Jump to content
IGNORED

Weirdness Abounds (or the Idrissa Gana Gueye Thread)


Recommended Posts

Just now, Palfy said:

If you laugh at that mate you are laughing at every player who went out yesterday and won that game, your insulting the team and the by belittling it.

i'm laughing because Haf has a sense of humor that i like.  instead of just saying "they don't care about possesion" he says what he said.  just like with lukaku instead of stating "he has a terrible first touch" he calls him trampoline shins.  his analogies are also gold, he's funny palfy, calm down, i'm just enjoying life over here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Palfy said:

Cake and fucking eat it, how many times Burnley lost 5-1 at home this season, your problem a good win without Gana is worthless and a bad loss without Gana is everything.

Let's change the name of the team to Ganaton and that should really make you a happy chappy.

You are obsessed with gana and the amount of shit you and Pete have collectively thrown just makes this thread a complete joke.

Many if not all people on here accept he's not creative although he can pass better than you give him credit for his passing stats indicate a player who retains the ball. 

Most if not all accept that there will be some games where he could be rested. Burnley is deffo one of those sides. 

You said Gana only looks good against shite sides, his arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool performances discredit that. 

You would sooner have schneiderlein ahead of him.... that says it all. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, markjazzbassist said:

i'm laughing because Haf has a sense of humor that i like.  instead of just saying "they don't care about possesion" he says what he said.  just like with lukaku instead of stating "he has a terrible first touch" he calls him trampoline shins.  his analogies are also gold, he's funny palfy, calm down, i'm just enjoying life over here

He said that as beating Burnley is no big deal basically fuck off Palfy saying it was a good win it's only Burnley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Palfy said:

He said that as beating Burnley is no big deal basically fuck off Palfy saying it was a good win it's only Burnley.

Whats with being so pious Palf... you bought gana and Burnley up so deal with it.  

A side leaking goals got stuffed by us.  If you can't handle people enjoying my retort which affirmed the fact that Burnley surrender possession by lumping it forward then don't post. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hafnia said:

Yeah none of us were laughing conceding 9 goals in 2 games without him though were we? 

No we weren't and not everyone was saying because we had no Gana that we lost, but belittling the teams win without him because it's only Burnley is fucking shite mate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Palfy said:

No we weren't and not everyone was saying because we had no Gana that we lost, but belittling the teams win without him because it's only Burnley is fucking shite mate.

Belittling the team? No.... just clearly stating the fact that Burnley will readily concede possession.  Lowest possession stats and lowest passes.  Hit it long and hope for the best.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, hafnia said:

Belittling the team? No.... just clearly stating the fact that Burnley will readily concede possession.  Lowest possession stats and lowest passes.  Hit it long and hope for the best.

 

 

Well if that's what you meant by it then I apologise for misinterpreting what you meant by what you said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, hafnia said:

Belittling the team? No.... just clearly stating the fact that Burnley will readily concede possession.  Lowest possession stats and lowest passes.  Hit it long and hope for the best.

 

 

49% possession with 401 passes on the game to our 416. Hardly what I'd call conceding possession. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Shukes said:

Just to point out guys.... err he was involved in this match. Part of the squad and came on and played.

And he showed he can do more than just tackle... proved it in fact!

He inspired us from the bench... that takes a special player!

And he dived for yellow card 5 touches and a warning couldn't have done it without him, where would we be if he wasn't sat on the bench we would have definitely lost 3-0 is that about right guys, if it's more please let me know I'd hate to undermine is worth and the fact we can't do anything with him bar lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, EFC-Paul said:

Brilliant player and I don't know how people can knock him or his ability but each to their own

At 29 he still has a few good seasons in him but If we could line the likes of Decourè up who is four years younger and a more rounded box to box type I wouldn't be devastated if he left 

If we could line Johnny Vegas up I'd be ecstatic😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Palfy said:

Well we didn't miss him yesterday our best result of the season.

 

4 hours ago, Palfy said:

Cake and fucking eat it, how many times Burnley lost 5-1 at home this season, your problem a good win without Gana is worthless and a bad loss without Gana is everything.

Let's change the name of the team to Ganaton and that should really make you a happy chappy.

The irony of these two posts within a few hours of each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Palfy said:

Well I wasn’t trying to be ironic and I can’t see the irony in them your have to enlighten me?

You’re accusing haf of being so narrow-minded about a player’s ability that he can’t recognize when his absence might have been beneficial, and yet in the very post that haf responded to in the first place, you suggested that we won in part due to his absence, despite having been thrashed in the last two matches without him. In essence, you’re doing exactly what you say haf is doing, just reversing the terms. A bad loss without Gana means nothing but a good win without Gana means everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Palfy said:

And he dived for yellow card 5 touches and a warning couldn't have done it without him, where would we be if he wasn't sat on the bench we would have definitely lost 3-0 is that about right guys, if it's more please let me know I'd hate to undermine is worth and the fact we can't do anything with him bar lose.

Just stating facts. He was involved and we broke a two game losing streak where we have conceded like there’s no tomorrow.

Obviously his influence made a difference. Did you see him shouting orders from the bench, the mans a legend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, nyblue23 said:

You’re accusing haf of being so narrow-minded about a player’s ability that he can’t recognize when his absence might have been beneficial, and yet in the very post that haf responded to in the first place, you suggested that we won in part due to his absence, despite having been thrashed in the last two matches without him. In essence, you’re doing exactly what you say haf is doing, just reversing the terms. A bad loss without Gana means nothing but a good win without Gana means everything.

My first post was in reference to subject of selling Gana, and I meant if one was concerned at his loss then don’t worry we didn’t miss him yesterday, not that we won in part because he wasn’t there yesterday. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Shukes said:

Just stating facts. He was involved and we broke a two game losing streak where we have conceded like there’s no tomorrow.

Obviously his influence made a difference. Did you see him shouting orders from the bench, the mans a legend.

A legend ? the weirdness just got a whole lot weirder. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll almost be glad to see him gone for my sanity.  

£30m+ for the worst player to wear an Everton shirt at the age of 29.....

 

Mustn't be that bad.  Maybe PSG just want him to win the ball and give it to Neymar and Mbappe to use their onball talents? That's a good idea.... then again some PSG fans may moan and ask why Gana can't beat 3 men like Neymar or finish like Mbappe.... the fact that he can just win it and pass to them is irrelevant.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Palfy said:

My first post was in reference to subject of selling Gana, and I meant if one was concerned at his loss then don’t worry we didn’t miss him yesterday, not that we won in part because he wasn’t there yesterday. 

That still has the implication of saying we were just as well off. Didn’t miss = easy to win without.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...