STRIKERS R DA BEST

strikerzebra · Post by **strikerzebra** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:22 am

Western Strikers are going well in the cup arent they. . wait what ? they lost 7-0 vs the Panthers? Thats embarassing

Huddo #3 · Post by **Huddo #3** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:10 am

strikers..?
check out how their 16's squad is going!
they reflect the whole club!

Stav_14 · Post by **Stav_14** » Sun Jul 23, 2006 3:07 pm

ohh well a 7-0 defeat in the cup...jst the way the cookie crumbles isnt it. it doesnt matter if they brought down U/19s or U/23s they were eligable to play therefore theyre the same age as you so you got beaten fair and square...jst face the defeat!

Neutral Observer · Post by **Neutral Observer** » Sun Jul 23, 2006 5:20 pm

Stav_14 wrote:ohh well a 7-0 defeat in the cup...jst the way the cookie crumbles isnt it. it doesnt matter if they brought down U/19s or U/23s they were eligable to play therefore theyre the same age as you so you got beaten fair and square...jst face the defeat!

Who won today? Strikers 3 Panthers 2

the cove26 · Post by **the cove26** » Sun Jul 23, 2006 7:26 pm

Neutral Observer wrote:
Stav_14 wrote:ohh well a 7-0 defeat in the cup...jst the way the cookie crumbles isnt it. it doesnt matter if they brought down U/19s or U/23s they were eligable to play therefore theyre the same age as you so you got beaten fair and square...jst face the defeat!
Who won today? Strikers 3 Panthers 2

it was good experience for our under 15s team and one under 14.

BillShankly · Post by **BillShankly** » Sun Jul 23, 2006 7:50 pm

lol under 15s team

good try!

the cove26 · Post by **the cove26** » Sun Jul 23, 2006 7:57 pm

BillShankly wrote:lol under 15s team

good try!

lol thanks mate, there were i think 6 under 15s and 1 under 14 from memory.

Mrs Roma · Post by **Mrs Roma** » Sun Jul 23, 2006 8:02 pm

to striker boi 4 eva are quite shore with the tittle of your forum because i can easially prove you wrong i think you are being very big headded.

the juggler · Post by **the juggler** » Sun Jul 23, 2006 8:02 pm

[quote="Panther26"][quote="BillShankly"]lol under 15s team

good try![/quote]

lol thanks mate, there were i think 6 under 15s and 1 under 14 from memory.[/quote]

Does anybody know the result of Adelaide City vs Comets game today in the Under 17's competition?

WELLMAN · Post by **WELLMAN** » Sun Jul 23, 2006 10:08 pm

Panther 26, did Joel, Nick and Will play today ?
Remember even though they play in the U/15s they are still eligible to play U/14s.

Andy_Pipkin · Post by **Andy_Pipkin** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:02 am

Nick & Joel both played and are both U14
Will, Peter, Jimmy & Matt also played all U15

Score was 2:1 to Strikers but Panthers were all over them in the second half.

Neutral Observer · Post by **Neutral Observer** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:18 am

mu4ever wrote:Nick & Joel both played and are both U14
Will, Peter, Jimmy & Matt also played all U15

Score was 2:1 to Strikers but Panthers were all over them in the second half.

Yes the Strikers coach in second half ordered the team to play defensive. He put all his midfields and forwards in defence leaving only 1 player up front. What a joke. First half Strikers prove that they are great attacking team. Good coach would perservere with same formation and style of play. I thought that it was great game played at good spirit. Bouth teams should be congratulated for the effort. It is pathetic to argue how old are the players. The team on field is the team you play. It is clubs choice if they keep moving players. I believe that each club should play players in they correct age group to make the team and the competition true strength. Then move players only when needed to help players development. It is joke to see some 15 or 16 years old playing under 19 and getting hurt and it does do nothing to their game. It is the weekness of the clubs not being able to develop and retain players. Sometimes I wonder why we call it under 19 when entire team is elegible to play U-17.

the cove26 · Post by **the cove26** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:51 pm

Neutral Observer wrote:
mu4ever wrote:Nick & Joel both played and are both U14
Will, Peter, Jimmy & Matt also played all U15

Score was 2:1 to Strikers but Panthers were all over them in the second half.
Yes the Strikers coach in second half ordered the team to play defensive. He put all his midfields and forwards in defence leaving only 1 player up front. What a joke. First half Strikers prove that they are great attacking team. Good coach would perservere with same formation and style of play. I thought that it was great game played at good spirit. Bouth teams should be congratulated for the effort. It is pathetic to argue how old are the players. The team on field is the team you play. It is clubs choice if they keep moving players. I believe that each club should play players in they correct age group to make the team and the competition true strength. Then move players only when needed to help players development. It is joke to see some 15 or 16 years old playing under 19 and getting hurt and it does do nothing to their game. It is the weekness of the clubs not being able to develop and retain players. Sometimes I wonder why we call it under 19 when entire team is elegible to play U-17.

Thats a fair comment but players will develop if they are played in a higher age group. At Panthers we have 3 players (from memory) who turned 16 this year getting a regular start in the Under 23's team. In the 19s we have a regular starter who is still only 14. You can not play these players in there age groups because they will not be tested.

Big W · Post by **Big W** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 10:14 pm

Neutral Observer wrote:
mu4ever wrote:Nick & Joel both played and are both U14
Will, Peter, Jimmy & Matt also played all U15

Score was 2:1 to Strikers but Panthers were all over them in the second half.
Yes the Strikers coach in second half ordered the team to play defensive. He put all his midfields and forwards in defence leaving only 1 player up front. What a joke. First half Strikers prove that they are great attacking team. Good coach would perservere with same formation and style of play. I thought that it was great game played at good spirit. Bouth teams should be congratulated for the effort. It is pathetic to argue how old are the players. The team on field is the team you play. It is clubs choice if they keep moving players. I believe that each club should play players in they correct age group to make the team and the competition true strength. Then move players only when needed to help players development. It is joke to see some 15 or 16 years old playing under 19 and getting hurt and it does do nothing to their game. It is the weekness of the clubs not being able to develop and retain players. Sometimes I wonder why we call it under 19 when entire team is elegible to play U-17.

I think playing in the under 19's helps juniors improve their games more than playing 17's neutral observer.

gulf · Post by **gulf** » Tue Jul 25, 2006 4:36 pm

mu4ever wrote:Nick & Joel both played and are both U14
Will, Peter, Jimmy & Matt also played all U15

Score was 2:1 to Strikers but Panthers were all over them in the second half.

seen him play hes not the best

LFC · Post by **LFC** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:51 am

[quote]Thats a fair comment but players will develop if they are played in a higher age group. At Panthers we have 3 players (from memory) who turned 16 this year getting a regular start in the Under 23's team. In the 19s we have a regular starter who is still only 14. You can not play these players in there age groups because they will not be tested[/quote]

hey, yeah i agree with you, im a 16 year old stopper and i play half game 19's then stay warm go to the trainor and the physio and then play out regular full matches for the 23's, at enfield.

last week i played for both teams again against the panthers...

to be honest... they are a weak team... they have a few good players... but more then half their team will not become nething... will not get anywere... ALTHOUGH... when i was watching (i got subbed off at half time to keep strength for 23's) i began to notice a young english born small centre mid... he will become something. Now i love to see great football, i dont care whether its my 23's ripping up another team or the 19's at my club getting torn apart. I have HUGE respect for effective flowing smart play, and i have to say that although the panthers do not have great individual players (bar 2 players) they can play effective football. I am an enfield player... but a fan of the panthers...

Back to the point. Some players do not find under 17's a challenge... i am 16 years old and i only came to adelaide this year in january. I played superleague in melbourne but the way the leagues are set are different . Superleague in victoria is the elite league... for each age ... so i was and still am at a standard above my age. when ive played down for the 17's when i didnt have either 19s nor 23's matches the standard of play for 17's was quite ugly and the "bomb long" technique was used. It wasnt a challenge and it wasnt the style of play that helps players grow and develop. 23's suits me much better.... i am not a tall lad nor a solid lad.. i dont rely on height i rely on brains. So yeah i agree with you wholeheartedly ura smart guy. If i had of understood the adelaide way of football better... then i DEFINETLY wouldnt have gone to Enfield. i would find the blue eagles or Adelaide city much more accomodating

the cove26 · Post by **the cove26** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 4:25 pm

LFC wrote:
Thats a fair comment but players will develop if they are played in a higher age group. At Panthers we have 3 players (from memory) who turned 16 this year getting a regular start in the Under 23's team. In the 19s we have a regular starter who is still only 14. You can not play these players in there age groups because they will not be tested
hey, yeah i agree with you, im a 16 year old stopper and i play half game 19's then stay warm go to the trainor and the physio and then play out regular full matches for the 23's, at enfield.

last week i played for both teams again against the panthers...

to be honest... they are a weak team... they have a few good players... but more then half their team will not become nething... will not get anywere... ALTHOUGH... when i was watching (i got subbed off at half time to keep strength for 23's) i began to notice a young english born small centre mid... he will become something. Now i love to see great football, i dont care whether its my 23's ripping up another team or the 19's at my club getting torn apart. I have HUGE respect for effective flowing smart play, and i have to say that although the panthers do not have great individual players (bar 2 players) they can play effective football. I am an enfield player... but a fan of the panthers...

Back to the point. Some players do not find under 17's a challenge... i am 16 years old and i only came to adelaide this year in january. I played superleague in melbourne but the way the leagues are set are different . Superleague in victoria is the elite league... for each age ... so i was and still am at a standard above my age. when ive played down for the 17's when i didnt have either 19s nor 23's matches the standard of play for 17's was quite ugly and the "bomb long" technique was used. It wasnt a challenge and it wasnt the style of play that helps players grow and develop. 23's suits me much better.... i am not a tall lad nor a solid lad.. i dont rely on height i rely on brains. So yeah i agree with you wholeheartedly ura smart guy. If i had of understood the adelaide way of football better... then i DEFINETLY wouldnt have gone to Enfield. i would find the blue eagles or Adelaide city much more accomodating

that young english born lad is still only 14 years old. Great player, great skills, hes just got to watch his temper. we arent that weak mate, we just had a shocker against enfield.

LFC · Post by **LFC** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 4:47 pm

hahaha well yeah but ive played against many centre mids with english blood... tends to boil over more then not lol, but nah he was a top player he weakness is he can get beat [i]easily[/i] 1 v 1.... he tends to dive in i noticed but hey, with players around u backing u up like they did... cant blame him

Johnson #5 · Post by **Johnson #5** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 5:11 pm

U15s Enfield City 4-1 Western Strikers
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

Cuell · Post by **Cuell** » Tue Aug 22, 2006 4:08 pm

LOL yeah wasnt it like mmmm 4 - 1??? and your only goal was through a cheap penalty which you know u didnt deserve.....and your like what 3rd 4th now? mabey next time ENFIELD R DA BEST

Baptista · Post by **Baptista** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:01 pm

When i watched the U15s Strikers Vs white city a few sundays ago which Strikers won 5-0 due to some very shocking goal keeping which white city conceded a goal 5 minutes before half time to make the score 1-0 into half time. Number 5 for white city i think his name was John Atkinson after i asked one of his team mates. He really caught my eye with his strong runs from defence into attack and some beautiful balls through to the strikers. He was very aggresive and very smart behind the play, he was let down by his goal keeper and his midfield but still for me was best on ground. Strikers brought in 2 U17s one which played well Adrian and one which was rather dissapointing alex.

Anonymous · Post by **Anonymous** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 4:21 pm

Johnson #5 wrote:U15s Enfield City 4-1 Western Strikers
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

Guys... your whole leagues are crap...

your basically just playing for fun.. your all crap

the juggler · Post by **the juggler** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 5:49 pm

KingHenry...do you live in the garden shed?

Big John · Post by **Big John** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:27 pm

no he doesnt, its just hard to see anything when you have your head stuck so far up your arse

the juggler · Post by **the juggler** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:56 pm

Agree Big John..thought he might have lived in the shed because its where most of the TOOLS are kept...!!!

lk5chn · Post by **lk5chn** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 4:54 pm

Western strikers juniors are sad. that comp that they hold every year is so bad. every year cumberland entered it they won so strikers didnt envite them. shameful :?

thewesterner · Post by **thewesterner** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 11:37 pm

cumberland is the first club that gets an invite to our preseason carnival as the reigning champion club ... no clubs got an intvite this year because we were unable to hold the carnival due to the early start of the leagues , the adelaide 500 and the adelaide cup being brought forward

El Pocho Lavezzi · Post by **El Pocho Lavezzi** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 8:40 pm

scoosnter wrote:Western strikers juniors are sad. that comp that they hold every year is so bad. every year cumberland entered it they won so strikers didnt envite them. shameful :?

dnt go shooting off your mouth wen you don't know the facts... clown

Anonymous · Post by **Anonymous** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 8:53 pm

CUMBERLAND UTD ARE PROBABLY THE MOST SHITE TEAM IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA!

povman_2009 · Post by **povman_2009** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 9:35 am

King Henry, strikes again,

You are a wonderful person and it is a pleasure to read your clever posts, your knowledge of the local scene is incredible and I await anxiously your next words of wisdom.

Keep up the good work KH, or is that DH, yeah I think DH is a more apt description.

Warming - this post contains severe sarcasm and should be read with care....

Home | Forums | Photos | Video | Blog | About | Contact

STRIKERS R DA BEST

sore loozers

Re: sore loozers

Re: sore loozers

Strikers vs White City U15s

i

shed