― Vicky (Vicky), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:34 (twenty years ago)
― Vicky (Vicky), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:36 (twenty years ago)
They're having a go at each other as well, Giggs told Gary Neville to eff off
― Vicky (Vicky), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:39 (twenty years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:40 (twenty years ago)
― Vicky (Vicky), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:40 (twenty years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:41 (twenty years ago)
― Vicky (Vicky), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:41 (twenty years ago)
― Billy Dods (Billy Dods), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:42 (twenty years ago)
Also thank god for Graham Poll, second best ref going right now?
Cole should have been booked for diving in the first few minutes.
With Poll not cautioning Hienze in the first few minutes he knew what he was up against and wanted to hold back the cards for things like Rooney and Pires idiocy. ManU got theres back when he let Pires penalty go (probably hard to see from his angle).
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:45 (twenty years ago)
― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:49 (twenty years ago)
Keane was hilarious in the tunnel, shouting after Viera (this is from memory) "let's see who's the big man, I'll see you out there, see you out there you [muffled by Sky]"
Graham Poll turns up, coming up to Keane's chest and the psychotic Irishman manages to blurt out "he should learn to keep his fucking mouth shut" before the Sky censors canm get their muffling in
Hilarious
Gary Neville is producing a quintessential display, whinging like a trooper, Dot Coton in Excelsis.
And, did Rooney really get booked for implying that Pires' facial hair is a bit rub?
― Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:49 (twenty years ago)
No he didn't but between kicking the ball away and that action (with all those lovely antiracism posters around) he should have been.
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:51 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:52 (twenty years ago)
(What a freaking match!!)
― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:53 (twenty years ago)
― noodle vague (noodle vague), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:54 (twenty years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:56 (twenty years ago)
― noodle vague (noodle vague), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:57 (twenty years ago)
― Michael White (Hereward), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:02 (twenty years ago)
― Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:02 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:03 (twenty years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:17 (twenty years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:18 (twenty years ago)
― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:20 (twenty years ago)
― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:23 (twenty years ago)
― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:24 (twenty years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:24 (twenty years ago)
― Bumfluff, Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:24 (twenty years ago)
― Bumfluff, Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:25 (twenty years ago)
― ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:25 (twenty years ago)
Carrol ain't much better either
― Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:26 (twenty years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:34 (twenty years ago)
― Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:35 (twenty years ago)
― Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:36 (twenty years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:37 (twenty years ago)
― Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:38 (twenty years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:39 (twenty years ago)
"they're trying to find a pass through the needle in a haystack"
― Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:41 (twenty years ago)
― ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:41 (twenty years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:43 (twenty years ago)
Ken, what the hell are you talking about?
― Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:44 (twenty years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:44 (twenty years ago)
― ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:47 (twenty years ago)
― Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:48 (twenty years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:49 (twenty years ago)
― William Bloody Swygart (mrswygart), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:50 (twenty years ago)
― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:54 (twenty years ago)
― ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:54 (twenty years ago)
― Bumfluff, Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:54 (twenty years ago)
xpost, oh, right, sorry. Yeah, they've taken that attitude to Arsenal the last few crucial games against them -- the Cup game last season, at OT this season and last night. But it's not just against Arsenal. Usually, whenever United have a big game against a very good team, they play with that level of commitment-bordering-on-madness. Ironically, the year they won the Champions League, they completely forgot to play that way against Bayern in the Final and almost blew it (unlike against Juve that season, in Turin).
― David A. (Davant), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:46 (twenty years ago)
― David A. (Davant), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:49 (twenty years ago)
Fucking great game. I loved it. Best moment - when Gary Neville rushes over to abuse the ref, who immediately says "shut up or you're off" to which his eyes widen, he puts his hands up, backs away and prevents team mates from having a go. Graham Poll was superb last night, missed penalty (which was certainly forgiveable) excepting.
― Markelby (Mark C), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:49 (twenty years ago)
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:50 (twenty years ago)
Poll was surprisingly good, I agree.
(Xpost:
Dave C = Dr. C, innit?
Ha ha!)
― David A. (Davant), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:53 (twenty years ago)
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:53 (twenty years ago)
― The Horse of Babylon (the pirate king), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:54 (twenty years ago)
― David A. (Davant), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:56 (twenty years ago)
Alright, this post is funny.
― David A. (Davant), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:57 (twenty years ago)
As for effective teams, I have to say the United for 1999-2000 were amazing. When they had Cole and Yorke and Beckham, Keane in his prime, Scholes regularly brilliant, Stam very impressive etc. Christ, they used to score from clearing corners in their own half; the only way to stop them scoring was to not let them have the ball.
― Dave B (daveb), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 12:31 (twenty years ago)
― Stevem On X (blueski), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 12:34 (twenty years ago)
― The Horse of Babylon (the pirate king), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 13:06 (twenty years ago)
Quite. IF we stay clear of injuries the title's ours, but we have a lot of games to play in various cups. The 'big squad' thing is a myth really. What if Terry, Frank L, and a couple of strikers were injured and out for key games? We have little cover at centre-back with Carvalho injured - in fact it's only Huth. If say Drogba and Eidar were out we're down to Kezman as the focal point of the attack - and he's pretty useless. I suppose one of the wingers could go up front, but it would change a winning pattern and I wouldn't fancy it. In midfield we should be OK - he seems to be going for Frank, Makka and one of Tiago/Smertin/Cole. We have the new geezer from Czechoslovakia or somewhere + the wretched Geremi as cover and I suppose Scott Parker will be fit soon.
I can't see us losing it, but a blip is still possible. I have seen to much disappointment in 34 years of supporting CFC to get the champagne ready!
― Dr. C (Dr. C), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 13:12 (twenty years ago)
now we're getting that thing were teams turn up and expect to lose - they don't even pretend to hide it. it's something arsenal and man u have experienced for years, but it's strange. on sunday, birmingham just didn't want to be there.
― Pete W (peterw), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 13:17 (twenty years ago)
huth is out for 6-8 weeks but carvalho is back soon. that giant russian (Dolph Lundgren?) can play centre-back i think.
― Pete W (peterw), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 13:21 (twenty years ago)
― Dr. C (Dr. C), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 13:22 (twenty years ago)
― frankiemachine, Wednesday, 2 February 2005 13:57 (twenty years ago)
― Dave B (daveb), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 14:01 (twenty years ago)
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 14:15 (twenty years ago)
― ken c (ken c), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 15:00 (twenty years ago)
― ken c (ken c), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 15:06 (twenty years ago)
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 15:08 (twenty years ago)
― Dave B (daveb), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 15:13 (twenty years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 15:23 (twenty years ago)
As said here before, I am uncomfortable with the Abramovic scenario and particularly like my club being used as a way of laundering money. The post-Abramovic years could be uncomfortable, but it's almost worth the risk to see us stuffing Man U and The Arse this year.
― Dr. C (Dr. C), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 15:43 (twenty years ago)
Well hey, if you're not complaining! ;-)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 15:48 (twenty years ago)
Thanks, Ned. (Proof that Ned proof reads every thread on ILX!)
― Dr. C (Dr. C), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 15:57 (twenty years ago)
― the bellefox, Wednesday, 2 February 2005 16:28 (twenty years ago)
i guess they hear them in the tunnels every week, and already know the words from the playground
― Stevem On X (blueski), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 16:36 (twenty years ago)
― ailsa (ailsa), Thursday, 3 February 2005 00:11 (twenty years ago)
There aren't a huge number of other teams doing that at the moment - Liverpool are doing okay in that department, there are a fair few coming through the lower teams in the league (although tough shit if you're at a club like Bolton). Has the romantic ideal of a John Terry coming through the ranks and then captaining his team in Europe all but gone? Or have Premiership clubs more or less given up on it and are all doing a Tottenham, ie accepting that a season or two at West Ham or Derby is better than sitting in the reserves at White Hart Lane?
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 3 February 2005 00:28 (twenty years ago)
ailsa otm. i am a man u fan, but i must say: even when we were producing the likes of scholes, becks, butt nevilles etc - we spent big money to fill the rest of the gaps. at every stage of united's career, there were some big money signings (3.75 for keane may not seem much now, for instance, but it was a brit record at the time). we have had the luxury of splashing out on flops like veron and still having enough to cover other areas. cole, yorke, stam, ferdinand, ronaldo, rooney - these all cost big money.
what i mean is - united's financial situation during the ferguson era always gave them a headstart above the majority of premiership teams. ferguson did a terrific job - regardless of how much financial help he got - he is an incredibly great manager. but it's ridiculous that ppl complain about *one* team having a financial superiority to man u, when we've had it over the majority of the league, for the entirety of our most successful period.
so, i grudgingly give props to abramovich, his gigantic wallet, his excellent choice of manager, and his refusal to involve himself in footballing affairs. a smart man.
― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Thursday, 3 February 2005 00:48 (twenty years ago)
― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Thursday, 3 February 2005 00:50 (twenty years ago)
― ken c (ken c), Thursday, 3 February 2005 01:08 (twenty years ago)
― Dave B (daveb), Thursday, 3 February 2005 09:32 (twenty years ago)
― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Thursday, 3 February 2005 09:56 (twenty years ago)
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 3 February 2005 09:57 (twenty years ago)
― Dr. C (Dr. C), Thursday, 3 February 2005 10:04 (twenty years ago)
what did his work at chelsea involve beside throwing lots of money at the club? and finding (through people he hired), in mourinho,someone who knew what to do with it.
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Thursday, 3 February 2005 10:12 (twenty years ago)
― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Thursday, 3 February 2005 10:36 (twenty years ago)
Fast forward a few years, the oligarchs are not popular in Russia, seeing as having robbed the country etc etc. Putin is under pressure to deal with them, but seems to have struck a deal with Abramovich that as long as he stays out of politics he will be left alone. Still, Abramovich is funnelling vast amounts of money out the country and into Chelsea.
Also, by becoming Mr Stamford Bridge, he is also the world's most famous Russian and therefore well-placed for any future political career.
(Disclaimer - may not all be true. If I suddenly stop posting, avenge my death)
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 3 February 2005 10:48 (twenty years ago)
There were also details of this court case:
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2005/01/17/003.html
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Thursday, 3 February 2005 10:53 (twenty years ago)
That's why I've always thought he bought Chelsea. I didn't think that show uncovered anything that wasn't in the public domain (so RA's money is owned by shell companies based in Cyprus? So what?)
Back to football: the best thing about Chelsea is undoubtedly Mourinho - if Ranieri had this squad we'd probably be a couple of points behind Man U, with the challenge already fading. Mourinho has made all the difference and, like Ferguson and Wenger, proves a good manager is what really makes the difference. His gesture last night of making the players throw their shirts to the crowd has cemented his legend.
― Pete W (peterw), Thursday, 3 February 2005 10:57 (twenty years ago)
― Markelby (Mark C), Thursday, 3 February 2005 12:07 (twenty years ago)
― Dr. C (Dr. C), Thursday, 3 February 2005 12:10 (twenty years ago)
― Dave B (daveb), Thursday, 3 February 2005 12:33 (twenty years ago)
For reasons noted above thread I doubt his investment in Chelsea can be regarded as "laundering" - the money was got in a dubious way but with the collusion of the Russian government and I doubt he's under any legal threat. I can see the argument that owning Chelsea makes him a bit more high profile and adds a bit of protection but if he threatened to become a genuine political embarrassment to the Russian government (eg by deciding confession was good for the soul) I doubt it'd help him much.
It seems to me there's much hypocrisy about Abramovich. Many Englishmen who could have watched documentaries about corrupt Russians enriching themselves at the expense of the people with complete equanimity have discovered a marvellous sense of outrage now that a tiny fraction of the cash has been pumped into a rival football club. So convenient to pretend that their real objection isn't to how he's using the cash, but the immoral way he got it. When in fact as long as he'd restricted his spending to yachts and private jets they'd never have given a damn.
― frankiemachine, Thursday, 3 February 2005 12:54 (twenty years ago)
― Dr. C (Dr. C), Thursday, 3 February 2005 13:58 (twenty years ago)
Well, to some extent, in the near future, you might have to.
― Onimo (GerryNemo), Thursday, 3 February 2005 15:05 (twenty years ago)
― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Thursday, 3 February 2005 15:14 (twenty years ago)