Talksport

Bodicoteblue said:
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.
Click to expand...
They’ve been in more CL finals in the last thirty years than they have title challenges. What does that tell you?
 
laserblue said:
Since when has winning the European Community Shield conferred world champions status?
Click to expand...
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.
 
Steadfast said:
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.
Click to expand...
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....!
 
Blue Til Death said:
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....!
Click to expand...
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'.
 
George Hannah said:
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'.
Click to expand...
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?
 
We were listening to the Sportsbar on the way home tonight, and Cindy stated, not once, but twice, that City accumulated 99 points in the 17/18 season.

Andy Wankstain didn’t pull him up on it, and nothing was read out from listeners to correct his error.

Of course, it was a deliberate mistake to get people to bite, and in many ways, I’m glad no one (apparently) did, as that means nothing was added to talkshite's coffers.

On another note, a deluded, thick rag (is there any other kind?) rang in to say that he thinks that scum will challenge us for the title this season, but when pushed to say how close he thought they would be to us, he said 12 points.
 
Vienna_70 said:
We were listening to the Sportsbar on the way home tonight, and Cindy stated, not once, but twice, that City accumulated 99 points in the 17/18 season.

Andy Wankstain didn’t pull him up on it, and nothing was read out from listeners to correct his error.

Of course, it was a deliberate mistake to get people to bite, and in many ways, I’m glad no one (apparently) did, as that means nothing was added to talkshite's coffers.

On another note, a deluded, thick rag (is there any other kind?) rang in to say that he thinks that scum will challenge us for the title this season, but when pushed to say how close he thought they would be to us, he said 12 points.
Click to expand...
It’s the casual repetition of untruths, leading them to become accepted norms.
This morning - a preview of today’s game with the casual reference to City’s ‘tactical fouling’ followed by the usual ‘spurs need to win for the good of mankind’.
I hope the latter was a bit tongue-in-cheek, but it was glendenning, so probably not.
 
Bodicoteblue said:
It’s the casual repetition of untruths, leading them to become accepted norms.
This morning - a preview of today’s game with the casual reference to City’s ‘tactical fouling’ followed by the usual ‘spurs need to win for the good of mankind’.
I hope the latter was a bit tongue-in-cheek, but it was glendenning, so probably not.
Click to expand...

The tactical fouling nonsense from other fans s funny tbh, it's actually a compliment.

But when it's highlighted in the media in such a bias way it's wrong. For a City 'tactical foul' BT coverage on one of those 'special European nights'at Anfield where if VVD does the same that scouse rat with the nose will guaranteed say 'that's shrewd thar is Fletch
 
As if on cue...
Talksh*t commentator during arse Burnley game
‘A cynical foul there, much like the ones we saw from City last week’
 
So we have a big debate going on in football and all they can talk about on talkshite is scary movies !!!
 
Having a dig again
talkSPORT (@talkSPORT) Tweeted:
@MaxRushden: “Fernandinho is tugging people on the way to the shops.”

@BGlendenning: “That’s quite a serious allegation, Max...”

The moment a chat on tactical fouls ended up going full Partridge

Max absolutely loses it https://t.co/BZlaR9aIeq

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top