Vienna_70 said:Edin had a great game. Put himself about and led the line superbly.
As others have said, if that backheel was executed by shrek or one of the other media darlings, Sty would be wanking themselves stupid for months.
He is a big old unit and he helps us out defensively at set pieces.
And remember, were it not for his goals, we wouldn't have won the title last season.
oakiecokie said:Vienna_70 said:Edin had a great game. Put himself about and led the line superbly.
As others have said, if that backheel was executed by shrek or one of the other media darlings, Sty would be wanking themselves stupid for months.
He is a big old unit and he helps us out defensively at set pieces.
And remember, were it not for his goals, we wouldn't have won the title last season.
For fucks sake why do people keep using this shit analogy when it cant be proven.
It's pretty obvious that he was instrumental in the 2nd part of the season. Just his snide time wasting against Everton may have made the difference.oakiecokie said:Vienna_70 said:Edin had a great game. Put himself about and led the line superbly.
As others have said, if that backheel was executed by shrek or one of the other media darlings, Sty would be wanking themselves stupid for months.
He is a big old unit and he helps us out defensively at set pieces.
And remember, were it not for his goals, we wouldn't have won the title last season.
For fucks sake why do people keep using this shit analogy when it cant be proven.
blue banks said:He showed a turn of pace yesterday that I didn't realise he had tbh. Excellent.
bluealf said:oakiecokie said:Vienna_70 said:Edin had a great game. Put himself about and led the line superbly.
As others have said, if that backheel was executed by shrek or one of the other media darlings, Sty would be wanking themselves stupid for months.
He is a big old unit and he helps us out defensively at set pieces.
And remember, were it not for his goals, we wouldn't have won the title last season.
For fucks sake why do people keep using this shit analogy when it cant be proven.
Well he scored them and we won the title that is the proof you seek, of course somebody else playing may well have scored the same amount of goals but that didn't happen, so Dzekos late season form pushed us over the line.
Of course we could ask about all the shit analogies said about Dzeko being useless, when it is pretty much proven he isn't useless at all.
Puppet Master Silva said:bluealf said:oakiecokie said:For fucks sake why do people keep using this shit analogy when it cant be proven.
Well he scored them and we won the title that is the proof you seek, of course somebody else playing may well have scored the same amount of goals but that didn't happen, so Dzekos late season form pushed us over the line.
Of course we could ask about all the shit analogies said about Dzeko being useless, when it is pretty much proven he isn't useless at all.
And without Negredo's form over the first half of the season we wouldn't have won the league.
noise said:It's pretty obvious that he was instrumental in the 2nd part of the season. Just his snide time wasting against Everton may have made the difference.oakiecokie said:Vienna_70 said:Edin had a great game. Put himself about and led the line superbly.
As others have said, if that backheel was executed by shrek or one of the other media darlings, Sty would be wanking themselves stupid for months.
He is a big old unit and he helps us out defensively at set pieces.
And remember, were it not for his goals, we wouldn't have won the title last season.
For fucks sake why do people keep using this shit analogy when it cant be proven.
As far as I know it's only when we talk about Dzeko that the old, "any other player could have done it" deriding takes place.Matty said:noise said:It's pretty obvious that he was instrumental in the 2nd part of the season. Just his snide time wasting against Everton may have made the difference.oakiecokie said:For fucks sake why do people keep using this shit analogy when it cant be proven.
I think the issue here is we're talking in hypotheticals as if they are facts. It's clear that Edin Dzeko's goals helped us a long way towards winning the title last season, however so did the actions of many different players throughout the season. Negredo's goals, Yaya's goals, Kompany's defending, Kolarov's crossing, in short everyone who played made a contribution so you could, arguably, pick anyone who wore a City shirt last season and claim, "we wouldn't have won the title last season" if it wasn't for them, as who knows what would have happened if they hadn't been on the pitch and someone else had been. The probable here is that, were Dzeko to have been unavailable for the last 6 months of the season then someone would have played in his place, we'd have still had 11 men on the pitch. How on earth are we supposed to know, A - Who that "someone" would have been and B - What contribution they would have made to our title push? It's impossible to assess as it's a purely hypothetical situation with no way of categorically proving anything. The only thing we can be sure of, the only thing that is a fact, is that the contribution Dzeko put in helped us win the league. Would we have won the league without him, but with someone else? Absolutely impossible to know.