KidA Seven
Member
1. Baggio
2. Bergkamp
3. Cantona
Good days.
2. Bergkamp
3. Cantona
Good days.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
football thread 13/14 |ot12| last roll of the dive
- Thread starter bud
- Start date
- Status
Perfect Blue
Banned
1. Figo
2. Zidane
3. Shev
hnghhhhh
2. Zidane
3. Shev
hnghhhhh
Unless old Man Sepp gives it up Yurt, we're all doomed. :-/
Cleff, pls. Go back to bed.
pulga
Banned
Seems like Matic is all but done which is nice.
With De Bruyne reportedly already in Germany just waiting for his physical, it's going to be interesting to see who else we get linked with in the next two weeks.
Guarin is the rumor that just won't go away, but I don't even think he adds anything with Matic now in the team.
Van Ginkel could be back training by the end of March, so he should factor in at some point too. News on his recovery has gone kind of quiet though.
We're carrying a lot of young players currently in reserves and on loan. I just don't want these kids to get lost and end up as the next Matic, or worse....Pogba. We don't exactly have a great track record with the young players we invest in.
With De Bruyne reportedly already in Germany just waiting for his physical, it's going to be interesting to see who else we get linked with in the next two weeks.
Guarin is the rumor that just won't go away, but I don't even think he adds anything with Matic now in the team.
Van Ginkel could be back training by the end of March, so he should factor in at some point too. News on his recovery has gone kind of quiet though.
We're carrying a lot of young players currently in reserves and on loan. I just don't want these kids to get lost and end up as the next Matic, or worse....Pogba. We don't exactly have a great track record with the young players we invest in.
And Hazard coming to PSG.
Subtle, pls. Be nice. Negredo's done well so far.
Be interesting to see what would have happened if their team situations were reversed though. Negredo being a physical beast helps him a lot in the EPL but pretty much all of Spurs attacking players were struggling before December and they're only starting to really improve since December.
Perfect Blue
Banned
Even funnier when you realize Soldado was worth more last year.
Can Crusher
Banned
Ugh... Thankfully since the award is for best player, not team.
Most importantly he scored 6 in 11 games during the World Cup of 1982. That includes an hat trick against then reigning champion Brazil. He had come from a 2 year ban. and won the WC 82 Golden Boot, Golden Ball and WC Title with Italy.
What that tells me is how important the World Cups tended to be. These days multiple leagues are worldwide known, followed by hundreds of millions. The Champions League popularity cannot be understated too. Teams and players alike are followed twice every week, echoing throughout Europe and the world. That goes for players and managers too.
It's great that the best player doesn't have to belong to the best team, because they aren't always synonymous. What bothers me however is that as is, it very much feels like a popularity contest, with names popping up over others simply because they are a bigger brand. Ibrahimovic for example, clearly had a more impressive year than the likes of Neymar and Iniesta,
Coldnoodle
Member
What's the footygaf Whatsapp
Freewheelin'
Member
It is a place where some of the banned members are and we share cock photos
PrematureQuiche
Member
I hope Van Ginkel can come back before the end of the season. I was looking forward to seeing him. Maybe Guarin would be useful if we end up getting rid of Lamps, Mikel and Essien at the end of the season. I'm interested in which striker we get in at the end of the season, I am assuming we will wait till after the World Cup and get someone new. Next season will be Lukaku, Torres and new ST I guess. I heard we were also being linked with Zouma again so that could be interesting!
:lol fuck off Timmy.
Coldnoodle
Member
How do I get in?
Shanks D Zoro
Banned
back when the champions league was the European Cup. Now all the best players in the world play in about 20 teams across five leagues. And anyone who doesn't, soon will.
I think Gab Marcotti should be the only one who should pick the the best player in the world.
Freewheelin'
Member
PM me your number, I forward it onto Wilbz the gang leader and then prepare
right now we are talking about all the places we have had sex and wilbz is showing off his gross wounds
KidA Seven
Member
I always laugh at your posts. They're always about a player going to PSG. :lol
Halp
I had a student ask me a question and I'm stumped as to why I've come up with his answer.
They gave me three sentences
1) I go to school in a coat that matches my uniform
2) The coat matches the sweater
3) A sweater is easy to match other clothes.
The first two are fine but sentence 3 sounds incorrect to me without "with" after "match", as in "A sweater is easy to match with other clothes".
My problem is: why does it require "with" while the other two do not? The best explanation I could come up with is that in the first two examples, the sweater is the actor in the action of matching, however "easy to" in the third sentence indicates that a third party is acting out the action of matching two items, and that's what the difference is. Since a sweater is inanimate and incapable of differentiating between something being easy or difficult to do, it requires someone to do the action.
My problem is that I can't come up with a clear explanation of why this third party being present means I have to add "with", and it's making me doubt that line of thinking entirely. I'm sure there's a clear rule about this that I'm missing. But I'll be damned if I can figure it out.
I had a student ask me a question and I'm stumped as to why I've come up with his answer.
They gave me three sentences
1) I go to school in a coat that matches my uniform
2) The coat matches the sweater
3) A sweater is easy to match other clothes.
The first two are fine but sentence 3 sounds incorrect to me without "with" after "match", as in "A sweater is easy to match with other clothes".
My problem is: why does it require "with" while the other two do not? The best explanation I could come up with is that in the first two examples, the sweater is the actor in the action of matching, however "easy to" in the third sentence indicates that a third party is acting out the action of matching two items, and that's what the difference is. Since a sweater is inanimate and incapable of differentiating between something being easy or difficult to do, it requires someone to do the action.
My problem is that I can't come up with a clear explanation of why this third party being present means I have to add "with", and it's making me doubt that line of thinking entirely. I'm sure there's a clear rule about this that I'm missing. But I'll be damned if I can figure it out.
Can Crusher
Banned
My teachers usually just answered "Because that's how it is.".
Shanks D Zoro
Banned
for me it seems a case of singular/plural. Clothes is plural so it needs to be "match with" The other two are singular so you don't need with, but you caan still use it.
Freewheelin'
Member
I was like wat :lol
So I asked Wilbs, he just did an English language teaching course at uni.
His reply:
Nah he says something like your explnation seems pretty good, like because it is an animate object doing the matching you can make that distinction? He says obviously uyou're the expert and he obviously doesn't know anywhere near as much as you, but if your explanation is that in the third one its apparent someone is matching the sweater to the other clothes or hyperthetically so, whereas the others the matching has already been made? idk lol im lost
oh shit plural might be right
"These shirts match those pants"
Oh fuck I think I just got it. It's because "match" and "match (with)" are just two different verbs entirely. "Match" is transitive, "match with" intransitive. I'm almost positive that's it.
Your explanation sounds right. If I'm the one matching two other things, it's "I matched my sweater with my jeans." But if the sweater is the thing that matches, it's "My sweater matches my jeans."
Also the phrasing of the third sentence seems a little awkward generally. I think I'd say something like, "A sweater easily matches other clothes." But I don't really know what I'm talking about.
Shanks D Zoro
Banned
Haha, I have no idea about language. I just pull shit out of my arse and if someone questions its I say something like "its irregular" or "I am from London, the home of the language, what we say goes" When i tried thinking of examples i realised my singular/plural was not working
KidA Seven
Member
wat
idk
pls don't ask me that again
pls
idk
pls don't ask me that again
pls
Sviatoslav
Member
Just go with this. English barely makes a lick of sense anyway. It's nothing like the beautiful mother tongue.
I'm not sure that's right "to match (with)" is still transitive because it requires an object (in this case, "other clothes"). I think the issue might not be so much that "with" is required in the third example, but rather that the preposition can be dropped in the first and second sentences, which don't use the infinitive form of the verb. I'm not a language scholar, mind you.
Yeah Fintan it's the right path and I came to a similar conclusion - it's essentially passive voice. "A is easy to be matched with b" or "A matches with b easily."
Maybe it's because to "match with" is to pair two things together, where as "match" is simply to go together well naturally.
Maybe it's because to "match with" is to pair two things together, where as "match" is simply to go together well naturally.
KidA Seven
Member
Rumor that Forlan will join Cerezo Osaka. Pls happen.
Have only just bumped into him, huh? lol
Yeah you're right and I went back on that idea because I came to the same counter example.
Thanks for the help guys I'll figure it out eventually.
Trying to theorize how the top BPL teams can improve in the next couple of seasons. I'm bored
If United somehow manage to get Pogba, Garay and Shaw. The whole dynamic of their team suddenly changes. I'd suggest Greizmann too for the wing. Ditch Kagawa, Nani and Cleverly (should fetch a good rate because English tax), and mold Januzaj to take over from Rooney. United certainly have the money to do something like this, only takes the balls the see it true. That's about 115-120m in transfer fees right there. Pogba 45m (swallow your pride on this Barca did with Cesc paying dividends), Garay 22m, Shaw 27m, Greizmann 20m. The next summer go for Strootman to replace Carrick's role as main starter, sign an RVP replacement depending for main striker. If United are serious they'd need only about 2 seasons of rebuilding to be world beaters.
On the Arsenal side of things we've already laid out the plan for the future when we signed those 5 British players on long term deals. Key signings to be made are for our left wing, which can be filled by Draxler, striker this one we'll have to be more cautious with and I really have no idea who to sign here but they have to be able to counterattack at speed like Henry could. CB to complement and eventually take over from Per someone like Zouma. We'll also need a CM as Arteta's isn't getting any younger, I'm thinking Lars Bender here. This can be done over 3 seasons. We will probably lose Walcott in this period as I don't see us offering him over 100k. We'll also need to add a new RB and if Coleman at Everton continues his form, it might just be him.
Chelsea are probably the best built team for the future as they still have Lukaku and Cortouis to return. They only need a striker and will probably get Costa or Falcao if Monaco decide to sell. Have Matic coming in to replace Lampard and most of their team is young enough. They'll need to add a CB to replace Terry soon enough and a new LB can see them competing with United for Shaw.
Man City's team is almost perfect, like I have no clue how you improve that team other than sign a better goalkeeper and probably a new defensive coach is in order. Also need to think on a Yaya Toure replacement (good luck).
I'll need to think on Liverpool, as they need imo the most work and have the least resources (ability to attract players + money). So their signings are a lot more difficult to make.
If United somehow manage to get Pogba, Garay and Shaw. The whole dynamic of their team suddenly changes. I'd suggest Greizmann too for the wing. Ditch Kagawa, Nani and Cleverly (should fetch a good rate because English tax), and mold Januzaj to take over from Rooney. United certainly have the money to do something like this, only takes the balls the see it true. That's about 115-120m in transfer fees right there. Pogba 45m (swallow your pride on this Barca did with Cesc paying dividends), Garay 22m, Shaw 27m, Greizmann 20m. The next summer go for Strootman to replace Carrick's role as main starter, sign an RVP replacement depending for main striker. If United are serious they'd need only about 2 seasons of rebuilding to be world beaters.
On the Arsenal side of things we've already laid out the plan for the future when we signed those 5 British players on long term deals. Key signings to be made are for our left wing, which can be filled by Draxler, striker this one we'll have to be more cautious with and I really have no idea who to sign here but they have to be able to counterattack at speed like Henry could. CB to complement and eventually take over from Per someone like Zouma. We'll also need a CM as Arteta's isn't getting any younger, I'm thinking Lars Bender here. This can be done over 3 seasons. We will probably lose Walcott in this period as I don't see us offering him over 100k. We'll also need to add a new RB and if Coleman at Everton continues his form, it might just be him.
Chelsea are probably the best built team for the future as they still have Lukaku and Cortouis to return. They only need a striker and will probably get Costa or Falcao if Monaco decide to sell. Have Matic coming in to replace Lampard and most of their team is young enough. They'll need to add a CB to replace Terry soon enough and a new LB can see them competing with United for Shaw.
Man City's team is almost perfect, like I have no clue how you improve that team other than sign a better goalkeeper and probably a new defensive coach is in order. Also need to think on a Yaya Toure replacement (good luck).
I'll need to think on Liverpool, as they need imo the most work and have the least resources (ability to attract players + money). So their signings are a lot more difficult to make.
United need much more work than Liverpool. We have the best strike partnership in the league and a competent midfield. We need reinforcements in the same place United do (full backs, CM and a wide attacker), but without those reinforcements we're still in a stronger position in all of midfield, attack and defense.
Nah. I didn't finish the game and I'm personally astonished at the way it was praised as one of the better games last year. It had few redeeming qualities in my book.
Nah. I didn't finish the game and I'm personally astonished at the way it was praised as one of the better games last year. It had few redeeming qualities in my book.
Barzul, pls. Until the day Moyesey drops his wing play, those players will be off no use. He'll probably stick Pogba in an AML role. D:
It's a cinematic experience. That's what gaming is nowadays. D:
It's a cinematic experience. That's what gaming is nowadays. D:
Lol
:lol I just do it to annoy people. I just go to a PSG news aggregator and post whatever it says.
Tbh, I'm pretty confident that PSG will sign Pogba in the near future.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked