Moderators: BillShankly, arxidi, Judge Judy, Forum Admins
Convicts? Cons?God is an Englishman wrote:Are you lot being serious about the ref being frustrating? Didn't do much wrong.
Chillaaaay (what the shiraz is that all about) were far better team in first half, convicts better in second. 2-1 would have been fair, cons did better than I expected.
A side note, those Australian commentators are very funny. Have they seen a game before?
its always good value watching someone meet hawkesy for the first time.full back wrote:Convicts? Cons?God is an Englishman wrote:Are you lot being serious about the ref being frustrating? Didn't do much wrong.
Chillaaaay (what the shiraz is that all about) were far better team in first half, convicts better in second. 2-1 would have been fair, cons did better than I expected.
A side note, those Australian commentators are very funny. Have they seen a game before?
If you dont like this country idiot.............shiraz off to where you came from!!!
You do know what aMegaBonus wrote:Confusing a philosophy with a formation......gee, the loss today has really got to youBomber
Does this now mean the Dutch system of 4-3-3 now trumps the tika-taka Spanish system again? Forget Gombau, AU, bring back Rini.
means, or should I try and explain it to you?That's a fair assessment, personally I thought the referee was excellent, although he could have given us a penalty it would have been almost as soft as the Brazil one that everyone is banging on aboutGod is an Englishman wrote:Are you lot being serious about the ref being frustrating? Didn't do much wrong.
Chillaaaay (what the shiraz is that all about) were far better team in first half, convicts better in second. 2-1 would have been fair, cons did better than I expected.
A side note, those Australian commentators are very funny. Have they seen a game before?
full back wrote:Convicts? Cons?God is aWill you glishman wrote:Are you lot being serious about the ref being frustrating? Didn't do much wrong.
Chillaaaay (what the shiraz is that all about) were far better team in first half, convicts better in second. 2-1 would have been fair, cons did better than I expected.
A side note, those Australian commentators are very funny. Have they seen a game before?
If you dont like this country idiot.............shiraz off to where you came from!!!
How was the boat ride over here for you?God is an Englishman wrote:full back wrote:Convicts? Cons?God is aWill you glishman wrote:Are you lot being serious about the ref being frustrating? Didn't do much wrong.
Chillaaaay (what the shiraz is that all about) were far better team in first half, convicts better in second. 2-1 would have been fair, cons did better than I expected.
A side note, those Australian commentators are very funny. Have they seen a game before?
If you dont like this country idiot.............shiraz off to where you came from!!!
further proof you convicts love a whinge.
MegaBonus
question......
has Timmy now scored at 3 consecutive world cups??? if so, that would surely put him in elite company
MegaBonus wrote:MegaBonus
question......
has Timmy now scored at 3 consecutive world cups??? if so, that would surely put him in elite company
happy to answer my own question....he joins:
Pele (4 WC Final tournaments)
Uwe Seeler (4 WC Final tournaments)
Bagio
Klinsman
Matthaus (also played in 5 WC Finals)
Italy 2 Engerland 1God is an Englishman wrote:Are you lot being serious about the ref being frustrating? Didn't do much wrong.
Chillaaaay (what the shiraz is that all about) were far better team in first half, convicts better in second. 2-1 would have been fair, cons did better than I expected.
A side note, those Australian commentators are very funny. Have they seen a game before?
haywood djablowme wrote: I believe Arsenal have improved more than the Poo! (we are only 5 pts behind you)
What's that got to do with this game convict?full back wrote:Italy 2 Engerland 1God is an Englishman wrote:Are you lot being serious about the ref being frustrating? Didn't do much wrong.
Chillaaaay (what the shiraz is that all about) were far better team in first half, convicts better in second. 2-1 would have been fair, cons did better than I expected.
A side note, those Australian commentators are very funny. Have they seen a game before?
How would that stop him being a convict, you may even have been born here but I would still call you a bubble.Kosta Utd wrote:im sure he was born here which makes you point invalid as usual
your entitled to say whatever you like, doesn't make it valid tho..God is an Englishman wrote:How would that stop him being a convict, you may even have been born here but I would still call you a bubble.Kosta Utd wrote:im sure he was born here which makes you point invalid as usual
Commentators were just displaying passion. When you spend your entire life dreaming of something taking place I challenge anyone not to be excited when its a real possibility of taking place. Nothing wrong with that.God is an Englishman wrote:Are you lot being serious about the ref being frustrating? Didn't do much wrong.
Chillaaaay (what the shiraz is that all about) were far better team in first half, convicts better in second. 2-1 would have been fair, cons did better than I expected.
A side note, those Australian commentators are very funny. Have they seen a game before?
Stuckey wrote:Commentators were just displaying passion. When you spend your entire life dreaming of something taking place I challenge anyone not to be excited when its a real possibility of taking place. Nothing wrong with that.God is an Englishman wrote:Are you lot being serious about the ref being frustrating? Didn't do much wrong.
Chillaaaay (what the shiraz is that all about) were far better team in first half, convicts better in second. 2-1 would have been fair, cons did better than I expected.
A side note, those Australian commentators are very funny. Have they seen a game before?
Hey Pom:God is an Englishman wrote:Stuckey wrote:Commentators were just displaying passion. When you spend your entire life dreaming of something taking place I challenge anyone not to be excited when its a real possibility of taking place. Nothing wrong with that.God is an Englishman wrote:Are you lot being serious about the ref being frustrating? Didn't do much wrong.
Chillaaaay (what the shiraz is that all about) were far better team in first half, convicts better in second. 2-1 would have been fair, cons did better than I expected.
A side note, those Australian commentators are very funny. Have they seen a game before?
Getting excited is not the same as making mistakes and making inane comments.
Heh convict/wogfull back wrote:
Hey Pom:
Uruguay 2 Engerland 1
At least Australia went out with a bit of respect!
Pot calling the kettle black I'd say.God is an Englishman wrote:Stuckey wrote:Commentators were just displaying passion. When you spend your entire life dreaming of something taking place I challenge anyone not to be excited when its a real possibility of taking place. Nothing wrong with that.God is an Englishman wrote:Are you lot being serious about the ref being frustrating? Didn't do much wrong.
Chillaaaay (what the shiraz is that all about) were far better team in first half, convicts better in second. 2-1 would have been fair, cons did better than I expected.
A side note, those Australian commentators are very funny. Have they seen a game before?
making inane comments.
Stuckey wrote:Pot calling the kettle black I'd say.God is an Englishman wrote:
making inane comments.
Does the better team always win?PDog wrote:England weren't the better team. Scoreline says so.
Thanks for playing.
How many penalties did you deserve this game?God is an Englishman wrote: Meanwhile England were the better team today, but that doesn't get you points.
