegoat for the other night is just plain retarded.

Carrick deserves his success and has been a large part of it.

Ush1

To mount a defence of a player by simply listing he has been part of a squad that has won things, is moronic in the extreme.

eZe^

If Manchester United step up, like I expect they will, they are very capable of winning this tie by 3 or 4 goals. Barca hockeyd Bayern 4-0 at the Camp Nou last season at the same stage.

Ush1

eZe^ wrote: »

If Manchester United step up, like I expect they will, they are very capable of winning this tie by 3 or 4 goals. Barca hockeyd Bayern 4-0 at the Camp Nou last season at the same stage.

Yep, I think they will do that even without Rooney.

projectmayhem

eZe^ wrote: »

If Manchester United step up, like I expect they will, they are very capable of winning this tie by 3 or 4 goals. Barca hockeyd Bayern 4-0 at the Camp Nou last season at the same stage.

I wouldn't rely on the Barca game as a good indicator as to how Bayern will perform next week. It was an entirely different team, with a terrible manager and turmoil all over the club. This year they're far more stable, with a better manager and better players in the roster (Gomez and Robben, namely). It won't be that easy for United.

Boggles

Ush1 wrote: »

To mount a defence of a player by simply listing he has been part of a squad that has won things, is moronic in the extreme.

He has played the majority of first team games, including most of the "big ones".

Your acting like he is a fringe squad player.

I'm not solely basing his worth to united on the clubs success, discounting it though is stupid.

Boskowski

Can we go back to talking about how Bayern is going to make all this a mute point come Wednesday again?

Boskowski

eZe^ wrote: »

If Manchester United step up, like I expect they will, they are very capable of winning this tie by 3 or 4 goals. Barca hockeyd Bayern 4-0 at the Camp Nou last season at the same stage.

If my Grandma had balls etc....

Did it ever occur to you that it may not have been the case that Manchester just had a bit of a cold or just didn't feel like playing, that just maybe their opponent didn't allow them to play well?

What if Bayern actually kicked them out of the competition come Wednesday? Will you keep going on about how really Manchester is well capable of 'hockeying' them 3 or 4 or 5 nil, but how just this thing or the other went against them that night and it was all a bit of a fluke? And how really they're not even in the same league at all?

Fkn hell?!? Manchester may well beat them by 3, actually I think they are still favourites. But have a bit of respect man ffs.

keane2097

Boskowski wrote: »

Can we go back to talking about how Bayern is going to make all this a mute point come Wednesday again?

It's "moot"...

CR 7

keane2097 wrote: »

It's "moot"...

Stop being so over confident. Bayern have one or two good players. Championship standard, one could say.



















:pac:

Boskowski

keane2097 wrote: »

It's "moot"...

Damned, according to dict.cc it is. Well English is not my first language obviously. Thanks :rolleyes:

Ush1

Boskowski wrote: »

If my Grandma had balls etc....

Did it ever occur to you that it may not have been the case that Manchester just had a bit of a cold or just didn't feel like playing, that just maybe their opponent didn't allow them to play well?

What if Bayern actually kicked them out of the competition come Wednesday? Will you keep going on about how really Manchester is well capable of 'hockeying' them 3 or 4 or 5 nil, but how just this thing or the other went against them that night and it was all a bit of a fluke? And how really they're not even in the same league at all?

Fkn hell?!? Manchester may well beat them by 3, actually I think they are still favourites. But have a bit of respect man ffs.

I wouldn't take it so personally but looking at the game as a neutral, you would favour Man. United. An away goal and back at Old Trafford. They may knocked United out but for most people watching they would heavily favour a home win and they are just being honest, nothing to do with lack of respect.

Boskowski

Ush1 wrote: »

I wouldn't take it so personally but looking at the game as a neutral, you would favour Man. United. An away goal and back at Old Trafford. They may knocked United out but for most people watching they would heavily favour a home win and they are just being honest, nothing to do with lack of respect.

Actually, I agree. 2:1 away is a good result after all.

However, I think scoring 1 won't be good enough for Utd though since Bayern is going to score with Schweinsteiger and Robben back (bar further injury woes vs Schalke on Saturday). Perfect setup for a bit of treat for us in the TV audience.

Looking forward to it.

keane2097

Boskowski wrote: »

Damned, according to dict.cc it is. Well English is not my first language obviously. Thanks :rolleyes:

You're welcome

Mitch Connor

Boskowski wrote: »

Actually, I agree. 2:1 away is a good result after all.

However, I think scoring 1 won't be good enough for Utd though since Bayern is going to score with Schweinsteiger and Robben back (bar further injury woes vs Schalke on Saturday). Perfect setup for a bit of treat for us in the TV audience.

Looking forward to it.

I agree with this - I think United have to either score 3, or win it on peno's. I don't see it being a 1-0 win for United at OT. With Robben and Schwiensteiger back it will be a more potent Munich attack, and United's will be somewhat blunted without Rooney. Personally, I think Munich are the favourites for it at the moment.

BERBA

Ush1 wrote: »

No i think youll find its exactly the point. Original post, a spurs fan happy with the money they got for him.

Laugin all the way to the bank ush1 on that carrick deal , and come to think of it on the berb deal as well

CR 7

BERBA wrote: »

Laugin all the way to the bank ush1 on that carrick deal , and come to think of it on the berb deal as well

We'll settle for laughing all the way to the trophy cabinet. :cool:

BERBA

Park Ji Sung wrote: »

We'll settle for laughing all the way to the trophy cabinet. :cool:

Yeah and up to yere necks in debt ! , it'll eventually catch up to ye

Mitch Connor

BERBA wrote: »

Yeah and up to yere necks in debt ! , it'll eventually catch up to ye

which has very little to do with player purchases - so not at all relevant to the players bought (and the championships they have won)