utd scumbags

Fuckin jammy bastards 89th minute Liverpool better beat Everton tomoro
Comments
42
You know it would happen
thats why They ARE champions,
liverpool playin on monday mate
Seriously, it feels as it was the 219439210390. time the bastards scored lucky in the end of the match.
Like Chelsea never won in last minutes
Parent
But they are no bastards. :)
Parent
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GROUPPPPPPPP MASTURBATINNNNNNNG
Parent
Quote 90' Chelsea [2 - 1] Stoke C.
60' [0 - 1] R. Delap
89' [1 - 1] J. Belletti
90' [2 - 1] F. Lampard


2 goals in the last 2 mins, if thats not lucky....
Parent
Deserved and a sign of will & balls.
Parent
QuoteSeriously, it feels as it was the 219439210390. time the bastards scored lucky in the end of the match.
Parent
United = lucky bastards, Chelsea = a good horse never jumps higher than it has to. Is it so hard to distinguish?
Parent
Lucky as in dominating the game for 60+ minutes? Possession 70-30 = lotto too.

Biased is the word i'm looking for.
Parent
Keep cool, as if I had meant this seriously. I haven't even seen united. But the time point was lucky and they stay bastards.
Parent
Sure they're not lucky bastards?
Parent
lampard scored in 94th minute, which makes it in 6 min not 2!
Parent
moar and moar lucky then rofl
Parent
belletti actually scored in the 87th minute, lampard 94th, and thank fuck for that, chelsea never ever score in the last minutes so to finally score feels good, and the fact that u as a utd fan are saying that about chelsea when its a known statistic that utd score the most goals in the dying minutes is a fucking joke
Parent
both teams were lucky, but both were deserved in the end :p
Parent
actually, it was the 8th time that utd scored a DECISIVE goal in the last minute, not even scored in the last minute, a goal that actually changes the game in the last minute, its a fucking joke.

chelsea had roughly... 40 attempts today, stoke had 3, if chelsea didnt win that game....
Parent
Indeed, this was my impression.
Parent
Statistical speaking that would mean Stoke was better then Chelsea if they score 1 out of 3 and Chelsea only 2 out of 40 :P
Parent
u can be a smartass and take it that way :P or else u can realise that chelsea actually set up camp in the stoke half and just bombarded them
Parent
http://www.sailinganarchy.com/general/2002/cool_test.htm

:D

Yep, but that doesn't take away the fact that they apparently suck at doing a good bombardment! :P
Parent
recently chelse have been fucking shit at scoring, its a joke, pisses the fuck out of me, i lose 5 years of my life watching a chelsea game nowadays, conceding a corner or throw in alone scares the shit out of me.
Parent
Hahaha! :D Well personally I don't care about football or who wins, as long as the game is an attractive and thrilling one to watch between equal teams :)
Parent
24/7 Gillette Soccer Saturday refresher!
fuck liverpool, MAN UNITED FOREVR
Hah, says a Liverpool fan. :P
Westhaaaam United!

WHU!
Chelsea just equalised as well so it isn't that bad. It's hardly jammy when you dominate a team for an entire match, though.
and what is chelsea? 2-1? wtf
Loving the glory hunters!!
watched the game, just went to the kitchen, thinking nothing will happen, got back and the score was 1-0 for manu, didn't even see a replay :z
was looking to be a great weekend for arsenal... :(
1 goal at the end = luck

2 goals at the end = skill
Everton will beat the shite on monday 1-2

Cahill
Arteta

and that playdo faced cunt Jizzard for the shite
Back to top