Cybereagles

The Undisputed Number One Home for All Super Eagles Fans
It is currently Thu Jun 04, 2020 3:12 pm

View unanswered posts | View active topics


Board index » Strictly Soccer » EAGLES NEST

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 13 of 13
  [ 286 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
anointed
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 8:25 pm
Posts: 49559
txj wrote:
theDunamis wrote:
txj wrote:
anointed wrote:
txj wrote:
And the stats on.chances created?


I bet those chances of yours were created in the midfield.

You've been backed into a tight corner and you think spinning is the way to go. Abeg define "chances created" because you sound like one Naija commentator of yore who said, "...this is Ademola Adesina moving dangerously into the centre circle..."

I have a feeling I can get those stats on chances created on your blogspot or who else keeps stats on chances created. name 'em and shame the devil bro. That makes two outstanding links you are to provide now.


If you don't know how to look up the stats for that say so, or just watch the game again, specifically the second half.

Fact remains City created enough chances to negate its failures in defence.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: So Monaco just came on the field to suck air. And I guess Monaco didn't create "enough chances to negate its failures in defence" or is that nonsensical reasoning only reserved for the team you support??????


Try and follow the issue properly. The debate centers on the primary reason City lost, based on how the game played out; not how we think it should have...City created the majority of chances, esp in 2hf.

Quote:
“City could have won the game easily in the second half but because they are human beings they missed a few chances.
.....Jurgen Klopp

Monaco missed a few chances? Were the shots on and off target parts of the 'chances' or is that there are shots on and off target and then, by your dishonest logic, there some other things are considered 'chances'?

Second, is Klopp's quote the 'data' you were talking about? Pls, help me decipher it cos it looks like there are some encrypted data therein considering that Monaco did not have a few chances but many chances and could have buried the match in the first half, making nonsense of Klopp's second half encrypted 'data'.

Still awaiting the links to pundits who talked down on the French link and chances data i.e the chances created outside the shots off and on target.

_________________
TOUCH NOT MY ANOINTED...
Quote:
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding...hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe
Top
 Profile  
 
txj
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 4:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 11:35 pm
Posts: 30738
anointed wrote:
txj wrote:
theDunamis wrote:
txj wrote:
anointed wrote:
txj wrote:
And the stats on.chances created?


I bet those chances of yours were created in the midfield.

You've been backed into a tight corner and you think spinning is the way to go. Abeg define "chances created" because you sound like one Naija commentator of yore who said, "...this is Ademola Adesina moving dangerously into the centre circle..."

I have a feeling I can get those stats on chances created on your blogspot or who else keeps stats on chances created. name 'em and shame the devil bro. That makes two outstanding links you are to provide now.


If you don't know how to look up the stats for that say so, or just watch the game again, specifically the second half.

Fact remains City created enough chances to negate its failures in defence.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: So Monaco just came on the field to suck air. And I guess Monaco didn't create "enough chances to negate its failures in defence" or is that nonsensical reasoning only reserved for the team you support??????


Try and follow the issue properly. The debate centers on the primary reason City lost, based on how the game played out; not how we think it should have...City created the majority of chances, esp in 2hf.

Quote:
“City could have won the game easily in the second half but because they are human beings they missed a few chances.
.....Jurgen Klopp

Monaco missed a few chances? Were the shots on and off target parts of the 'chances' or is that there are shots on and off target and then, by your dishonest logic, there some other things are considered 'chances'?

Second, is Klopp's quote the 'data' you were talking about? Pls, help me decipher it cos it looks like there are some encrypted data therein considering that Monaco did not have a few chances but many chances and could have buried the match in the first half, making nonsense of Klopp's second half encrypted 'data'.

Still awaiting the links to pundits who talked down on the French link and chances data i.e the chances created outside the shots off and on target.


The data is right in front of you. Just watch the second half.

_________________
Form is temporary; Class is Permanent!
Liverpool, European Champions 2005.

We watched this very boring video, 500 times, of Sacchi doing defensive drills, using sticks and without the ball, with Maldini, Baresi and Albertini. We used to think before then that if the other players are better, you have to lose. After that we learned anything is possible – you can beat better teams by using tactics." Jurgen Klopp
Top
 Profile  
 
anointed
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 4:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 8:25 pm
Posts: 49559
txj wrote:
anointed wrote:
txj wrote:
theDunamis wrote:
txj wrote:
anointed wrote:
txj wrote:
And the stats on.chances created?


I bet those chances of yours were created in the midfield.

You've been backed into a tight corner and you think spinning is the way to go. Abeg define "chances created" because you sound like one Naija commentator of yore who said, "...this is Ademola Adesina moving dangerously into the centre circle..."

I have a feeling I can get those stats on chances created on your blogspot or who else keeps stats on chances created. name 'em and shame the devil bro. That makes two outstanding links you are to provide now.


If you don't know how to look up the stats for that say so, or just watch the game again, specifically the second half.

Fact remains City created enough chances to negate its failures in defence.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: So Monaco just came on the field to suck air. And I guess Monaco didn't create "enough chances to negate its failures in defence" or is that nonsensical reasoning only reserved for the team you support??????


Try and follow the issue properly. The debate centers on the primary reason City lost, based on how the game played out; not how we think it should have...City created the majority of chances, esp in 2hf.

Quote:
“City could have won the game easily in the second half but because they are human beings they missed a few chances.
.....Jurgen Klopp

Monaco missed a few chances? Were the shots on and off target parts of the 'chances' or is that there are shots on and off target and then, by your dishonest logic, there some other things are considered 'chances'?

Second, is Klopp's quote the 'data' you were talking about? Pls, help me decipher it cos it looks like there are some encrypted data therein considering that Monaco did not have a few chances but many chances and could have buried the match in the first half, making nonsense of Klopp's second half encrypted 'data'.

Still awaiting the links to pundits who talked down on the French link and chances data i.e the chances created outside the shots off and on target.


The data is right in front of you. Just watch the second half.


Cos the match was made of only the second half? Maybe you should watch the first half. I ve watched both!

_________________
TOUCH NOT MY ANOINTED...
Quote:
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding...hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe
Top
 Profile  
 
kofi86
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 5:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 10:07 pm
Posts: 9150
txj wrote:
anointed wrote:
txj wrote:
theDunamis wrote:
txj wrote:
anointed wrote:
txj wrote:
And the stats on.chances created?


I bet those chances of yours were created in the midfield.

You've been backed into a tight corner and you think spinning is the way to go. Abeg define "chances created" because you sound like one Naija commentator of yore who said, "...this is Ademola Adesina moving dangerously into the centre circle..."

I have a feeling I can get those stats on chances created on your blogspot or who else keeps stats on chances created. name 'em and shame the devil bro. That makes two outstanding links you are to provide now.


If you don't know how to look up the stats for that say so, or just watch the game again, specifically the second half.

Fact remains City created enough chances to negate its failures in defence.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: So Monaco just came on the field to suck air. And I guess Monaco didn't create "enough chances to negate its failures in defence" or is that nonsensical reasoning only reserved for the team you support??????


Try and follow the issue properly. The debate centers on the primary reason City lost, based on how the game played out; not how we think it should have...City created the majority of chances, esp in 2hf.

Quote:
“City could have won the game easily in the second half but because they are human beings they missed a few chances.
.....Jurgen Klopp

Monaco missed a few chances? Were the shots on and off target parts of the 'chances' or is that there are shots on and off target and then, by your dishonest logic, there some other things are considered 'chances'?

Second, is Klopp's quote the 'data' you were talking about? Pls, help me decipher it cos it looks like there are some encrypted data therein considering that Monaco did not have a few chances but many chances and could have buried the match in the first half, making nonsense of Klopp's second half encrypted 'data'.

Still awaiting the links to pundits who talked down on the French link and chances data i.e the chances created outside the shots off and on target.


The data is right in front of you. Just watch the second half.


You were the one to introduce "data" to the discussion. That was your quote, I highlighted the first part. You surely did not mean the match itself as data, did you?

txj wrote:
The beauty of reviewing a football match that has been played is that u have data. Its not what they could've or should've done. Its about how the game actually played out, and what were the key factors in it.

The PRIMARY problem on the day was not taking their chances.

_________________
"If two grown men can't make a pervert happy for a few minutes in order to watch a film about zombies, then maybe we should all just move to Iran!"
Top
 Profile  
 
txj
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 11:35 pm
Posts: 30738
kofi86 wrote:
txj wrote:
You were the one to introduce "data" to the discussion. That was your quote, I highlighted the first part. You surely did not mean the match itself as data, did you?

txj wrote:
The beauty of reviewing a football match that has been played is that u have data. Its not what they could've or should've done. Its about how the game actually played out, and what were the key factors in it.

The PRIMARY problem on the day was not taking their chances.


There's no greater data (or if u like evidence) about the match than video of the game itself.

_________________
Form is temporary; Class is Permanent!
Liverpool, European Champions 2005.

We watched this very boring video, 500 times, of Sacchi doing defensive drills, using sticks and without the ball, with Maldini, Baresi and Albertini. We used to think before then that if the other players are better, you have to lose. After that we learned anything is possible – you can beat better teams by using tactics." Jurgen Klopp
Top
 Profile  
 
anointed
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 8:25 pm
Posts: 49559
txj wrote:
kofi86 wrote:
txj wrote:
You were the one to introduce "data" to the discussion. That was your quote, I highlighted the first part. You surely did not mean the match itself as data, did you?

txj wrote:
The beauty of reviewing a football match that has been played is that u have data. Its not what they could've or should've done. Its about how the game actually played out, and what were the key factors in it.

The PRIMARY problem on the day was not taking their chances.


There's no greater data (or if u like evidence) about the match than video of the game itself.


You first said data...then it was the chances...then it was the second half...now it's the match itself

You can't seriously be comfortable with your own lies and dishonesty?

_________________
TOUCH NOT MY ANOINTED...
Quote:
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding...hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe
Top
 Profile  
 
txj
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 11:35 pm
Posts: 30738
anointed wrote:
txj wrote:
kofi86 wrote:
txj wrote:
You were the one to introduce "data" to the discussion. That was your quote, I highlighted the first part. You surely did not mean the match itself as data, did you?

txj wrote:
The beauty of reviewing a football match that has been played is that u have data. Its not what they could've or should've done. Its about how the game actually played out, and what were the key factors in it.

The PRIMARY problem on the day was not taking their chances.


There's no greater data (or if u like evidence) about the match than video of the game itself.


You first said data...then it was the chances...then it was the second half...now it's the match itself

You can't seriously be comfortable with your own lies and dishonesty?


:???:

Data is a set of values of qualitative or quantitative variables.

Match footage is data, in the very same way survey result is data.

I never thought I would have to explain this...

Wow!!!

_________________
Form is temporary; Class is Permanent!
Liverpool, European Champions 2005.

We watched this very boring video, 500 times, of Sacchi doing defensive drills, using sticks and without the ball, with Maldini, Baresi and Albertini. We used to think before then that if the other players are better, you have to lose. After that we learned anything is possible – you can beat better teams by using tactics." Jurgen Klopp
Top
 Profile  
 
anointed
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 8:25 pm
Posts: 49559
txj wrote:
anointed wrote:
txj wrote:
kofi86 wrote:
txj wrote:
You were the one to introduce "data" to the discussion. That was your quote, I highlighted the first part. You surely did not mean the match itself as data, did you?

txj wrote:
The beauty of reviewing a football match that has been played is that u have data. Its not what they could've or should've done. Its about how the game actually played out, and what were the key factors in it.

The PRIMARY problem on the day was not taking their chances.


There's no greater data (or if u like evidence) about the match than video of the game itself.


You first said data...then it was the chances...then it was the second half...now it's the match itself

You can't seriously be comfortable with your own lies and dishonesty?


:???:

Data is a set of values of qualitative or quantitative variables.

Match footage is data, in the very same way survey result is data.

I never thought I would have to explain this...

Wow!!!

Na dictionary now. What we are talking have context. Stop the lying and dishonest jargons. Why don't you show the link to the 'chances' you mentioned earlier on instead of quoting Michael West? Yeah, congrats. You have succeeded in diverting attention from your dishonesty and lies with your vacuous homily on 'data'

_________________
TOUCH NOT MY ANOINTED...
Quote:
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding...hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe
Top
 Profile  
 
txj
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 11:35 pm
Posts: 30738
anointed wrote:
txj wrote:
:???:

Data is a set of values of qualitative or quantitative variables.

Match footage is data, in the very same way survey result is data.

I never thought I would have to explain this...

Wow!!!

Na dictionary now. What we are talking have context. Stop the lying and dishonest jargons. Why don't you show the link to the 'chances' you mentioned earlier on instead of quoting Michael West? Yeah, congrats. You have succeeded in diverting attention from your dishonesty and lies with your vacuous homily on 'data'


Insulting me from thread to thread wont change the facts.

Just watch the 2HF of the game on the internet. The evidence of the chances is all there...

_________________
Form is temporary; Class is Permanent!
Liverpool, European Champions 2005.

We watched this very boring video, 500 times, of Sacchi doing defensive drills, using sticks and without the ball, with Maldini, Baresi and Albertini. We used to think before then that if the other players are better, you have to lose. After that we learned anything is possible – you can beat better teams by using tactics." Jurgen Klopp
Top
 Profile  
 
theDunamis
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 11:00 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 9:56 pm
Posts: 7557
Location: Hidden with Christ Jesus
txj wrote:
Try and follow the issue properly. The debate centers on the primary reason City lost, based on how the game played out; not how we think it should have...City created the majority of chances, esp in 2hf.

Quote:
“City could have won the game easily in the second half but because they are human beings they missed a few chances.
.....Jurgen Klopp


Try to make sense, d00d. A game was played over 2 legs and you are here spouting nonsense and doubling down from post to post with more nonsense about how the team you favor cudda shudda wudda won if the game only existed in the 2nd half of the 2nd leg and IF they took all their chances in that favorable half. Dude, do you even understand how ridiculous that sounds???? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

_________________
theDunamis is signed, sealed, DELIVERED!
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 13 of 13
  [ 286 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13

Board index » Strictly Soccer » EAGLES NEST

All times are UTC + 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group