Re: Top Clubs in Europe Summer Signings

by Geo Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:30 pm

Crimson wrote:I don't know when I think of the best European clubs today I think of clubs such as (and in no order):

Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal, Barce, Madrid, Inter, AC Milan, Bayern(borderline), Porto etc etc

But I guess each to his own

wtf?

by Senor Penguin Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:35 pm

Geo wrote:
Crimson wrote:I don't know when I think of the best European clubs today I think of clubs such as (and in no order):

Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal, Barce, Madrid, Inter, AC Milan, Bayern(borderline), Porto etc etc

But I guess each to his own
wtf?

Top Clubs in Europe Summer Signings - Page 2 Best-halloween-costume

by El Chelsea Fuerte Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:42 pm

Crimson wrote:
bhends wrote:
Crimson wrote:
english_jewel wrote:
Crimson wrote:Liverpool, Tottenham and Man City are NOT "top clubs in Europe" lmao

Man City and Liverpool are ffs

I don't see how....

Would you care to explain?

For starters they've been far more relevant continentally than Real Madrid since 2002

Are you excluded as well then?

We are still in the Champions League, meanwhile Liverpool is not, they weren't last season either. When was the last time Liverpool won the EPL? When was the last time Man City was in the UCL or won the EPL?

Chelsea and Man Utd are big European clubs that much is certain. Arsenal as well because despite the lack of cups they always go deep in the UCL and have proven themselves recently against the best teams in Europe.

Until Liverpool get back into the UCL and perform well and back into the top four I would hardly call them a top European club. As for Man City they have done jack squat so far lol

How can you possibly say Liverpool aren't a top club? They have a great history and have 5 European Cups...and they aren't exactly out of top 4 reach are they? Just one place behind. Plus they still attract good players. And City have to be a top club because of the players they attract (be it because of money or anything else), plus they will be playing in the Cl next year, and you get the feeling that they will be competing at the top for many years.

by Swanhends Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:52 pm

Bayern is borderline but Porto is in :coffee:

by Geo Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:54 pm

bhends wrote:Bayern is borderline but Porto is in

HAHA.. and Liverpool isn't a top club What a Face

by Seppuku Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:56 pm

And Man.City has been continually more relevant than Real Madrid since 02.

by Swanhends Sun Jun 19, 2011 12:04 am

Seppuku wrote:And Man.City has been continually more relevant than Real Madrid since 02.

Was only referring to Liverpool

by Seppuku Sun Jun 19, 2011 12:08 am

bhends wrote:
Crimson wrote:
english_jewel wrote:
Crimson wrote:Liverpool, Tottenham and Man City are NOT "top clubs in Europe" lmao

Man City and Liverpool are ffs

I don't see how....

Would you care to explain?

For starters they've been far more relevant continentally than Real Madrid since 2002

Are you excluded as well then?

No you weren't

by Swanhends Sun Jun 19, 2011 12:34 am

You're right, I should have referred to Liverpool as "he" bounce

Reading comprehension :coffee:

by Seppuku Sun Jun 19, 2011 12:46 am

Or:

"For starters Liverpool have been far more relevant continentally than Real Madrid since 2002"

Nothing in your initial statement would indicate you are talking about one club. On the contrary you are directly replying to a question asking on the statues of the two aforementioned clubs.

by Guest Sun Jun 19, 2011 12:52 am

That was 2 years ago

http://www.anfield-online.co.uk/lfc-news/2009/liverpool-back-to-number-one-in-uefa-ranking/

how did we manage to fuk it up /facepalm

all faults o Arshavin and Ivanovic :coffee:

by Swanhends Sun Jun 19, 2011 12:53 am

Seppuku wrote:Nothing in your initial statement would indicate you are talking about one club.

How could I be talking about Manchester City when (to my knowledge) they've never played in Europe? (Save for last seasons Europa League)

You have to play continentally to be "continentally relevant"

As I said, reading comprehension bounce

by Seppuku Sun Jun 19, 2011 1:06 am

Where is "continental relevance" in your initial post?

You keep mentioning reading comprehension but all I see is a linguistically incompetent individual that puts the burden on the reader to fill in the gapes.

Re-read the original dialogue and tell me how on earth would anyone know you are referring to one club here (Liverpool).

by Swanhends Sun Jun 19, 2011 1:17 am

Seppuku wrote:Where is "continental relevance" in your initial post?

Right here?

bhends wrote:For starters they've been far more relevant continentally than Real Madrid since 2002

Perhaps you can explain to me how its possible for Manchester City to be relevant continentally when they havent played continental football.

Seeing as how there were two possible clubs to pick from, and one could not possibly be the answer, I wonder which I was talking about?

by Gil Sun Jun 19, 2011 1:23 am

Madrid fanboys Sleep

by izzy Sun Jun 19, 2011 1:26 am

Gil wrote:Madrid fanboys

Madrid fan here.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Sleep

by Seppuku Sun Jun 19, 2011 1:34 am

My beef isn't with your argument. My beef is with the way you phrased it.

It's poorly written, extremely ambiguous and leaves the door open for reader interpretation. (City has played continental football since 02 btw)

The question you were responding to was clearly asking about two clubs. You chose "they" when addressing the question. You did not isolate the subject.

I, as a reader, came off with the impression that both City and Liverpool are more relevant than Real Madrid according to you.

by Mr Nick09 Sun Jun 19, 2011 3:04 am

Is the sunday times anything reliable?

by BeautifulGame Sun Jun 19, 2011 3:44 am

St_Nick09_of_Goal wrote:Is the sunday times anything reliable?

Highly reliable? why?

by Mr Nick09 Sun Jun 19, 2011 3:58 am

cause they have lass x sandro trade in their paper.

im also learning which papers not to pay attention in england

by BeautifulGame Sun Jun 19, 2011 4:31 am

St_Nick09_of_Goal wrote:cause they have lass x sandro trade in their paper.

im also learning which papers not to pay attention in england

Times and Guardian are usually reliable.Ofcourse they do get something wrong but they dont make up stories and always have substance.

Every other rag ( Mail,Mirror,Sun,People,Talksport,etc) are just rubbish.

Also Harry is mad enough to do these sort of transfers but dont think Levy will allow it unless its cash +Diarra for Sandro.

by InterMalia Sun Jun 19, 2011 4:34 am

Bhends summed up our plans pretty well i see.

by Mr Nick09 Sun Jun 19, 2011 4:38 am

lol, why would we pay trade and pay?

anyway, according to them, sandro was offered to us...

by BeautifulGame Sun Jun 19, 2011 4:46 am

St_Nick09_of_Goal wrote:lol, why would we pay trade and pay?

anyway, according to them, sandro was offered to us...

Very surprised if they did.Sandro is on low wages compared to Diarra and also fans favourite.where did u read might be misinterpreted .Times needs pay subscription.

by Guest Sun Jun 19, 2011 4:49 am

Not relevant, but this goal is really really under-rated

by Mr Nick09 Sun Jun 19, 2011 4:50 am

It's on AS, they make lots of conjecture of course, i'm not even sure if i rate him...

http://www.as.com/futbol/articulo/sandro-podria-llegar-lass-the/20110619dasdaiftb_25/Tes

by Sponsored content

Hitskin.com