Author Topic: Who think we need a rematch with England (Read 8644 times)

Remie · « **Reply #30 on:** November 06, 2006, 05:18:48 PM »

I didnt say England never created any clear cut chances i only ever said that they did not create enough to warrant calling it licks. We still have a different view on what is a clear cut chance and what isnt (eg minutes 6, 68 and 78) but at least i think we now agree that we didnt take licks by England, as earlier on in the topic it looked as if some of you were saying we did.

Filho · « **Reply #31 on:** November 06, 2006, 05:28:18 PM »

Quote from: Remie on November 06, 2006, 05:18:48 PM

I didnt say England never created any clear cut chances i only ever said that they did not create enough to warrant calling it licks. We still have a different view on what is a clear cut chance and what isnt (eg minutes 6, 68 and 78) but at least i think we now agree that we didnt take licks by England, as earlier on in the topic it looked as if some of you were saying we did.

So what is this then? Sorry I did not use your exact words...no one on ones you say? Only shots from the edge and outside the area. To me that is saying no clear cut chances. Sorry but those statement were absolutely wrong..read what you wrote below.

Sadly you also relying on text to determine what is a good chance in football. Go and watch it..you cannot get a good feel for it unless you see it with your own eyes.

Quote from: Remie on November 06, 2006, 03:07:47 PM

But England did not break down the defence and create any one on one chances, they were restricted to shots from the edge and outside of the area.

Remie · « **Reply #32 on:** November 06, 2006, 05:33:58 PM »

Most of Lampard's chances were from the edge or outside of the area.

There were 2 good chances that were closer than the edge of the area. (Owen header and Lampard's left foot). So I will give you that, but in my defence i just made a generalised statement which on the whole was fair when summing up 90 minutes of football. Those 2 are what i call out and out clear cut chances.

Filho boy, you a lawyer or wha?

I feel like im trying to get off a murder charge or sumting

I have actually watched the game a number of times, im only using the text for summarising purposes. Sadly you assumed otherwise.

morvant · « **Reply #33 on:** November 06, 2006, 05:57:54 PM »

remie yuh iz ah borse

yuh going up against de big guns and putting up ah good fight

me i cyar start to argue football with these fellers but ah could spanner with de best ah dem tho

Filho · « **Reply #34 on:** November 06, 2006, 06:02:31 PM »

Quote from: Remie on November 06, 2006, 05:33:58 PM

Lampard's chances were all from the edge of the area.
There may have been 1 or 2 chances that were fractionally closer than the edge of the area
Filho boy, you a lawyer or wha?

I feel like im trying to get off a murder charge or sumting

I have actually watched the game a number of times, im only using the text for summarising purposes. Sadly you assumed otherwise.

Respek remie. I done bredda...but watch this and stop talking nonsense about Lampard chances were only from the edge of the area

http://youtube.com/watch?v=_zaYd_0U_DU

kicker · « **Reply #35 on:** November 06, 2006, 06:05:50 PM »

England wettin' T&T any day of the week boy..wham tuh allyuh.....steupppppppssssssssss !!!

Yuh don't have to lose yuh brain tuh support with all of your heart.....

In football anything can happen, but that's still not an excuse fuh the dotishness I readin' here on this thread.

ah feel Toussaint could put a lil rip on Lampard in de middle though

Remie · « **Reply #36 on:** November 06, 2006, 06:08:40 PM »

(Sorry Filho, i had edited my last post before you just posted) ...

Most of Lampard's chances were from the edge or outside of the area.

There were 2 good chances that were closer than the edge of the area. (Owen header and Lampard's left foot). So I will give you that, but in my defence i just made a generalised statement about the clear cut chances, which on the whole i thought was fair when summing up 90 minutes of football. Those 2 are what i call out and out clear cut chances.

You can see on the footage that you posted that there was only one chance where he was left open with no pressure which was the left footed shot which i mentioned above. The other chances were half chances, not clear cut. But i guess people are going to disagree on that as well.

Just to make sure nobody is getting the wrong idea- the first thing that i said is that we dont have a realistic chance of beating England, i said a 1% chance. That is when we start to debate a next thing.

davidephraim · « **Reply #37 on:** November 06, 2006, 06:20:47 PM »

Quote from: lickslikefire on November 06, 2006, 04:05:45 PM

Quote from: Grande man on November 06, 2006, 03:30:27 PM
Remie, England created chances - glaring chances - with their possession, but did not finish them. Their fault, not ours. But I agree with your stand that we did not get licks. That should not be the basis for us "getting licks".

Jai John, look Sweden create plenty chances against us too (besides de ones Shaka save). Does that take anything away from the 0-0 result?

We can't judge our team's shortcomings on "what if" England and Sweden had finished their chances. Point is they didn't finish them. And those are their shortcomings, not ours.

all yuh serious...

I agree that we did not get licks according to de scoreline (since the results were 2-0 and 0-0)

but yuh have to agree that we were totally outplayed in both the Sweden and the England game...

any objective neutral individual would conclude we were totally outplayed in both those games...it was like watching offense against defense in practice......I'll be honest...men go get vex but i ent care...IMO we were damn lucky in both dem games....those teams didn't finish dere chances(which were many), and the only reason we get dem results is because of the soca warriors heart, never say die attitude, beenie defensive tactics, and doh forget luck.....

we could have easily gotten 3-6 goals easily in each of those games, and that was playing 11 men defensively.....all yuh imagine the licks we would ah get if we played a more attacking game.... $:-\$

if left up to this so called defensive style it look like it go be licks book for years. why we even bothering to go next world cup, to defend till de whistle blw.

Pointman · « **Reply #38 on:** November 06, 2006, 06:41:46 PM »

Quote from: grskywalker on November 06, 2006, 10:46:07 AM

Based on the current ENGLAND and Warrior teams what do you think would happen?

We would get level cutass. I think we played them well in the WC , in part, because there was a lot at stake. The fellas were very motivated and we put on an admirable performance(I would have LOVED to see Latas in that game though). There's nothing to really play for now.

Tongue · « **Reply #39 on:** November 06, 2006, 07:04:48 PM »

Quote from: grskywalker on November 06, 2006, 01:11:22 PM

This might be a dead horse but Beenie was too conservative in his approach to that game, we all know who should have taken the field! If we adopt a more attacking formation, I feel we have the players to take them and squeeze out 1-0 a win or draw 1-1

Yuh kill de horse and now yuh torking

.....come nah man I know yuh is ah smart fellah leh we doh revisit dah Beenie was too conservative tork ahgain nah man.

Filho · « **Reply #40 on:** November 06, 2006, 11:47:16 PM »

Quote from: Remie on November 06, 2006, 06:08:40 PM

(Sorry Filho, i had edited my last post before you just posted) ...

Most of Lampard's chances were from the edge or outside of the area.

There were 2 good chances that were closer than the edge of the area. (Owen header and Lampard's left foot). So I will give you that, but in my defence i just made a generalised statement about the clear cut chances, which on the whole i thought was fair when summing up 90 minutes of football. Those 2 are what i call out and out clear cut chances.

You can see on the footage that you posted that there was only one chance where he was left open with no pressure which was the left footed shot which i mentioned above. The other chances were half chances, not clear cut. But i guess people are going to disagree on that as well.

Just to make sure nobody is getting the wrong idea- the first thing that i said is that we dont have a realistic chance of beating England, i said a 1% chance. That is when we start to debate a next thing.

If you look at what you initially wrote, u never said anything about Lampard's chances being clear cut. You just mentioned all his chances being from outside or around the edge of the area. I have your original quote in my reply. Go back and check. PLus, Lampard 1st half volley at the top of the six yard box from Owen cut back was clear cut..with time and space. Breds, u even had to backtrack and edit your posts fus yuh know yuh was wrong

As for other clear cut chances..you joking if you don't consider Crouch jokey 1st half scissors clear cut. By their standards..Lampard shot across the face of the goal was a real good chance, as was Crouch second half header over the bar..He scored an almost identical one later as proof. Let this one rest breds..I agree thaat T&T held strong and England looked less than impressive against us...but England made more chances than you willing to admit..even with video evidence staring straight at you

Savannah boy · « **Reply #41 on:** November 07, 2006, 12:28:00 AM »

With all de strides we made under Beenie, why we cyah beat the U.S.A.? We beat a decent Mexico team when we back was against de wall. We gave a good account in Mexico...a place we normally go and shit down de place. We done put Panama and Guatemala in dey place. Ah doh need to say anything about we WC achievements. Yes we eh reach de second rounds but we earned respect. Yuh fraid de U.S.A. dat much breds? Trust meh, dey looking over dey shoulder now. We eh reach yet...but we come a long way.

Remie · « **Reply #42 on:** November 07, 2006, 03:17:58 AM »

Yep Filho, i was wrong about all Lampard's chances being from the edge of the area, because half were just inside the area. I admit that now that the video has refreshed my memory.

But that was not the main point i was making, it was just a statement you pulled out that i admit was inaccurate. The main point i was making was that England did not make enough chances that you would consider clear cut, i.e. chances that you would consider the attacking team favourites to score. However, i should not have said England's chances were only from the edge or outside of the box, because that was not true.

But i should have known better because when you debating with Filho, even if you have a valid point, if you have an inaccurate back up statement anywhere, he will find it and kill yuh wid it.

Filho, yuh hadda be a lawyer? Not so?

congo · « **Reply #43 on:** November 07, 2006, 05:01:54 AM »

if the tactics made us hold out England by the skin of our teeths for over 80 mins... Why would we want to play more attacking football?? We held out england cause we put rel men behind the ball and we were lucky that they were having a bad world cup....

Filho · « **Reply #44 on:** November 07, 2006, 05:47:15 AM »

Quote from: Remie on November 07, 2006, 03:17:58 AM

Yep Filho, i was wrong about all Lampard's chances being from the edge of the area, because half were just inside the area. I admit that now that the video has refreshed my memory.

But that was not the main point i was making, it was just a statement you pulled out that i admit was inaccurate. The main point i was making was that England did not make enough chances that you would consider clear cut, i.e. chances that you would consider the attacking team favourites to score. However, i should not have said England's chances were only from the edge or outside of the box, because that was not true.

But i should have known better because when you debating with Filho, even if you have a valid point, if you have an inaccurate back up statement anywhere, he will find it and kill yuh wid it. Filho, yuh hadda be a lawyer? Not so?

Nah...not a lawyer. And u have some valid points. I should have said that long time ago (thought I did). Respect Remie....
Doh study me nah...I often get it wrong too and it have men here who does pounce on me. Having said that, you really said nothing that I needed to pounce on..In football talk, every sentence doh hadda be spot on factually. I know the gist of what you were trying to say. Is just one of those days when I trying to make a point and get fixated on a small ting

laterz boss

kicker · « **Reply #45 on:** November 07, 2006, 06:42:15 AM »

If T&T played Haiti or Costa Rica who would win ?

That's a more pertinent question....

We talkin' about England when there are teams in our own backyard, who can't make a note on the global stage that could give us a good a$$ kickin' on their day.......and sometimes on more than just their day.

Quags · « **Reply #46 on:** November 07, 2006, 08:30:20 AM »

If England lucky enough to pull out another cheeky win ,fire bun them cause is pure revenge we looking for

grskywalker · « **Reply #47 on:** November 07, 2006, 08:34:48 AM »

My sole purpose was to open up a debate on the topic and see where we are not only as a team but supporters.

As a supporter, I try now to go into the game expecting a win from the warriors and not second guessing. If the team playing shit then they playing shit, but I give them the benefit of their world cup experience.

FF · « **Reply #48 on:** November 07, 2006, 09:05:43 AM »

I cyah believe this..... I come in this morning and read this whole thread...

IS EITHER:

1. MEN REAL DUNCEY

or

2. MEN FRAID MAN CALL DEM UNPATRIOTIC

We get licks... we will get licks right now.... and we will get more licks in the future de way things going...

allyuh open allyuh eye nah....

grskywalker · « **Reply #49 on:** November 07, 2006, 09:09:14 AM »

Quote from: Savannah boy on November 07, 2006, 12:28:00 AM

With all de strides we made under Beenie, why we cyah beat the U.S.A.? We beat a decent Mexico team when we back was against de wall. We gave a good account in Mexico...a place we normally go and shit down de place. We done put Panama and Guatemala in dey place. Ah doh need to say anything about we WC achievements. Yes we eh reach de second rounds but we earned respect. Yuh fraid de U.S.A. dat much breds? Trust meh, dey looking over dey shoulder now. We eh reach yet...but we come a long way.

Savannah your colorful expressions are great comedy

Quags · « **Reply #50 on:** November 07, 2006, 09:11:05 AM »

We ain"t get no licks steupppss ,we hold them 80 had they fans tootsin bricks lol,stern get ah goal call back and crouch cheat to score.

Filho · « **Reply #51 on:** November 07, 2006, 09:15:30 AM »

Quote from: grskywalker on November 07, 2006, 08:34:48 AM

My sole purpose was to open up a debate on the topic and see where we are not only as a team but supporters.

As a supporter, I try now to go into the game expecting a win from the warriors and not second guessing. If the team playing shit then they playing shit, but I give them the benefit of their world cup experience.

How does going to the WC all of a sudden make them world beaters? Maybe I am not understanding you properly. We agree that every game T&T plays they have a chance of winning...no matter who they play. That is the beauty of football. But that doesn't mean that you should cease to be an educated fan, with a good idea of what those chances are.

andre samuel · « **Reply #52 on:** November 07, 2006, 02:20:04 PM »

Quote from: kicker on November 07, 2006, 06:42:15 AM

If T&T played Haiti or Costa Rica who would win ?

That's a more pertinent question....

We talkin' about England when there are teams in our own backyard, who can't make a note on the global stage that could give us a good a$$ kickin' on their day.......and sometimes on more than just their day.

excellent post kicker!!

ah want to know how much ah allyuh "we go beat england" men go be comfortable knowing that we have to play Haiti or Cuba in first round 2010 WC Qualifiers. I sure man go be quaking.

Let's face it, we had a month to prepare for that game and we gave it our all and performed with dignity...............full stop!!

let's focus on competing with Mexico, Costa Rica and USA......and try to stay ahead of teams like Guatemala, El Salvador, Panama, Canada, Jamaica and Hounduras!!

ah love it!!

Flex · « **Reply #53 on:** November 14, 2006, 04:54:23 PM »

England's John Terry clears the ball off the line after Trinidad & Tobago's Stern John header crept towards the goal - 2006 FIFA World Cup Germany - Group B - England v Trinidad & Tobago - Franken-Stadion

Poll

With the current Warrior team can we beat England?

Author Topic: Who think we need a rematch with England (Read 8644 times)