Jump to content


  • Post count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Charl91 last won the day on 8 March 2017

Charl91 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,169 Excellent

About Charl91

  • Rank
    Key Player
  • Birthday 16/05/1991

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

6,511 profile views
  1. He's done a great job on the defense. Plus, as an added bonus, he'll be able to give our players solid advice on any new cars they want to buy.
  2. I think at this point it's either got to be prospects for the future, or world class players.
  3. Good performance from him. Deserved an assist really because put in some quality balls (though could have done better with his shot).
  4. Really is a super sub. Probably deserves another start at some point, because he keeps delivering off the Bench.
  5. I thought we've played well. Been the better team and unlucky not to be ahead. My only worry is Lacazette and Aubameyang are lethal on the break, but we've definitely had the better chances.
  6. Didn't make me laugh - he's my MP
  7. Stop pissing around Jon, we have a game today.
  8. Yeah, he's a different player now. Almost more of a (superior) Darren Bent, fox-in-the-box kind of player. It's great (and wise) that he's adapted his game, and he still puts a shift in, but I do miss him haring around the pitch like a mad man. Damn you, time! Stop aging Vardy.
  9. I think the answer is no, we're not. At least not yet. It's difficult though, because part of it is how good we were for the system we played (as many have said). For instance, I think we can all agree that it's fair to say Ricardo is a better footballer than Danny Simpson. But playing Ranieri's system? I would choose Simpson 8 times out of 10, because we sat back and defended under a lot of pressure, something that Simpson is better at. Similarly, peak Huth and Morgan would be slaughtered pushing up to the half way line, but I'd certainly take them over Soyuncu and Evans when defending cross after cross being launched into the box. Do we have better players? In some areas, maybe. I'd say that no replacement has as much quality as Mahrez or Kante (though N'didi pushes him close!). I'd also argue that while he may not have had the speed, Fuchs in his prime was a stronger player than Chilwell (in terms of defensive ability and passing/crossing). Maybe the clear ones are Ricardo > Simpson Tielemans > Drinkwater Maddison > Okazaki? Albrighton? Different roles, so difficult to compare. Other than that, I'm not convinced that any other players are necessarily stronger. But that's no slight - that was a league winning side, and we had to replace them at some point. We still have a very good squad
  10. I get really worried about all the articles saying how well we're doing. Tempting fate!
  11. Nope, apparently saying anything is fair game. Labour may as well accuse Tories of spending £2 billion per year on shooting puppies and kittens, because apparently it doesn't matter what you promise, or whether there's even an iota of truth in what you say, as long as you're on the "winning side". Once you "win" then everyone has to get behind you, no complaints, regardless of what you've said or done previously.
  12. I put Lib Dem, but in reality I will end up voting for whoever has the best chance of stopping Andrew Bridgen. The potato-faced weasel will win whatever though, so I guess it doesn't matter. I've never campaigned before, but I'm almost tempted to go knocking round doors on a vote-for-anyone-but-Andrew-Bridgen campaign.
  13. Does this mean when people get old and senile we stop them voting again?
  14. I would learn more towards "no", but I'm undecided. My gut reaction is that they're not informed enough. But then I think about the huge amount of people who vote who are also not informed, or by people whose critical thinking extends to whatever the front page of their chosen newspaper tells them, and suddenly that argument doesn't hold quite so much weight. So yeah, I can see the merits of both sides in this, to be honest. I also agree that it shouldn't be changed just because It would benefit one political party over another - as much as I would prefer Labour or Lib Dem over the current Tories, it's a dangerous precedent to set. But that being said, I certainly can see the more of a merit in it for referendums, as they tend to be things with more long-lasting effects. Edit: Though this also just reminded me about Tuition fees. Governments certainly would have been less willing to implement them if they knew that the people on the receiving end of them had a vote. I always thought it sucked that generally the people who it most effected never got a democratic say in the matter. I think that does sway me more to the 16+ should be allowed to vote argument.
  • Create New...