Mauricio Espinosa talks about his horror World Cup decision.

'orrible bastard wrote:

Danny B wrote:Exactly.

Have they taken that into account? Hell no

come to think of it united undeservedly beat Wolves twice this season already!

Hernandez and Park

Danny B wrote:

'orrible bastard wrote:

Danny B wrote:Exactly.

Have they taken that into account? Hell no

come to think of it united undeservedly beat Wolves twice this season already!

Hernandez and Park

we could have used a Uruguayan linesman!

Was gonna say both goals were clearly over the line, but so was Lampard's

Danny B wrote:Was gonna say both goals were clearly over the line, but so was Lampard's

damn you reply quickly.

I'm stalking you

All the confidence England gained at half time would've collapsed after they concede their 3rd goal.

The clash of tactics, formation and discipline were all unfavorable for England. I am confident they would've still ended up conceding a third goal, which would've threw away all the high morale England had at half time.

(polskaGOLA) wrote:All the confidence England gained at half time would've collapsed after they concede their 3rd goal.

The clash of tactics, formation and discipline were all unfavorable for England. I am confident they would've still ended up conceding a third goal, which would've threw away all the high morale England had at half time.

Yeah, because it's a fucking certainty Germany would have scored. Fuck off you cunt.

(polskaGOLA) wrote:All the confidence England gained at half time would've collapsed after they concede their 3rd goal.

The clash of tactics, formation and discipline were all unfavorable for England. I am confident they would've still ended up conceding a third goal, which would've threw away all the high morale England had at half time.

Shut up you biased, deluded troll. You are speaking hypothetically, we are speaking realisitically. Now fuck off.

(polskaGOLA) wrote:All the confidence England gained at half time would've collapsed after they concede their 3rd goal.

The clash of tactics, formation and discipline were all unfavorable for England. I am confident they would've still ended up conceding a third goal, which would've threw away all the high morale England had at half time.

Aye, because you decide what happens.

Why don't you go ahead and tell me the scores for all the games until the end of the season, seeing you know everything that's going to happen?

(polskaGOLA) wrote:All the confidence England gained at half time would've collapsed after they concede their 3rd goal.

The clash of tactics, formation and discipline were all unfavorable for England. I am confident they would've still ended up conceding a third goal, which would've threw away all the high morale England had at half time.

What a thick cunt you are, I reckon you should fuck off to Tiki Taka where you get your brilliant football chat telling us after we concede our third, like that would have happened for sure.

(polskaGOLA) wrote:All the confidence England gained at half time would've collapsed after they concede their 3rd goal.

The clash of tactics, formation and discipline were all unfavorable for England. I am confident they would've still ended up conceding a third goal, which would've threw away all the high morale England had at half time.

no one is arguing that we WOULD have won. we are arguing that victory would have been more likely had the goal stood. do you fucking get it? i can only assume that translation is the problem here. England thoroughly deserved to lose, we all know that. fact is that appalling decision DID affect the final result. maybe it would have been 4 2, maybe 5 2, 3 2 or 10 6. no one knows. what we all know is that Germany were the better team before the dissalowed goal and after it. what we dont know and never will is how that decision affected the final result BUT we all know that decision DID affect the final result!

lol.

Daft cunts, no point in arguing as it involves England. Strange, I used to think English were more lax when it comes to their country, but you guys are more nationalistic than Poles are for fucks sake. (And that is saying a whole lot). I know if it wasn't England but rather USA or someone, you lot wouldn't be saying jackshit.

Yes, I am confident Germany would've scored again even if it was 2-2. England would have needed a miracle to win that game. End of.

Lampard's goal would have been that "miracle" you thick fuck

You would need several individual miracles than you dimwitted fuck.

Yeah, I'm the one who's dimwitted

(polskaGOLA) wrote:lol.

Daft cunts, no point in arguing as it involves England. Strange, I used to think English were more lax when it comes to their country, but you guys are more nationalistic than Poles are for fucks sake. (And that is saying a whole lot). I know if it wasn't England but rather USA or someone, you lot wouldn't be saying jackshit.

Yes, I am confident Germany would've scored again even if it was 2-2. England would have needed a miracle to win that game. End of.

Yeah, play the 'English are too nationalistic'. Fuck off, you hate us and won't give us anything. That's all it is you prick.

The bit in bold means absolutely fuck all. I was confident we could beat Blackpool. We lost 2-1. I was confident we could beat Northampton fucking Town, we lost. Don't talk shit.

Neither goal we had was a miracle. We'd had the same number of shots as Germany up to half-time. The reason Germany scored twice was because we were pushing up and they countered. How can you possibly predict anything in a scenario that actually didn't happen? Point is you can't. Now take your bullshit elsewhere, 'cos it's got no place in here. You're speaking hypothetically, the rest of us aren't. That single point makes your point completely irrelevant to the conversation, yet you call us dimwitted? Idiotic to say the least.

(polskaGOLA) wrote:You would need several individual miracles than you dimwitted fuck.

That could still happen you tool.

Yeah, play the 'English are too nationalistic'. Fuck off, you hate us and won't give us anything. That's all it is you prick.

(polskaGOLA) wrote:

Danny B wrote:

Sean CFC wrote:Funny how it's only the English who think England could have won the match.

Well Polska's a bias fuck isn't he?

I'm being quite reasonable I think.

I think if England had another manager, and played a 4-5-1, England would've had a serious shot at winning the World Cup IMO.

-------------------Green**------------------
Johnson------Ferdinand----Terry--------Cole
------------Berry---------Lampard-----------
Milner*-----------Gerrard--------------Young
-----------------Rooney---------------------

* - Or Cole, Lennon or whoever
** - Or Hart of whoever

That team can win the WC IMO, if well disciplined.

From earlier this thread.

I don't hate England. Never did. I just don't have a mechanism in my brain telling me that ENGLAND #1 ENGLAND #1 everytime I post.

Oh yes, because saying that England had a better chance of winning the game at 2-2 is 'ENGLAND #1'


Idiot..

It's not even about us thinking we would win the World Cup....but we COULD. If you're in the competition then you can still win.....had that goal been given our chances of staying in the competition would've been significantly higher.

There's been FAR more unlikely results/combacks in football than England coming from 2-0 down to win.....

(polskaGOLA) wrote:lol.

Daft cunts, no point in arguing as it involves England. Strange, I used to think English were more lax when it comes to their country, but you guys are more nationalistic than Poles are for fucks sake. (And that is saying a whole lot). I know if it wasn't England but rather USA or someone, you lot wouldn't be saying jackshit.

Yes, I am confident Germany would've scored again even if it was 2-2. England would have needed a miracle to win that game. End of.

you really are a fucking idiot. always were on the EA forum and you are now! am i being nationalistic when i say Germany were the better team, England were shit all tournament and we deserved to lose v Germany and probably would even if the goal stood? is that blind nationalism? or quite a sensible account of our World Cup?

if we were 2 2 at half time we would have stood a much better chance of winning, who knows maybe the inept officials would have ruled out a perfectly good German goal or send a kraut off for something he never did! the game WOULD have been different! it may or may not have affected the final outcome - i very much doubt it would!

and if it was USA, no i couldn't give a shit. just as when Suarez handballed off the line v Ghana i couldn't really give a shit, because it wasn't my team. however i do recognise that that incident had an impact on the final outcome of that game! if he didnt handball it, Ghana Would have won! would they have won the World Cup? i doubt it.

cast your mind back to when Henry cheated Ireland out of the World Cup. pleny of Englishmen were appalled by what Henry done, i was. did i ultimately care? did i fuck, i couldn't give a rats ass about anyone but me and my own! but i recognised it was something the ref missed that seriously affected the end result.

i am nationalistic when it comes to my country's football team! im a fucking fan! but it does NOT cloud my interpretation of the rules, nor my ability to ascertain that wrong decisions CAN seriously affect football results!

Dan wrote:Oh yes, because saying that England had a better chance of winning the game at 2-2 is 'ENGLAND #1'


Idiot..

I never said that you deluded scouser.

'orrible bastard wrote:

(polskaGOLA) wrote:lol.

Daft cunts, no point in arguing as it involves England. Strange, I used to think English were more lax when it comes to their country, but you guys are more nationalistic than Poles are for fucks sake. (And that is saying a whole lot). I know if it wasn't England but rather USA or someone, you lot wouldn't be saying jackshit.

Yes, I am confident Germany would've scored again even if it was 2-2. England would have needed a miracle to win that game. End of.

you really are a fucking idiot. always were on the EA forum and you are now! am i being nationalistic when i say Germany were the better team, England were shit all tournament and we deserved to lose v Germany and probably would even if the goal stood? is that blind nationalism? or quite a sensible account of our World Cup?

if we were 2 2 at half time we would have stood a much better chance of winning, who knows maybe the inept officials would have ruled out a perfectly good German goal or send a kraut off for something he never did! the game WOULD have been different! it may or may not have affected the final outcome - i very much doubt it would!

and if it was USA, no i couldn't give a shit. just as when Suarez handballed off the line v Ghana i couldn't really give a shit, because it wasn't my team. however i do recognise that that incident had an impact on the final outcome of that game! if he didnt handball it, Ghana Would have won! would they have won the World Cup? i doubt it.

cast your mind back to when Henry cheated Ireland out of the World Cup. pleny of Englishmen were appalled by what Henry done, i was. did i ultimately care? did i fuck, i couldn't give a rats ass about anyone but me and my own! but i recognised it was something the ref missed that seriously affected the end result.

i am nationalistic when it comes to my country's football team! im a fucking fan! but it does NOT cloud my interpretation of the rules, nor my ability to ascertain that wrong decisions CAN seriously affect football results!

You aren't being nationalistic, it was more aimed at the other posters on this thread.

Obviously you'd have a better chance at 2-2. I never said otherwise. All I am saying is that the odds were highly against you regardless of the score at half time.

Rest of your post is acceptable, but not something to really respond too. Like I said, it was mostly aimed at others, not at you. I'd appreciate you actually reading my posts before jumping to conclusions. I never said England didn't have a better chance at 2-2. Obvious England did.

(polskaGOLA) wrote:

Dan wrote:Oh yes, because saying that England had a better chance of winning the game at 2-2 is 'ENGLAND #1'


Idiot..

I never said that you deluded scouser.

Well, incase you are unable to read properly, you will see that has been the main focal point of our argument.

None of us have said we'd have won the World Cup, none of us have said we'd have definitely won the game, we were saying that if the goal had stood, we'd have had more of a chance of winning the game.

Understand?

Game wasn't "highly against us" if we just got the game back to 2-2....it makes no sense at all.

(polskaGOLA) wrote:

'orrible bastard wrote:

(polskaGOLA) wrote:lol.

Daft cunts, no point in arguing as it involves England. Strange, I used to think English were more lax when it comes to their country, but you guys are more nationalistic than Poles are for fucks sake. (And that is saying a whole lot). I know if it wasn't England but rather USA or someone, you lot wouldn't be saying jackshit.

Yes, I am confident Germany would've scored again even if it was 2-2. England would have needed a miracle to win that game. End of.

you really are a fucking idiot. always were on the EA forum and you are now! am i being nationalistic when i say Germany were the better team, England were shit all tournament and we deserved to lose v Germany and probably would even if the goal stood? is that blind nationalism? or quite a sensible account of our World Cup?

if we were 2 2 at half time we would have stood a much better chance of winning, who knows maybe the inept officials would have ruled out a perfectly good German goal or send a kraut off for something he never did! the game WOULD have been different! it may or may not have affected the final outcome - i very much doubt it would!


and if it was USA, no i couldn't give a shit. just as when Suarez handballed off the line v Ghana i couldn't really give a shit, because it wasn't my team. however i do recognise that that incident had an impact on the final outcome of that game! if he didnt handball it, Ghana Would have won! would they have won the World Cup? i doubt it.

cast your mind back to when Henry cheated Ireland out of the World Cup. pleny of Englishmen were appalled by what Henry done, i was. did i ultimately care? did i fuck, i couldn't give a rats ass about anyone but me and my own! but i recognised it was something the ref missed that seriously affected the end result.

i am nationalistic when it comes to my country's football team! im a fucking fan! but it does NOT cloud my interpretation of the rules, nor my ability to ascertain that wrong decisions CAN seriously affect football results!

You aren't being nationalistic, it was more aimed at the other posters on this thread.

Obviously you'd have a better chance at 2-2. I never said otherwise. All I am saying is that the odds were highly against you regardless of the score at half time.

Rest of your post is acceptable, but not something to really respond too. Like I said, it was mostly aimed at others, not at you. I'd appreciate you actually reading my posts before jumping to conclusions. I never said England didn't have a better chance at 2-2. Obvious England did.

i have read your posts and despite others (Dan & Lux in particular) putting the same point across as me, you are calling them delusional and nationalistic.

Luxz0rz wrote:Game wasn't "highly against us" if we just got the game back to 2-2....it makes no sense at all.

Scoreline = / = Performance

Germany would still have the upper hand at half time, through tactical, formation and disciplinary reasons.

(polskaGOLA) wrote:

Luxz0rz wrote:Game wasn't "highly against us" if we just got the game back to 2-2....it makes no sense at all.

Scoreline = / = Performance

Germany would still have the upper hand at half time, through tactical, formation and disciplinary reasons.

The fact that most of their players were pretty much kids and had never been in a situation like it?

They would have been shot to pieces. It wouldn't have surprised me if they didn't really turn up for the second half tbh.

Danny B wrote:

(polskaGOLA) wrote:

Luxz0rz wrote:Game wasn't "highly against us" if we just got the game back to 2-2....it makes no sense at all.

Scoreline = / = Performance

Germany would still have the upper hand at half time, through tactical, formation and disciplinary reasons.

The fact that most of their players were pretty much kids and had never been in a situation like it?

They would have been shot to pieces. It wouldn't have surprised me if they didn't really turn up for the second half tbh.

They had several more experienced players on their side. Plus Germany's kids aren't exactly like that. They have been playing professionally for a long time, they've been in such experiences in the Bundesliga, plus it's not like they would just give up either.

Tbh, our team was far more experienced than theirs