Tim's starting lineup was perfect! ...if you're Chelsea.

[TheSecretNonFootballer]

He is an attacking player who has scored 1 goal in 15 appearances.

Sig has scored 4 goals in 23 appearances.

Now I am in no way saying that sig is significantly better than Chadli but this notion that Chadli is a far superior player who could have had a marked effect on the outcome of the bluescum game is just nonsense.

So if sig is crap, Chadli is pretty crap. QED.

Adebayor got 5 in 25 last season, or whatever it was, so is pretty crap.
Ozil 4 in 22, crap.
Oscar got 4 in 34 last season, dogshit.
Willian 2 in 19, turd.
Silva 4 in 34 last season, chod.

(That's all according to the official PL site)

QED init.

 

[Actonspur_FromCOYS]

Adebayor got 5 in 25 last season, or whatever it was, so is pretty crap.
Ozil 4 in 22, crap.
Oscar got 4 in 34 last season, dogshit.
Willian 2 in 19, turd.
Silva 4 in 34 last season, chod.

(That's all according to the official PL site)

QED init.

WTF?

We were comparing Chadli and Sig. People were calling Sig crap and how he gets picked above Chadli is lunacy. I was simply saying that if Sig is crap then Chadli is similarly crap as there is little to no difference to their current contribution on the pitch. For the record I dont think either are crap, they are both decent squad players.

So ignoring your random stats and refocusing on the issue; Chadli replacing Sig would have made bollock all difference to Saturdays result.

 

[TheSecretNonFootballer]

WTF?

We were comparing Chadli and Sig. People were calling Sig crap and how he gets picked above Chadli is lunacy. I was simply saying that if Sig is crap then Chadli is similarly crap as there is little to no difference to their current contribution on the pitch. For the record I dont think either are crap, they are both decent squad players.

So ignoring your random stats and refocusing on the issue; Chadli replacing Sig would have made bollock all difference to Saturdays result.

And what did you use as evidence that Chadli was pretty much as crap as Sig? The stats.

I just gave you some more stats to show that 1 goal in 15 isn't that big of a deal and isn't an indication of whether he is "pretty crap", as you put it.

 

[Actonspur_FromCOYS]

And what did you use as evidence that Chadli was pretty much as crap as Sig? The stats.

I just gave you some more stats to show that 1 goal in 15 isn't that big of a deal and isn't an indication of whether he is "pretty crap", as you put it.

So what else are we supposed to use when someone asks us to substantiate a players quality? Feelings?

Again you are totally failing to deal with the central question. Is Chadli currently a significantly better option than Sig and specifically, would Chadli for Sig have changed the result on Saturday?

 

[TheSecretNonFootballer]

So what else are we supposed to use when someone asks us to substantiate a players quality? Feelings?

Again you are totally failing to deal with the central question. Is Chadli currently a significantly better option than Sig and specifically, would Chadli for Sig have changed the result on Saturday?

I'm not too sure how you can ask me another way, other than stats, that we can substantiate a players quality but then instantly dismiss the stats of others. If Chadli is pretty crap with 1 goal in 15, is Willian also crap for 2 goals in 19?

Your central question is unanswerable so is ultimately pointless.

 

[Actonspur_FromCOYS]

I'm not too sure how you can ask me another way, other than stats, that we can substantiate a players quality but then instantly dismiss the stats of others. If Chadli is pretty crap with 1 goal in 15, is Willian also crap for 2 goals in 19?

Your central question is unanswerable so is ultimately pointless.

Jesus christ. I said I dont think either player is crap, simply they are very similar. Did you even read the thread?

How the fuck is that question unanswerable? Its a simple yes or no based on what you think. It just sounds like you are trying to avoid the question as you know Im right.

 

[Kiedis]

Over the last month, Chadli has created more in his cameos than Townsend, Lennon and Gylfi combined. Would have thought he was up for more minutes soon.

 

[TheSecretNonFootballer]

Jesus christ. I said I dont think either player is crap, simply they are very similar. Did you even read the thread?

How the fuck is that question unanswerable? Its a simple yes or no based on what you think. It just sounds like you are trying to avoid the question as you know Im right.

So a page back you didn't say Chadli was pretty crap? I imagined it?

The question is unanswerable as there is no right answer because, believe it or not, it's impossible to predict things that didn't happen. You say it wouldn't make a difference, I say it would. Neither answer is a statement of fact so the question is nothing more than speculation.

What is a fact is that Chadli statistically has on average made more successful passes, both long and short, has won more tackles, more headers, created more chances, more successful dribbles, has been beaten less, has more assists and more key passes per game. To suggest that someone who has so far outperformed another player would have no more of an impact is just blatantly ignoring the statistics that you suggest substantiate a players quality.

 

[HobbitSpur]

Well it was pointless then as the probability of winning was spectacularly low.

Please do not reply with some utter delusion that we could have won when no one has beaten mourinhos bluescum at the bridge.

It is not utter delusion to say we could have won, to put it simply, We Could Have Won. It was unlikely, but in a two horse race anyone can win. Should Wigan have beaten Man City TWICE in the last 2 FA Cups???

To use your logic we will never win at Stamford Bridge as we have not won there for 23 years.

To use your logic we should have played for a draw at Old Trafford in 2013 as we had not won there for 23 years.

To use your logic, West Brom deserved to let in a goal in injury time as Cheslea have never lost under Mourinho at the bridge.

The thing about Statistics are that the longer runs go on, the more likely they are to come to an end. If we give up because the history is stacked against us, we might as well pack up now.

 

[Blake Griffin]

sig and chad are both equally average.

 

[Actonspur_FromCOYS]

So a page back you didn't say Chadli was pretty crap? I imagined it?

The question is unanswerable as there is no right answer because, believe it or not, it's impossible to predict things that didn't happen. You say it wouldn't make a difference, I say it would. Neither answer is a statement of fact so the question is nothing more than speculation.

What is a fact is that Chadli statistically has on average made more successful passes, both long and short, has won more tackles, more headers, created more chances, more successful dribbles, has been beaten less, has more assists and more key passes per game. To suggest that someone who has so far outperformed another player would have no more of an impact is just blatantly ignoring the statistics that you suggest substantiate a players quality.

Cannot be bothered to keep explaining this to you. Ill give it one more try in bite size form.

People said Sig was crap.

I said IF THAT IS TRUE then Chadli must be pretty crap as they are pretty similar in terms of their effectiveness currently.

I said I dont think either of them are crap, both are decent squad players.

So you ignore goals scored and any other stats where Sig > Chadli to make the point that Chadli > Sig. Strong.

I am simply saying they are currently very similar in terms of their current contribution to our team. I would probably agree that Chadli is a slightly better option for the LWF role but the insinuation that TS is making horrific errors by choosing Sig over Chadli is just nonsense. Back in reality they are really very similar and there would have been little to no difference in the outcome of the game on Saturday. If you believe there would have been then I give up and will leave you to forming the first Nacer Chadli fan club.

 

[TheSecretNonFootballer]

Cannot be bothered to keep explaining this to you. Ill give it one more try in bite size form.

People said Sig was crap.

I said IF THAT IS TRUE then Chadli must be pretty crap as they are pretty similar in terms of their effectiveness currently.

I said I dont think either of them are crap, both are decent squad players.

So you ignore goals scored and any other stats where Sig > Chadli to make the point that Chadli > Sig. Strong.

I am simply saying they are currently very similar in terms of their current contribution to our team. I would probably agree that Chadli is a slightly better option for the LWF role but the insinuation that TS is making horrific errors by choosing Sig over Chadli is just nonsense. Back in reality they are really very similar and there would have been little to no difference in the outcome of the game on Saturday. If you believe there would have been then I give up and will leave you to forming the first Nacer Chadli fan club.

This would all just be a lot easier if you just said you think that there is no way we can beat Chelsea at the Bridge. To believe that the match would be no different if different players played is just pure idiocy and something you tend to repeat after every humping we take.

 

[Actonspur_FromCOYS]

This would all just be a lot easier if you just said you think that there is no way we can beat Chelsea at the Bridge. To believe that the match would be no different if different players played is just pure idiocy and something you tend to repeat after every humping we take.

If we played Naughton in goal then yes we could play a different player in goal and have a good chance of changing the outcome of the game.

If you think swapping sig for chadli would have changed the game on saturday then youre not just an idiot. You are totally deluded.

There is no way, given the current way both teams are playing, that we can hope to beat bluescum away. So the most logical thing to do is try not to concede and nick a point. We could beat them, but it would take outrageous luck, the like of which no team has managed in over 70 games. So no I dont think setting up to try and win the game is very clever. But dont let the facts get in the way of your utopian delusion that Spurs should win every game and if we dont, it is the manager not selecting the right players or setting them up incorrectly.