two questions...

P P

pardoe

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 Nov 2008
Messages
959
I fully expect most people to not give a shite, if so, just don't answer, but for those who enjoy Premier League football as a whole as well as supporting City, i'd be interested to hear your opinions...

1) Of the three in with a chance of the title, who would be the lesser of the three evils in terms of a winner, in your opinion, given that Arsenal are always playing the victims, Chelsea have John Terry, and United are our dirty debt-ridden near-neighbours?

Rivalries to one side for one moment i think don't think there's much between the three sides in terms of football over the season. All have been below their best but showed glimpses of playing very well. Given their win on the weekend and remembering how great it is to see the Rags with egg on their faces, though, for me i think i'd be slightly less annoyed with Chelsea taking it than the Arsey Whingers.

2) If we don't finish fourth, who would you be least annoyed to see grab fourth given that Spurs are Spurs, Liverpool are a huge set of c*nts, and Villa fans would be gloating for a whole year that they got the better of us over the deals for both Dunney & Gaz Baz?

I bloody HATE Spurs, really i do, but i think they've been the best footballing side of the four involved over the season. Again, i don't want to see anyone barring us get it, but if we don't and assuming that Liverpool sneaking it would be a complete travesty, i think the purist in me would have to admit that Spurs would be more deserving than Villa.
 
pardoe said:
I fully expect most people to not give a shite, if so, just don't answer, but for those who enjoy Premier League football as a whole as well as supporting City, i'd be interested to hear your opinions...

1) Of the three in with a chance of the title, who would be the lesser of the three evils in terms of a winner, in your opinion, given that Arsenal are always playing the victims, Chelsea have John Terry, and United are our dirty debt-ridden near-neighbours?

Rivalries to one side for one moment i think don't think there's much between the three sides in terms of football over the season. All have been below their best but showed glimpses of playing very well. Given their win on the weekend and remembering how great it is to see the Rags with egg on their faces, though, for me i think i'd be slightly less annoyed with Chelsea taking it than the Arsey Whingers.

2) If we don't finish fourth, who would you be least annoyed to see grab fourth given that Spurs are Spurs, Liverpool are a huge set of c*nts, and Villa fans would be gloating for a whole year that they got the better of us over the deals for both Dunney & Gaz Baz?

I bloody HATE Spurs, really i do, but i think they've been the best footballing side of the four involved over the season. Again, i don't want to see anyone barring us get it, but if we don't and assuming that Liverpool sneaking it would be a complete travesty, i think the purist in me would have to admit that Spurs would be more deserving than Villa.
Click to expand...
1) Arsenal that's an easy choice.

2) Spurs. For same reasons as you - their football. Wenger was right about Villa.
 
1...Arsenal. Mainly because it would be so good to see the faces of those who expect it to be a 2 horse race.

2.....Spurs. Because as much as it pains me to say, they deserve it. They are consistent.
 
1) I'd go for Chelsea. I think they have played some of the best football at times. Also because we could say we'd done the double of the champions but also coz I'm fed up of Wenger and the "we're hard done to" line.

2) Have to admit Spurs are the more deserving from a pure football point of view but I couldn't stand to see them take 4th. So I'd go for Villa for being least offensive.
 
1. Chelsea, even though everyone calls them classless and chavski ect they still have retained their soul more than Arsenal have since moving from Highbury, plus Frank Lampard is probably my non city favourite player.

2. Liverpool - Spurs - Villa. Liverpool first because i just cannot stand them and what they stand for and at least i wouldn't hear that cliche "famous european nights at Anfield". Spurs getting 4th would make things so much harder than if Liverpool got there though. Simply for the fact that they would spend more than they have done before to sustain what they had achieved and even though Manchester is the greatest city in the world (to me anyway) players will always choose London and Champions League football to Manchester and Europa League football. Villa getting 4th would not be a problem because they would need 8-9 players just to be good enough to finish 3rd in the group stage.
 
1. If it meant we'd see the back of Baconface after their 19th title then I'd even consider the rags but if not then I guess Arsenal.

2. Have to be Spurs for 4th. As much as Redknapp is a bent bastard, they are a well run club and play good football, plus would take the competition seriously whereas O'Neill would be whingeing about the strain on his players all the time. Liverpool I'd like to see destroyed completely. Let's see how many of their glory-hunting fans stay around then.
 
pardoe said:
I fully expect most people to not give a shite, if so, just don't answer, but for those who enjoy Premier League football as a whole as well as supporting City, i'd be interested to hear your opinions...

1) Of the three in with a chance of the title, who would be the lesser of the three evils in terms of a winner, in your opinion, given that Arsenal are always playing the victims, Chelsea have John Terry, and United are our dirty debt-ridden near-neighbours?

Rivalries to one side for one moment i think don't think there's much between the three sides in terms of football over the season. All have been below their best but showed glimpses of playing very well. Given their win on the weekend and remembering how great it is to see the Rags with egg on their faces, though, for me i think i'd be slightly less annoyed with Chelsea taking it than the Arsey Whingers.

2) If we don't finish fourth, who would you be least annoyed to see grab fourth given that Spurs are Spurs, Liverpool are a huge set of c*nts, and Villa fans would be gloating for a whole year that they got the better of us over the deals for both Dunney & Gaz Baz?

I bloody HATE Spurs, really i do, but i think they've been the best footballing side of the four involved over the season. Again, i don't want to see anyone barring us get it, but if we don't and assuming that Liverpool sneaking it would be a complete travesty, i think the purist in me would have to admit that Spurs would be more deserving than Villa.
Click to expand...

United - for no other reason to shut those fookin bin dipping bastards up.

Spurs - dont want Murderpool to win owt - crah and burn the fookin lot of them. I am certain that when they dont qualify for the CL next year there will be a period of mourning in Liverpool - they are good at that.
 
1) I'd like Arsenal to do the double to be honest with you, I have nothing but respect for that club and their manager. Despite the Ade incident, I've always found their fans to be quite nice too.
The reason for this, is that I admire any manager who is willing to stick to his guns over wages/transfer fees and the style of football to be played. Wenger could have won three trophies in the last few years, but blindly refused to change his style of play because he has a vision of how it should be played. Although pig-headed, that's admirable.

2) If I had a choice, I'd want Liverpool to get there instead of us. This is for two reasons; firstly it would be nice for Benitez to stick two fingers up at everybody who has been slagging him all year, and secondly because I would like us to be the ones to break up the old Top Four.
 
Chelsea because I really don't like Arsenal fans.

Liverpool because they're in money problems anyway, Spurs have spent nearly as much as us but don't have a Sheikh so could do with Champions League football. In other words, I think it'll be easier for us to do better next season if Liverpool got 4th rather than Spurs.
 
1. Arsenal....because despite Wenger being a moaning twat and his team a bunch of girls...they play the best football.

2. VILLA without question, because there the least likely to improve further with CL money. Dippers have had a crap season but the same squad almost won the league last year,and Spuds would improve more than Villa with the extra money (since Villa wouldn't spend it)!
 
1) Arsenal - I've always hated them in the past but I think Wenger has achieved a lot at little cost and I can't help but admire him.
2) Spurs - Not a fan of Harry (He struck it fantastic) Redknapp but the team have played good football and would deserve it. Definitely don't want Liverpool because I want the Big 4 monopoly to be broken. Don't want Villa because of O'Neill and his histrionics.
 
1) arse
4) at a push spuds, but if we don't do it then I will probably just deny that 4th place even exists and go on a bender for a couple of days.
 
chelsea just for the fact i hate the scum(obvious) and arsenal well wenger is a good manager but he has his limits on his breeding policies in premiership football!

aston villa,out of the clubs battleing for 4th these has give us the less grief fan wise and i wont begrudge them one bit.
 
pezlington said:
1) chelsea, i like drogba and malouda
2)liverpool, i dont want anyone (i.e. spurs) to break the infamous 'big 4' before we do! haha
Click to expand...
my views exactly. plus i want chelsea to put united firmly back in their place.
 
1. Chelsea - If they don't do it it would probably mean they'd dropped points to spuds and dippers, and I don't want that.

2. Villa - anywhere except blubberpool or Landen.
 
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