Talksport

At least they qualified for this version of the community shield by winning the CL,unlike the domestic one where they were neither champions nor cup winners.
Come to think of it , they won the champions’ league without being champions of anywhere.
They’ve been in more CL finals in the last thirty years than they have title challenges. What does that tell you?
 
Since when has winning the European Community Shield conferred world champions status?
Shouty just called it a significant European trophy that dippers have just won. Then he said wasnt that a great advert for a 39th game. Maybe he was hoping that's where dippers might've got the extra points needed to win the league.
 
Shouty just called it a significant European trophy that dippers have just won. Then he said wasnt that a great advert for a 39th game. Maybe he was hoping that's where dippers might've got the extra points needed to win the league.
According to the dipper litmus test to actually win a trophy, they did nothing of the sort last night, it was a draw and they should both share the trophy ... Silly, detestable ****s....!
 
According to the dipper litmus test to actually win a trophy, they did nothing of the sort last night, it was a draw and they should both share the trophy ... Silly, detestable ****s....!
We know in dipper rules that that scenario only applies to when they miss out not when someone else does.
 
Just as an aside, the other day I caught part of an interview with the Swansea chairman Trevor Birch about takeovers, investors motives etc - not a single word about us even with Weapon White cueing the prompts. Very odd - I wonder of our legal team are putting themselves about? Brings to mind one of our matches at the tail-end of last season with Martin Keown blurting out the phrase 'financial doping' in commentary then adding 'I'm not supposed to say that am I?' to which his colleague replied simply 'No'.
 
Just as an aside, the other day I caught part of an interview with the Swansea chairman Trevor Birch about takeovers, investors motives etc - not a single word about us even with Weapon White cueing the prompts. Very odd - I wonder of our legal team are putting themselves about? Brings to mind one of our matches at the tail-end of last season with Martin Keown blurting out the phrase 'financial doping' in commentary then adding 'I'm not supposed to say that am I?' to which his colleague replied simply 'No'.
Or, maybe, because he became Chelsea CEO and oversaw the sale of Chelsea to Abramovich, he’s not a hypocrite and doesn’t have any issue with our ownership?
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.