What a load of nonsense.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
There is no way Maka or many other keepers would have saved those goals. 3 great finishes well out of the reach of Stack(who contrary to the opinion of a few on here is only a couple of inches shorter then Maka).
Your vendetta against any keeper who isn't Makalamay is prett pathetic TBH.
Results 31 to 45 of 45
Thread: Here's the goals
-
30-07-2010 09:41 PM #31
-
31-07-2010 09:22 AM #32
I was there and take it from me we were absolute Jobby! We aere the only team i know that sets up to play for a draw 451 and goes 3-0 down and continues to play 451. Riordan and Stokes should have been on from the start. Hughes has to take most of the blame for this disgrace. Another trip another waste of cash but its Hibs and you keep going back!
-
31-07-2010 09:25 AM #33This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
31-07-2010 09:30 AM #34This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Having just watched the goals again would you not question Stacks positioning for the 2nd? Regardless if spoony was fouled or not you cant give the ball away so cheaply in these games. We were shown up big time Brockie.
-
31-07-2010 09:33 AM #35This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
31-07-2010 09:37 AM #36This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
I know mate but you want to make the 2ng leg easier not harder. I think it can be done but we need a good crowd and lots of noise!
-
31-07-2010 09:38 AM #37This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
31-07-2010 09:58 AM #38
Why oh why was it 3 against 2 for the 3rd goal
TOP CASH BACK
The easy way to make money
-
31-07-2010 10:18 AM #39This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Ok then mate, just that wee bit easier!
-
31-07-2010 10:31 AM #40
My comments on the goals after viewing the highlights link.
Goal 1) Murray slip didn't help however, their player sold a nice dummy turn before sticking a great shot in the net. Great goal - can't argue.
Goal 2) Good lob-come-shot but I would question Stack's positioning. He could've done better.
Goal 3) Kevin McBride (17) ambles back instead of bursting a gut. This is the difference between winners and losers. I witnessed similar scenarios several times last season.
Inexcusable, IMO.
-
31-07-2010 10:33 AM #41This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
I agree with the above although i got shot down for questioning Stacks positioning for the 2nd. I think that he could have done better.
-
31-07-2010 11:26 AM #42This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
31-07-2010 10:56 PM #43This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
01-08-2010 12:07 AM #44This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show QuoteNever one to laugh at others misfortune but today could only have been improved by rangers getting horsed and God pissing down a meteor shower of fifty pound notes on Edinburgh
Copyright BadMartini Wed 27th Jan 2010
-
01-08-2010 09:16 AM #45This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
I'm not saying that the slips and giving away of the ball would have been erradicated but it wouldn't have been any worse for having Rankin off the park and Deek and Stokes up front. At least then, we'd have had an out up top which would have changed the dynamic of the game IMO.
They scored a couple of crackers but I suspect they won't be doing that every week otherwise they'd be winning the champions league. That's the breaks and would have happened whether we had Deek or Stokes on or not. At least with them, I believe we'd have had more of the game and of course, at least a chance of scoring.
Log in to remove the advert |
Bookmarks