[Macros]

Cougar, Spurs play attacking football, I think they're second or third in the most conceeded goals in the league, boring Liverpool may be but 2 finals and a trophy in 3 years would suggest its a relatively good formula for success.

[Thelomen Toblerone]

I think he means boring in way that Liverpool rely heavily on Gerrard and Torres to score, while playing defensively. They dont have the same penchant for attacking, sweeping football that Arsenal and Man United have. That said, they're far more entertaining than Chelsea, and I can name you at least 10 teams in the PL that play far more boring footy. It's become a point of honour- no-one expects the smaller teams to try anything but to win, but people expect the big 4 to win while going gung-ho and playing Brazil 1986 style footy.

Three Arsenal Liverpool games in a week. How incredibly bloody sick of that fixture is everybody going to be. I fancy Arsenal, I have to say, though I would say that as a Gooner. I just think the players know they've bottled the league, but have the belief now they've beaten AC Milan to at least make the semis. Our quick counter-attack play should hopefully just be enough to over come Liverpool, but alot depends on injuries.

If Torres, Gerrard and Agger all play, I rate it 50-50. If one or more is missing, the win's Arsenals IMHO. Likewise, Arsenal need Adebayor, Hleb, Fabregas and Flamini, although we can deal a little better with these absences IMO.

Regardless, I think both sets of fans will agree that whoever wins, we'll all get behind them against Chelsea in the semis.

[polishgenius]

Macros;275347 said:

Cougar, Spurs play attacking football, I think they're second or third in the most conceeded goals in the league, boring Liverpool may be but 2 finals and a trophy in 3 years would suggest its a relatively good formula for success.

United play exciting attacking football and have the best defensive record in the league. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

[caladanbrood]

Thelomen Toblerone;275375 said:

Three Arsenal Liverpool games in a week. How incredibly bloody sick of that fixture is everybody going to be. I fancy Arsenal, I have to say, though I would say that as a Gooner. I just think the players know they've bottled the league, but have the belief now they've beaten AC Milan to at least make the semis. Our quick counter-attack play should hopefully just be enough to over come Liverpool, but alot depends on injuries.

For sure you beat AC, but Liverpool just dominated Inter too. Also, the league is far FAR from over. And Chelsea have snuck back into contention now, without anyone really noticing - 5 points behind you with a game in hand, and 3 points behind Manure having played the same. Any of the three could still win the double;)

Quote

Regardless, I think both sets of fans will agree that whoever wins, we'll all get behind them against Chelsea in the semis.

Say what?

[Set'alahd Crool]

Macros;275347 said:

Cougar, Spurs play attacking football, I think they're second or third in the most conceeded goals in the league, boring Liverpool may be but 2 finals and a trophy in 3 years would suggest its a relatively good formula for success.

I repeat, Liverpool haven't won the league since the backpass was outlawed. If 'Pool fans think 18 years without winning the league is successful then you've lowered the bar considerably. Man U's two and a half decade drought was definitely not considered a success.

[Sir Bob]

so s crool you dont rate rangers? i team that has a phenomenal defensive record only just failed to get to the knock out C.L rounds from a group that contained barca lyon and the german champs and are through to the q.f of uefa cup.
still in all 3 cup compititions and top of the legaue with as you say a game in hand, i can see why you would not rate them...

[Tiste Simeon]

Thelomen Toblerone said:

Regardless, I think both sets of fans will agree that whoever wins, we'll all get behind them against Chelsea in the semis.

You are correct. No matter how much I hate Arsenal, I would prefer them to beat Chelsea. Especially as Man U would do better against Arsenal in the CL final than they would against Chelsea imo...

[Set'alahd Crool]

Sir Bob;275650 said:

so s crool you dont rate rangers? i team that has a phenomenal defensive record only just failed to get to the knock out C.L rounds from a group that contained barca lyon and the german champs and are through to the q.f of uefa cup.
still in all 3 cup compititions and top of the legaue with as you say a game in hand, i can see why you would not rate them...

Do you actually think the spl is a quality league? A bit of patriotism goes a long way, I see. As for Rangers' champios' league run, like you said, they failed to get out of their group, which contained the worst german champions in the history of the bundesliga (the words of 3 germans with whom I work) and Lyon (who've sold almost all of their good players over the last few years while replacing one).

A bit of perspective about one's achievements wouldn't go astray. For example, when Rangers beat Sporting remember that they(Sporting) struggled past the Bolton reserves. So being in the uefa cup semis won't make 'Gers a good team either. Beat Bayern and I'll reconsider my position.

[Shpetim]

ManU meeting Rome.. . AGAIN fro christ sake... Anyone here remember the outcome of their last clash? Yes, the one in Old Trafford? Even though I'm a dedicated ManU supporter, I still don't wanna se THAT happen again.. Rome is very good this year btw. They beat Real fair and square.. I saw the game.. crazily entertaining.. I of course want ManU to win, but even if they lose, they've played fantastic football so far.
Guess when I became a ManU supporter... shouldn't be too difficult.. it has to do with this babyfaced norwayman who saved their butts in the finals.. The most exciting match I've seen so far, and I've seen a lot, believe me..

[Sir Bob]

um when did i say the spl was a good leauge all i said that they were top of it. the worst champs in years maybe but still champs and after 40 odd games(or how ever many they play) its not done to luck or randomness that they were top. lyon have sold most of there good players true but the still had grosso, juninhio, kallstrom at the time barros, fred, benzema and govou so they are still damn good and as we both agree the spl is pap it makes european achivements MORE impressive cause of the qulity of players rangers have(good players rarely come to scotland) and they have to raise the game every time. and it cant be easy to change ones mind set from playing diddy teams week in week out.

and relax

[caladanbrood]

Don't forget Ben Arfa (re: Lyon players, that is)

[Set'alahd Crool]

Sir Bob;276348 said:

and relax

What? WHAT!!! MMRRRWAAARGGGHHHH!!!!!

Um, sorry. Didn't mean to seem irate, tense or otherwise unrelaxed. Rangers do deserve credit for their achievements so far this season since, as you said, coming from a weak league makes european footy all the more difficult. My point was (meant to be) that their relative success doesn't make me rate them too highly.

That's not meant to be a criticism, since the lack of money in the scottish game is clearly the cause. Just look at our(irish) league. Far less money, proportionally worse standard of footbal.

[Lord of Salvation]

Arsenal has got this thing

[Sir Bob]

i was going for a mubling incoherent rant cause they are allways fun.
i think maybe we were at cross wires would you maybe be saying you dont rate rangers as say man u, inter,bayern munich,juventes e.t.c cause lets face it who would? but as a scottish team they are not doing to bad. i think i got an idea in my head and just ran with it.

[Set'alahd Crool]

Sir Bob;276948 said:

i was going for a mubling incoherent rant cause they are allways fun.
i think maybe we were at cross wires would you maybe be saying you dont rate rangers as say man u, inter,bayern munich,juventes e.t.c cause lets face it who would? but as a scottish team they are not doing to bad. i think i got an idea in my head and just ran with it.

Pretty much. If they want to be rated as a really good scottish side, however, they'll have to win the champions league like another scottish club did 41 years ago.....

Ok, so that's a bit unfair. The uefa cup will do, I s'pose.

[Macros]

Aren't the gers one of the msot successful teams in their own league in the world or something ridiculous like that? Not that its aying much, beyond celtic there isn't much competition.
Re: er, setahalad crool I think, I never said no league in 18 years was succesful, I said the last 3 was, a Champions league, FA Cup and another Champions League final, its not bad all things considered, Fergie won Dick all in his first 4 years with manure

[Set'alahd Crool]

'Pool's success in the champions' league is laudable, but in all fairness if you're not the best team in your domestic league you can't be the best team in Europe.

Unless of course your domestic league isn't in Europe, but that would bring its own complications to the party.

[Sir Bob]

yep rangers have indeed got the most domestic cups to their name for anyone in the world, its only recently(early 90s) that its been all rangers and celtic by such a big margin in fact in the 80s aberdeen and dundee utd challeged at home and abroad and were labeled "the new firm" a certain red nosed scots man was in charge of aberdeen. @ crool the chances of a scotish team even getting to the q.finals of the C.L look bleak, though stranger things have happened, i just cant think of any at the mo...

[Macros]

Potato potahto, if the winners of the league were a better team than the winner of the champions league surely they would be in that spot. A bad run of form, a few injuries at the start of a season can ruin a preiership challenge, over two legs, liverpool can beat any team in europe.

[Set'alahd Crool]

Macros;277627 said:

Potato potahto, if the winners of the league were a better team than the winner of the champions league surely they would be in that spot. A bad run of form, a few injuries at the start of a season can ruin a preiership challenge, over two legs, liverpool can beat any team in europe.

Liverpool have one of football's best strategists as their manager, which gives them a great chance in european competition. Man Utd don't - Fergie has many strengths as a manager (else he'd not have as many trophies as he does) but strategy ain't one of them. He relies on the quality of the teasm(s) he's built to be enough.
Over a long league season, more often than not, this has worked. In a knockout tournament, more often than not, it hasn't.

This season? I can't wait to find out.