Mirallas

Half of England and Belgium want their teams to lose
 
I think winning is the best option. England and Belgium are qualified and will face whatever comes out of Group H in the round of 16. No matter which team finishes first or second, England and Belgium are favorites to win their round of 16 games. Then, if you lost today, you will probably face Switzerland in the QF. If you won today, you're likely to face Brazil. What would you rather have: face Brazil as an unbeaten team or face Switzerland with a loss under your belt? If you win from Switzerland (or Sweden) you will go on to face either Spain or Croatia and I would NOT want to face Croatia, knowing I lost to Belgium/England. At this point, you have to take it from game to game, you can't afford to have your eyes on the finals. I'd say: whoever you root for tonight, better hope for a win.

He's the kind of manager that, if he left tomorrow, no one in Belgium would probably notice  He's a bit of a boring type. That and there's this weird situation with him almost never calling up Radja Nainggolan, a really good defensive midfielder from AS Roma and his explenation is always "Doesn't fit in the tactical plans", which is quite obviously not the real reason. Turns out Nainggolan put a vague statement on his Twitter that it had to do with his (edit: his=Nainggolans) personality.

I got a good feeling about this!

Not mine, dude.... really not mine.

Not mine, dude.... really not mine.

Not mine, dude.... really not mine.

idk about that just yet...  Were only a month into this season, seems a little soon. I'm not saying we should go all Martinez about it, but I'd be a tad more patient.

once you see it ...

Nope

Very little reason not to admire his football.
 
It is just the fact that he never really bothered to make himself likable. Only things we ever heard from Lukaku when he said something was about transferring, maybe going to bigger clubs, yadayada. He may be a lot more honest than most other footballers, but fans don't wanna hear that stuff. It gets annoying to be reminded of not being the best of the best where you'd rather hear him say nice things about the club and the people. But he never did that despite his prime position as the club's top striker. And that's why we're torn. Despite the fact that he's simply the best thing that happened to EFC in a very long time, purely from the combined sporty and financial point of view. And that's fine. It's part of the whole game as well.

Very little reason not to admire his football.
 
It is just the fact that he never really bothered to make himself likable. Only things we ever heard from Lukaku when he said something was about transferring, maybe going to bigger clubs, yadayada. He may be a lot more honest than most other footballers, but fans don't wanna hear that stuff. It gets annoying to be reminded of not being the best of the best where you'd rather hear him say nice things about the club and the people. But he never did that despite his prime position as the club's top striker. And that's why we're torn. Despite the fact that he's simply the best thing that happened to EFC in a very long time, purely from the combined sporty and financial point of view. And that's fine. It's part of the whole game as well.

Wow! Just wow! We are so fucking blessed to have had him. We should be so grateful.

hehe funny signing though But I wish him all the best and hope him and club have a heck of a season. I wonder what position he'll play in in the line-up.
 
edit: props to him for not going to China, Arabia or USA for mere money.

He looks like he is a couple of year younger and a few pounds lighter since he has joined.
 
 

No worries, lads!
 

It wasn't pretty but he hasn't gone with force and that is why he is on the pitch. It's the type of tackle you see a lot week in week out. If Ross goes in with full force then yes he should be off, but he is almost pulling out of it. It's a bruiser, maybe minor ligament damage at worse but it's not an ankle breaker.

No he didn't his ball control was poor certainly no intent there!

Let me say that I have considerable sympathy with Mirallas' view (re abortion). For very many in this US, this single issue determines their vote. They value the sanctity of human life and, as a result, view millions of abortions as a form of genocide. Where I disagree is (i) there are times when it is justified, and (ii) a government ban would simply reopen backstreet abortions, leading in turn to more deaths. If I follow Mirallas' logic (assuming he believes the government should step in), in what other "moral" areas would the government step in? Might they forcibly detain gays and put them through "conversion therapy"? After all, Mike Pence (Trump's vice-president) is a big supporter of conversion therapy for gays. This rapidly becomes a very slippery and scary slope.
 
Despite having witnessed, in the last few months, a lot of intolerant, even nasty, aggression from both parties and individuals, it was striking today (I flew from Atlanta to Dallas) that very few people were talking about the election. There was no gloating or "told you so" moments. For me, this was a positive: Everyone realizes they have to live together, so let's try to heal the wounds of this election process.
 
As for what Trump might do policy-wise, I hope and pray he tones things down. The truth is, though, that I fear we're entering a different world order in the West, and we will soon be expected to conform a lot more. In the balance between freedom and security, the latter will start to win out. It's not going to be a pretty sight - especially for minorities (blacks, Muslims, immigrants, gays, the disabled, ...).

Not sure what you're referring to, but I'm talking about the biggest hidden genocide in the world.

It's good to be a bookie at the moment I'd imagine How many people bet on a Clinton victory? something like 80% Hahaha! Silly people.
 
Also a good moment to be an unborn baby I'd imagine. Hopefully a number more will survive in the coming years than if Clinton were president. Never forget the important things. It's easy to make Trump look like a disaster, but it's genuinely not as bad as he's made out to be. Presidents aren't as powerful as they're sometimes said to be. The USA can be glad about this result. Lots and lots of salty comments around the internet, but that's of course a direct result of the high degree of polarization. People think it's a disaster. Nah it's not.

He won't be as bad as the media have made out he will be. He also won't be as good as he would think.

He used certain issues to gain support, to get the win. He got it, he did a great job of getting people on his side. Now he has the position I'd be surprised if he even tried to followed through with all of the crazy get out of our country, build a wall, ban Muslim stuff. If he carries out today's promises of new hospitals, airports and highways, built by American people with American meterials he won't be all bad.

I know one thing for sure, his first 100 days will be very interesting!

Not sure what you're referring to, but I'm talking about the biggest hidden genocide in the world.

It's good to be a bookie at the moment I'd imagine How many people bet on a Clinton victory? something like 80% Hahaha! Silly people.
 
Also a good moment to be an unborn baby I'd imagine. Hopefully a number more will survive in the coming years than if Clinton were president. Never forget the important things. It's easy to make Trump look like a disaster, but it's genuinely not as bad as he's made out to be. Presidents aren't as powerful as they're sometimes said to be. The USA can be glad about this result. Lots and lots of salty comments around the internet, but that's of course a direct result of the high degree of polarization. People think it's a disaster. Nah it's not.

I take Mirallas's point in his several posts above to refer to abortion. I infer, though I may well be oversimplying his views, that most, perhaps literally all, other issues are in comparison "trivial."
 
I don't know absolutely for certain whether Trump is "as bad as he's made out to be." But I described him in my post above as a "sociopathic near-fascist" with multiple "ugly views." I can define a "sociopath," and Trump exactly fits the several characteristics of a sociopath. I can list 7 or 8 characteristics of historical fascism, and Trump's campaign absolutely appealed to all those characteristics.
 
For me, even "sociopathic near-fascist" only begins to describe Trump's appalling character, personal history, and campaign.
 
But if one sees the abortion issue as literally more important than all other issues - domestic, foreign, financial, cultural, economic, military, international, etc. - then clearly Trump's promise to put forth conservative justices who may help overturn Roe v. Wade will require one to celebrate Trump's victory over fervently pro-choice Clinton.

This is the most poignant thing about all this. Looks like European news reporters have succesfully diverted your attention to trivial things and convinced you to feel strongly about it. Those downvotes on my post are shocking.