The mancityfans.net football forum

phips wrote:

Justified logic wrote:

phips wrote:ya lost me. what am i missing here?

Missing? You're avoiding the question, that's what you are missing.

what question? you posted a video.

if the keeper intends to come for the ball he yells "keeper". if he doesnt intend to come for the ball he says nothing. theres really only 2 options.

if you go to a restaurant and they ask you if you want soup or salad and you say soup you dont have to follow that with "and i dont want the salad". if its an OR situation the affirmation of one inherently implies the negation of the other.

Are you on a wind up? You have to be.

dazby wrote:

phips wrote:

Justified logic wrote:

phips wrote:ya lost me. what am i missing here?

Missing? You're avoiding the question, that's what you are missing.

what question? you posted a video.

if the keeper intends to come for the ball he yells "keeper". if he doesnt intend to come for the ball he says nothing. theres really only 2 options.

if you go to a restaurant and they ask you if you want soup or salad and you say soup you dont have to follow that with "and i dont want the salad". if its an OR situation the affirmation of one inherently implies the negation of the other.

Are you on a wind up? You have to be.

Well he's certainly using a fallacious argument, so I guess he is.

phips wrote:

Justified logic wrote:

phips wrote:ya lost me. what am i missing here?

Missing? You're avoiding the question, that's what you are missing.

what question? you posted a video.

if the keeper intends to come for the ball he yells "keeper". if he doesnt intend to come for the ball he says nothing. theres really only 2 options.

if you go to a restaurant and they ask you if you want soup or salad and you say soup you dont have to follow that with "and i dont want the salad". if its an OR situation the affirmation of one inherently implies the negation of the other.

Or even "Torwart", as used in Germany.

Mikhail Chigorin wrote:

phips wrote:

Justified logic wrote:

phips wrote:ya lost me. what am i missing here?

Missing? You're avoiding the question, that's what you are missing.

what question? you posted a video.

if the keeper intends to come for the ball he yells "keeper". if he doesnt intend to come for the ball he says nothing. theres really only 2 options.

if you go to a restaurant and they ask you if you want soup or salad and you say soup you dont have to follow that with "and i dont want the salad". if its an OR situation the affirmation of one inherently implies the negation of the other.

Or even "Torwart", as used in Germany.

I always preferred Torhüter or Torwächter. Why not use an Umlaut when available?

Mikhail Chigorin wrote:

phips wrote:

Justified logic wrote:

phips wrote:ya lost me. what am i missing here?

Missing? You're avoiding the question, that's what you are missing.

what question? you posted a video.

if the keeper intends to come for the ball he yells "keeper". if he doesnt intend to come for the ball he says nothing. theres really only 2 options.

if you go to a restaurant and they ask you if you want soup or salad and you say soup you dont have to follow that with "and i dont want the salad". if its an OR situation the affirmation of one inherently implies the negation of the other.

Or even "Torwart", as used in Germany.

German keepers used to shout "Leo!", although that might have changed. Maybe phips can educate them on the correct terminology?

mr_nool wrote:

Mikhail Chigorin wrote:

phips wrote:

Justified logic wrote:

phips wrote:ya lost me. what am i missing here?

Missing? You're avoiding the question, that's what you are missing.

what question? you posted a video.

if the keeper intends to come for the ball he yells "keeper". if he doesnt intend to come for the ball he says nothing. theres really only 2 options.

if you go to a restaurant and they ask you if you want soup or salad and you say soup you dont have to follow that with "and i dont want the salad". if its an OR situation the affirmation of one inherently implies the negation of the other.

Or even "Torwart", as used in Germany.

I always preferred Torhüter or Torwächter. Why not use an Umlaut when available?

I'll gladly defer to your greater knowledge in such matters mr_nool

Btw. Anyone see otter smash pea head after his sly foul?

london blue 2 wrote:Btw. Anyone see otter smash pea head after his sly foul?

Nice.

Next time I hope he gets his retaliation in first

Mikhail Chigorin wrote:

london blue 2 wrote:Btw. Anyone see otter smash pea head after his sly foul?

Nice.

Next time I hope he gets his retaliation in first

Excellent. Hope he smashes Firminio into the middle of the following week when we play the dippers

london blue 2 wrote:Btw. Anyone see otter smash pea head after his sly foul?

I despise that little mexican ...he has that kind of face that you just want to fuckign hit over and over.
Argentinians cant stand Mexicans at the best of times...in fact I dont know many people who do like them.......back on topic , hes a smarmy little cunt....hope he flops.

carl_feedthegoat wrote:

london blue 2 wrote:Btw. Anyone see otter smash pea head after his sly foul?

I despise that little mexican ...he has that kind of face that you just want to fuckign hit over and over.
Argentinians cant stand Mexicans at the best of times...in fact I dont know many people who do like them.......back on topic , hes a smarmy little cunt....hope he flops.

Are you trying to tell us you're a Trump supporter Carl?

On the video, I think that's the first time Otter has shown any bottle!

Mase wrote:

carl_feedthegoat wrote:

london blue 2 wrote:Btw. Anyone see otter smash pea head after his sly foul?

I despise that little mexican ...he has that kind of face that you just want to fuckign hit over and over.
Argentinians cant stand Mexicans at the best of times...in fact I dont know many people who do like them.......back on topic , hes a smarmy little cunt....hope he flops.

Are you trying to tell us you're a Trump supporter Carl?

On the video, I think that's the first time Otter has shown any bottle!

I like theatre mate , what can I tell you ))

And agree re Otter.....about time someone on our fuckign team dealt out some justice.

carl_feedthegoat wrote:

Mase wrote:

carl_feedthegoat wrote:

london blue 2 wrote:Btw. Anyone see otter smash pea head after his sly foul?

I despise that little mexican ...he has that kind of face that you just want to fuckign hit over and over.
Argentinians cant stand Mexicans at the best of times...in fact I dont know many people who do like them.......back on topic , hes a smarmy little cunt....hope he flops.

Are you trying to tell us you're a Trump supporter Carl?

On the video, I think that's the first time Otter has shown any bottle!

I like theatre mate , what can I tell you ))

And agree re Otter.....about time someone on our fuckign team dealt out some justice.

He's now shown us he's capable of such 'action' Carl, so he ought to be encouraged to repeat this kind of thing more often.

We could badly do with a 'Mr Nasty' in our back line to add a bit of steel to proceedings, especially at those times when we have to 'dig in'.

dazby wrote:

phips wrote:

Justified logic wrote:

phips wrote:ya lost me. what am i missing here?

Missing? You're avoiding the question, that's what you are missing.

what question? you posted a video.

if the keeper intends to come for the ball he yells "keeper". if he doesnt intend to come for the ball he says nothing. theres really only 2 options.

if you go to a restaurant and they ask you if you want soup or salad and you say soup you dont have to follow that with "and i dont want the salad". if its an OR situation the affirmation of one inherently implies the negation of the other.

Are you on a wind up? You have to be.

nope. i have better things to do than concoct plans to "wind up" people i dont know on the internet.

phips wrote:

dazby wrote:

phips wrote:

Justified logic wrote:

phips wrote:ya lost me. what am i missing here?

Missing? You're avoiding the question, that's what you are missing.

what question? you posted a video.

if the keeper intends to come for the ball he yells "keeper". if he doesnt intend to come for the ball he says nothing. theres really only 2 options.

if you go to a restaurant and they ask you if you want soup or salad and you say soup you dont have to follow that with "and i dont want the salad". if its an OR situation the affirmation of one inherently implies the negation of the other.

Are you on a wind up? You have to be.

nope. i have better things to do than concoct plans to "wind up" people i dont know on the internet.

There are many less worthwhile activities though, I enjoy indulging in it myself in a typically sad way.

Squad travelling to Girona:


1. Claudio Bravo
3. Danilo
4. Vincent Kompany
5. John Stones
7. Raheem Sterling
8 Ilkay Gundogan
10 Sergio Aguero
15. Eliaquim Mangala
17. Kevin De Bruyne
18. Fabian Delph
19. Leroy Sane
20. Bernardo Silva
21. David Silva
22. Benjamin Mendy
24. Tosin Adarabioyo
25. Fernandinho
27. Patrick Roberts
30. Nicolas Otamendi
31. Ederson
32. Daniel Grimshaw
33. Gabriel Jesus
35. Oleksandr Zinchenko
42. Yaya Toure
47. Phil Foden
55. Brahim Diaz

No bony or nasri ?

Nick wrote:No bony or nasri ?

Or more worrying, no walker

Wonderwall wrote:

Nick wrote:No bony or nasri ?

Or more worrying, no walker

According to Stuart Brennan there's no injury, personal reasons apparently.

Please play Bravo from the start and please let him make a dozen gaffes by half time and be sold before the end August.