Celtic FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2011/2012

SantryRed wrote: »

The GD is completely irrevelant in this point tbh. If they've lost and drawn more games of course their GD won't have improved. Whereas yours has only improved by 11 with 9 wins. Not something to really shout about

Ours has improved by 15, I must ave typed something wrong.

Ignore the goal difference if you like, it was merely an illustrative point, the main point is that we won 27/27 points at a time that they won 10/21.

Brewster wrote: »

YAWN.... Enough said.


Celtic did not create near enough chances as the home team to say they 'dominated' game. Just my opinion. Rangers should have been 1 up, who knows how game would have panned out.

Celtic had 12 attempts at goal, 7 of which were on target and this doesnt even include the incorrect offside decision.

My own opinion was that the first half yes was even enough and no one reallly dominated but Celtic most certainly dominated the second half and Rangers really struggled to keep possesion, Jelavic was completely isolated and Lafferty was just running aimlessly around flalling he's arms about.

All the standout performers on the night were in the hoops, Forrest was excellent, Kayal bossed midfield, Rogne was a rock at the back, Samaras I thought played very well and one that hasnt been mentioned here Matthews at FB was excellent.

How many clear cut chances were in the game last night? Alot of celtic's attempts came from outside the area. The game was very poor, aside from the goal Bocanegra's sitter was probably the best chance of the game.

KeithAFC wrote: »

The game was ****e. Looking back on it, as ****e as we played, we should have had a goal and Bocanegra should have buried that chance. We could have easily went in at HT 2-0. But celtic played much better in the 2nd half and punished us.

Welcome back Keith!!! I missed you buddy!

You gonna answer me about the bet now and try to win some money for charity or are you going to admit Celtic are going to win the league?

KeithAFC wrote: »

If you wish. Go for it. I will do it.

Good lad. €50?

lubo_moravcik wrote: »

Is there any truth that Forrest's Granda played for Rangers years ago, meant to be a cracking goalscorer? Heard after you lost to Berwick Rangers he was made a scapegoat and punted soon after.

I don't know if your boy and Jim Forrest were related but he and George McLean left the club not long after the Berwick debacle if I am honest it was no surprise that Forrest was one of the players to take the blame for that night I was at that game and if there was ever a player who looked as though he wanted to be elsewhere it was him. I don't have a lot of sympathy stories at the time were coming out that he had fell out with the club over money and he had made it clear he wanted away well he got his wish and he found out that like many players when they leave Rangers or Celtic its all downhill.

I do know that your boys Dad is a bear though and oly goes to Parkhead when Celtic are playing Rangers and sits in the away end he goes to see his boy when Celtic are playing away. So maybe there's some truth in the relationship

blahfckingblah wrote: »

now now coulda shoulda woulda... the better team won im just glad that ball was saved off the line not our best performance but did enough to go 2 points ahead,,, livens things up for the rest of the league

Should have gone to specsavers

premierstone wrote: »

There really was no need to as Gary was at least two yards onside, dont need glasses to see that mate

Totally different the ball was in the net. Pretty pointless starting this up again I responded to another one out the woodwork with a smiley face

premierstone wrote: »

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Totally different the ball was in the net. Pretty pointless starting this up again I responded to another one out the woodwork with a smiley face

No no hold on now, I have seen 20 replays of the goal incident, yes it looks over the line but there is no evidence from the camera angle I have seen that 100% says the ball crossed the line, granted I admit that is the most likely outcome. Whereas there is absolutely no doubt on the offside it was on and well on at that.

The officials cannot give a goal unless they are 100% sure, therefore the only way that could have been given last night was if we had goal line techology in place, and it showed the ball had indeed crossed the line, unfortunatly such technology is not in place as of yet.

And as I said earlier if it had been the other way about people would be saying what I am an probably we would be saying what you are pointless argument
There's also nothing to say he would have scored it's all ifs and buts

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

It was clear to me that it was in I screamed at the tv as soon as it did but we didn't get it I only hope it puts to bed the pish that Colum is biased towards us
You deserved your win and I look forward to the rest of the season

Thats a ridiculous argument. That goal would not have stood in any match anywhere in the world. I agree ye were hard done by but no official is going to award a goal there.

Read the post above yours and sorry you don't know what other refs would have done you can surmise but that's all

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Read the post above yours and sorry you don't know what other refs would have done you can surmise but that's all

Oh well if you want to play the victim, fine. I dont necessarily subscribe to the collum biased argument but not awarding the goal doesnt change anything in that regard.