SD4E Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 personal highlight was the bloke with no front teeth singing "we love you burnley" at the end. typical dingle. absolutely gutted for them
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
ABBEY Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 The girl in the glasses scared the £$%^ out of me! The tv cameras were on her and she was screaming at the players in extra time. COYLE CHIMP HEADS LOVE CHILD
ChesterRover Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 Well that sure made interesting viewing. Could'nt of scripted that better if you'd tried, well maybe a late Bentley goal would really have twisted the blade but still - how bloody funny!
Will Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 Well that sure made interesting viewing. Could'nt of scripted that better if you'd tried, well maybe a late Bentley goal would really have twisted the blade but still - how bloody funny! I was praying for a very late Bentley goal. Would have been perfect.
iamarover Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 All the better for them to be so heartbreakingly close. Schaudenfreude is what the Koln fans talked about at the World Cup. Which is basically getting a semi on when your hated rivals suffer. Tonight I have to say that was Schauden Porn at its best. So near..sooooo near. And yet. So feckin far. But in a grudging way you have to say they were magnificent. Which. Is hard to say. So I wont.
philipl Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 We are being cruel. Spurs were awful but you have to hand it to the dingles for their organisation. As for Akinbiye at the end- what a circus carthorse!
grizfoot Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 I've got to admit I do feel a little bit sorry for thoose Dingle folk. They were far the better team over the two legs. Tottenham are dreadful and lucky to be going through. The two 'ladies' wearing glasses who were seemingly constantly swearing for the entire match was comedy gold though.
Ewood Spark Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 The best of both worlds tonight .... Dingles losing in the cruelest of circumstances ........... and Spuds fans missing their last train home :lol:
jim mk2 Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 Anyone who rejoices at a southern club beating a Lancashire town team deserves to be transported to Australia. Great effort Burnley - you'll beat 'em in the Prem next year.
Ewood Spark Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 Anyone who rejoices at a southern club beating a Lancashire town team deserves to be transported to Australia. Hey don't accuse me of coming from Lancashire, I live in Blackburn with Darwen ... we have been devolved .... when I leave my house every morning I pass signs welcoming me to Lancashire.
Blue n White Rover Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 :lol: I couldn't give a flying monkeys how well the dingles played, the fact is that they are OUT and I love it! Those that are backing the scum on how well they played? Imagine that was Rovers, would they have the slightest bit of sympathy for us? NO! It was brilliant, watching their faces at full time. Who could've wrote a better script? We're from Blackburn and we hate the scum! Thank you Spurs for another great night of football! :D:D:D:D
thenodrog Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 Anyone who rejoices at a southern club beating a Lancashire town team deserves to be transported to Australia. Great effort Burnley I must say the 5 Live phone in after revealed Burnley fans as still being enthusiastic, excited and sporting whereas the Yids came across as a right moaning miserable and most of all SPOILT bunch who simply bemoaned their teams poor display rather than revelling in the thrill of a Wembley final. Thus proving that money IS the root of all evil in football and does NOT guarantee happiness. I hope they get well stuffed and humiliated beyond all reason.
dave birch Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 One has to wonder at the tactics of Bumley. In the first game they, apparently, played well and held spuds for some time. Spuds scored what turned out to be four crucial goals at home. In the second game, Bumley played out of their skins and, over the 90 mins knocked spuds over, but again, they couldn't hold out when it mattered. It's all well and good to play all over your opponents, but if you can't go the distance, what does it matter if you were brilliant for the best part of two games and still end up on the wrong side of the result.
Tyrone Shoelaces Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 If Spurs play the same goalie we'll batter them when they come to Ewood. He was at fault for 2 of the goals. Burnley have rode their luck all the way through this cup run, last night it ran out.
Exiledfan Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 One has to wonder at the tactics of Bumley. In the first game they, apparently, played well and held spuds for some time. Spuds scored what turned out to be four crucial goals at home. In the second game, Bumley played out of their skins and, over the 90 mins knocked spuds over, but again, they couldn't hold out when it mattered. It's all well and good to play all over your opponents, but if you can't go the distance, what does it matter if you were brilliant for the best part of two games and still end up on the wrong side of the result. To be fair we have the smallest squad in the Championship and have played 6 games since 3rd Jan, including two lots of extra time. The lads were out on their feet. The lack of sympathy is to be expected , but lets not turn this into a serious analysis of our tactics.
dave birch Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 To be fair we have the smallest squad in the Championship and have played 6 games since 3rd Jan, including two lots of extra time. The lads were out on their feet. The lack of sympathy is to be expected , but lets not turn this into a serious analysis of our tactics. Hardly a serious analysis, but it's a question that's got to be asked. It's a question I'd be asking of Sam in a similar situation. The manager knew what was coming, he should have prepared for the eventuality. You've got to remember, they had a preview at WHL.
Mike Graham Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 what happened to the sell out crowd that the dingle from BBC Look North West/Radio Lancashire said was the case? Only 19,500...wot a disgrace! I am sure they will claim it was really 55,000!
philipl Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 Hardly a serious analysis, but it's a question that's got to be asked. It's a question I'd be asking of Sam in a similar situation. The manager knew what was coming, he should have prepared for the eventuality. You've got to remember, they had a preview at WHL. Burnley did an excellent shut-out job until the 118 minute. Then suddenly Spurs put four accurate passes together in and around the box playing Pav in for a snap shot which Jensen very nearly got enough on to deflect wide. The huge difference was Spurs brought Pavlyuchenko on as the sub forward and Burnley brought on Akenbiyi who got into threatening positions to attack Spuds but miscontrolled and lost posession of literally every ball played to him. That for me was the key reason the dingles are not going to Wembley.
dave birch Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 Burnley did an excellent shut-out job until the 118 minute. Then suddenly Spurs put four accurate passes together in and around the box playing Pav in for a snap shot which Jensen very nearly got enough on to deflect wide. The huge difference was Spurs brought Pavlyuchenko on as the sub forward and Burnley brought on Akenbiyi who got into threatening positions to attack Spuds but miscontrolled and lost posession of literally every ball played to him. That for me was the key reason the dingles are not going to Wembley. Could that then, be described as a "tactical mistake"? Bring on a player that can't handle the situation. Had Sam done that, would we be asking questions? I'm sure we would.
Exiledfan Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 Could that then, be described as a "tactical mistake"? Bring on a player that can't handle the situation. Had Sam done that, would we be asking questions? I'm sure we would. Sorry dave, but you're talking some chuff or you're fishing for a row.
philipl Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 Could that then, be described as a "tactical mistake"? Bring on a player that can't handle the situation. Had Sam done that, would we be asking questions? I'm sure we would. Tactical mistakes happen when you have options to chose between. I don't know enough about the dingles to know if Coyle had any choice.
dave birch Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 Sorry dave, but you're talking some chuff or you're fishing for a row. Hardly angling for a row, but look at the situation; you're 3-0 up, it's extra time, if it stays that way, you're through. Surely you beef up the defence? Tactical mistakes happen when you have options to chose between. I don't know enough about the dingles to know if Coyle had any choice. /quote] That may be the answer, philip
Exiledfan Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 There was nothing to beef up the defence with. We have 6 defenders at the club. One was suspended and the other left the pitch injured in the first half, meaning that all of our remaining defenders were on the pitch. Ade's day is long gone, but he's occasionally a handful (as he showed at Chelsea). I'd imagine Coyle looked onto the pitch and took off Paterson because he looked the most knackered. The other choices on the bench were a goalkeeper, an 18 year old striker or two attacking midfielders. Coyle has made plenty of tactical mistakes since he came to the club, but I don't think he made any last night. In the end fatigue and superior quality told.
dave birch Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 There was nothing to beef up the defence with. We have 6 defenders at the club. One was suspended and the other left the pitch injured in the first half, meaning that all of our remaining defenders were on the pitch. Ade's day is long gone, but he's occasionally a handful (as he showed at Chelsea). I'd imagine Coyle looked onto the pitch and took off Paterson because he looked the most knackered. The other choices on the bench were a goalkeeper, an 18 year old striker or two attacking midfielders. Coyle has made plenty of tactical mistakes since he came to the club, but I don't think he made any last night. In the end fatigue and superior quality told. So, you have given me an answer. It was one that philip alluded to in a previous post. It comes down to the situation (and this also applies to the Rovers, but they are already there and competing for now) you can't play with the big boys if you haven't the wherewithall to back up your would be status. It's a problem that all the wouldbes (no disrespect) have, and a problem all the dropouts from the prem don't want to have.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.