The mancityfans.net football forum

DoomMerchant wrote:

iwasthere2012 wrote:

DoomMerchant wrote:

PeterParker wrote:I have only one dilemma, if we get indeed Pogba and Yaya doesn't leave, then how the fuck are we gonna play them?

I mean, from what i saw, they play the same position, so, normally we would use them both while the two Ferns will be their backup, however, neither do Yaya or Pogba like to defend. So, our offensive support will be more spectacular, but our defence might be under heavy fire.

Beside that, i genuine don't know, but i am curious, can Pogba pe used as a HG player? Because of his youth years with filth?

If how to accommodate yaya and pogba is what's called a "dilemma" then...sign me up.

Cheers

Do you have the legs to get around midfield.

There is a certain element of shall we say "round" to my game, yes.

I'm working on that tho.

Cheers

You could be a modern day Hector Chumpitaz, Doomie.

He was a fine player in spite of his rotund frame.

iwasthere2012 wrote:

twosips wrote:Weirdly, I have the opposite feeling to iwasthere. My instinct is that we'll only get Sterling of the big three. I don't think we can compete with Barca, Real and Bayern just yet and i think KDB/Pogba will end up hanging on for them. May be wrong obviously but im not confident...

That's a tingle in the right ball then, is it?

It's a good job it's not the ear that is itching/tingling......otherwise it might be gonorrhea.......


However, I'm with twosips on this in that I feel we'll lose out on the other two and, since I'm very dubious about Sterling, that scenario would then, as far as I'm concerned, be very disappointing indeed.

Mikhail Chigorin wrote:

DoomMerchant wrote:

iwasthere2012 wrote:

DoomMerchant wrote:

PeterParker wrote:I have only one dilemma, if we get indeed Pogba and Yaya doesn't leave, then how the fuck are we gonna play them?

I mean, from what i saw, they play the same position, so, normally we would use them both while the two Ferns will be their backup, however, neither do Yaya or Pogba like to defend. So, our offensive support will be more spectacular, but our defence might be under heavy fire.

Beside that, i genuine don't know, but i am curious, can Pogba pe used as a HG player? Because of his youth years with filth?

If how to accommodate yaya and pogba is what's called a "dilemma" then...sign me up.

Cheers

Do you have the legs to get around midfield.

There is a certain element of shall we say "round" to my game, yes.

I'm working on that tho.

Cheers

You could be a modern day Hector Chumpitaz, Doomie.

He was a fine player in spite of his rotund frame.

He was a defender though. Sorry Doomie, can't see us signing you up as a CB. It would push Denayer to the back of the queue and we could probably get Otamendi cheaper anyway.
Have you considered going into early pre-season training with Vinnie, to get the necessary legs under you for a ten mile gallop per game.

He was a defender though. Sorry Doomie, can't see us signing you up as a CB.

Theoretically, I suppose Chumpitaz might have been classed as a defender as he was nominally a 'libero'. However, he took this description very liberally as he was, more often than not, to be found in midfield.

Peru were a side that were based on all out attack and played 4-2-4 but their formation became more of a 3-3-4, in effect, with Chumpitaz around.

He was a very skillful, strolling type of performer and because he wasn't too tall, he was often described as a 'roly poly' figure but, crikey, he could really play. That Peruvian side from the 1970s was one of my all-time favourite teams and were a joy to watch with their fast, open, goal-scoring, aggressive style.

Their 4-2 defeat at the hands of Brazil, in the 1970 World Cup quarter finals, was a terrific game altogether and, on another day, the result could have been so different.

Mikhail Chigorin wrote:He was a defender though. Sorry Doomie, can't see us signing you up as a CB.

Theoretically, I suppose Chumpitaz might have been classed as a defender as he was nominally a 'libero'. However, he took this description very liberally as he was, more often than not, to be found in midfield.

Peru were a side that were based on all out attack and played 4-2-4 but their formation became more of a 3-3-4, in effect, with Chumpitaz around.

He was a very skillful, strolling type of performer and because he wasn't too tall, he was often described as a 'roly poly' figure but, crikey, he could really play. That Peruvian side from the 1970s was one of my all-time favourite teams and were a joy to watch with their fast, open, goal-scoring, aggressive style.

Their 4-2 defeat at the hands of Brazil, in the 1970 World Cup quarter finals, was a terrific game altogether and, on another day, the result could have been so different.

That's all very well and good Mikhail, but it doesn't really fit in with the more humorous narrative I was aiming for. Now if Doomie was a centre forward he could be a modern day Frannie (Doomie) Lee, but he's not. We are looking for a midfield Doominator here.

iwasthere2012 wrote:

Mikhail Chigorin wrote:He was a defender though. Sorry Doomie, can't see us signing you up as a CB.

Theoretically, I suppose Chumpitaz might have been classed as a defender as he was nominally a 'libero'. However, he took this description very liberally as he was, more often than not, to be found in midfield.

Peru were a side that were based on all out attack and played 4-2-4 but their formation became more of a 3-3-4, in effect, with Chumpitaz around.

He was a very skillful, strolling type of performer and because he wasn't too tall, he was often described as a 'roly poly' figure but, crikey, he could really play. That Peruvian side from the 1970s was one of my all-time favourite teams and were a joy to watch with their fast, open, goal-scoring, aggressive style.

Their 4-2 defeat at the hands of Brazil, in the 1970 World Cup quarter finals, was a terrific game altogether and, on another day, the result could have been so different.

That's all very well and good Mikhail, but it doesn't really fit in with the more humorous narrative I was aiming for. Now if Doomie was a centre forward he could be a modern day Frannie (Doomie) Lee, but he's not. We are looking for a midfield Doominator here.

What a fantastic description.

Well done to you.

Mikhail Chigorin wrote:

iwasthere2012 wrote:

Mikhail Chigorin wrote:He was a defender though. Sorry Doomie, can't see us signing you up as a CB.

Theoretically, I suppose Chumpitaz might have been classed as a defender as he was nominally a 'libero'. However, he took this description very liberally as he was, more often than not, to be found in midfield.

Peru were a side that were based on all out attack and played 4-2-4 but their formation became more of a 3-3-4, in effect, with Chumpitaz around.

He was a very skillful, strolling type of performer and because he wasn't too tall, he was often described as a 'roly poly' figure but, crikey, he could really play. That Peruvian side from the 1970s was one of my all-time favourite teams and were a joy to watch with their fast, open, goal-scoring, aggressive style.

Their 4-2 defeat at the hands of Brazil, in the 1970 World Cup quarter finals, was a terrific game altogether and, on another day, the result could have been so different.

That's all very well and good Mikhail, but it doesn't really fit in with the more humorous narrative I was aiming for. Now if Doomie was a centre forward he could be a modern day Frannie (Doomie) Lee, but he's not. We are looking for a midfield Doominator here.

What a fantastic description.

Well done to you.

my sporting skills as a youth were limited to being a shit distance runner and wearing one of these whilst grappling with teenage boys. I was pretty half-decent at it too. Duh.

cheers

DoomMerchant wrote:

Mikhail Chigorin wrote:

iwasthere2012 wrote:

Mikhail Chigorin wrote:He was a defender though. Sorry Doomie, can't see us signing you up as a CB.

Theoretically, I suppose Chumpitaz might have been classed as a defender as he was nominally a 'libero'. However, he took this description very liberally as he was, more often than not, to be found in midfield.

Peru were a side that were based on all out attack and played 4-2-4 but their formation became more of a 3-3-4, in effect, with Chumpitaz around.

He was a very skillful, strolling type of performer and because he wasn't too tall, he was often described as a 'roly poly' figure but, crikey, he could really play. That Peruvian side from the 1970s was one of my all-time favourite teams and were a joy to watch with their fast, open, goal-scoring, aggressive style.

Their 4-2 defeat at the hands of Brazil, in the 1970 World Cup quarter finals, was a terrific game altogether and, on another day, the result could have been so different.

That's all very well and good Mikhail, but it doesn't really fit in with the more humorous narrative I was aiming for. Now if Doomie was a centre forward he could be a modern day Frannie (Doomie) Lee, but he's not. We are looking for a midfield Doominator here.

What a fantastic description.

Well done to you.

my sporting skills as a youth were limited to being a shit distance runner and wearing one of these whilst grappling with teenage boys. I was pretty half-decent at it too. Duh.

cheers

Now that's how you get a tingle in your left nut.

iwasthere2012 wrote:

Mikhail Chigorin wrote:He was a defender though. Sorry Doomie, can't see us signing you up as a CB.

Theoretically, I suppose Chumpitaz might have been classed as a defender as he was nominally a 'libero'. However, he took this description very liberally as he was, more often than not, to be found in midfield.

Peru were a side that were based on all out attack and played 4-2-4 but their formation became more of a 3-3-4, in effect, with Chumpitaz around.

He was a very skillful, strolling type of performer and because he wasn't too tall, he was often described as a 'roly poly' figure but, crikey, he could really play. That Peruvian side from the 1970s was one of my all-time favourite teams and were a joy to watch with their fast, open, goal-scoring, aggressive style.

Their 4-2 defeat at the hands of Brazil, in the 1970 World Cup quarter finals, was a terrific game altogether and, on another day, the result could have been so different.

That's all very well and good Mikhail, but it doesn't really fit in with the more humorous narrative I was aiming for. Now if Doomie was a centre forward he could be a modern day Frannie (Doomie) Lee, but he's not. We are looking for a midfield Doominator here.

I think Mickey Quinn might be a better comparison than Franny.

twosips wrote:Fair enough. For what its worth i just thought he was being cynical. I am too - I thought the article was relatively vague guess work and nothing new. I don't think as a City fan you have to get carried away by positive articles.

Holy crap, someone actually understands what i wrote and shares the same enternally cynical mindset as me.

phips wrote:

twosips wrote:Fair enough. For what its worth i just thought he was being cynical. I am too - I thought the article was relatively vague guess work and nothing new. I don't think as a City fan you have to get carried away by positive articles.

Holy crap, someone actually understands what i wrote and shares the same enternally cynical mindset as me.

Why don't you two get fucking married? For all "enternity."

cheers

Mirror reporting tomorrow that Delph's reserve price is only 10 million and we're poised to snap him up.

blues2win wrote:Mirror reporting tomorrow that Delph's reserve price is only 10 million and we're poised to snap him up.

That's a freebie to us ;-)

Beefymcfc wrote:

blues2win wrote:Mirror reporting tomorrow that Delph's reserve price is only 10 million and we're poised to snap him up.

That's a freebie to us ;-)

I sincerely hope that's bollocks. A less injured Rodwell. He would not be an upgrade on any of our midfielders.

Blue Noodle wrote:

Beefymcfc wrote:

blues2win wrote:Mirror reporting tomorrow that Delph's reserve price is only 10 million and we're poised to snap him up.

That's a freebie to us ;-)

I sincerely hope that's bollocks. A less injured Rodwell. He would not be an upgrade on any of our midfielders.

Really?

If he's Rodwells' class, without the injuries, I'd take him in a shot. It's only Rodwell's injuries that stop him from making it at the top level.

PS. I've never wanted Rodwell, or Delph in this instance, but he could be the piece in the jigsaw.

Hope Delph likes the bench

phips wrote:

twosips wrote:Fair enough. For what its worth i just thought he was being cynical. I am too - I thought the article was relatively vague guess work and nothing new. I don't think as a City fan you have to get carried away by positive articles.

Holy crap, someone actually understands what i wrote and shares the same enternally cynical mindset as me.

Steady. I do sometimes think you're an unnecessarily mardy/fussy cunt so I'm not excusing that, just willing to give you the the benefit of the doubt this time. Only fair.

twosips wrote:

phips wrote:

twosips wrote:Fair enough. For what its worth i just thought he was being cynical. I am too - I thought the article was relatively vague guess work and nothing new. I don't think as a City fan you have to get carried away by positive articles.

Holy crap, someone actually understands what i wrote and shares the same enternally cynical mindset as me.

Steady. I do sometimes think you're an unnecessarily mardy/fussy cunt so I'm not excusing that, just willing to give you the the benefit of the doubt this time. Only fair.

looks like i was wrong, you dont understand what i write.

phips wrote:looks like i was wrong, you dont understand what i write.

I don't think you even understand what you write 99% of the time.

bigblue wrote:

phips wrote:looks like i was wrong, you dont understand what i write.

I don't think you even understand what you write 99% of the time.

Come on everyone, cut the guy some slack.

We all write a load of drivel at times, probably none more so than myself and, at the end of the day, it's all about opinions and the ways they're delivered, which are sometimes difficult to accurately convey in the cyber medium.

Crikey, I often don't understand what the deuce the Doominator is talking about (as I'm sure others don't), even though it's usually entertaining to an obscure degree.

As I say, just cut the guy some slack; we're not BlueMoon.