• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Who or what was the turning point for Leicester City ?

I think the phrase...'and their luck ran out' is about to happen. I just hope we are the ones who can take advantage and not some fudgers like Emirates Marketing Project...
 
Kandi1977 said:
Norway played nothing like Pulis does!! They used the long ball vs organised defence. Otherwise they tried to win the ball and counter with pace and many players. Not even remotely close to how Pulis sets up his teams.
Click to expand...
Pulis? I was comparing Leicester to 90's Norway.
 
StephenH said:
Both were leading a charmed life.
Click to expand...

I thought Denmark were a great team and certainly not park-the-bus like Norway. They had luck at the right moments but they were a good side where everything came together at the right time for them.
Also, their football was no comparison to the brick served up by Egil Olsen's Norway..
 
braineclipse said:
o_O
Click to expand...

I'm referring to the Yugoslavian wars and ethnic strife that led to the breakup of the country (to form Bosnia, Croatia, Slovenia etc). The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has not been the same since (in terms of its boundaries, social cohesion etc).

The war mainly started in 1991, when Yugoslavia were top of their Euro 1992 qualifying group and flying. They were expelled from international sporting competitions (or at leats the football ones IIRC). Denmark were second in that group and were given Yugoslavia's qualifying place.
 
glorygloryeze said:
I'm referring to the Yugoslavian wars and ethnic strife that led to the breakup of the country (to form Bosnia, Croatia, Slovenia etc). The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has not been the same since (in terms of its boundaries, social cohesion etc).

The war mainly started in 1991, when Yugoslavia were top of their Euro 1992 qualifying group and flying. They were expelled from international sporting competitions (or at leats the football ones IIRC). Denmark were second in that group and were given Yugoslavia's qualifying place.
Click to expand...

While war is bad (mmkay) the breakup of Yugoslavia into actual nation states (more or less) wasn't a bad thing. Yugoslavia not being the same, or rather not being there any more, is definitely not a bad thing. Tito's version of "social cohesion" is not something to longed for.
 
braineclipse said:
While war is bad (mmkay) the breakup of Yugoslavia into actual nation states (more or less) wasn't a bad thing. Yugoslavia not being the same, or rather not being there any more, is definitely not a bad thing. Tito's version of "social cohesion" is not something to longed for.
Click to expand...

I'll try not to derail this thread, but out of interest why do you say those things, particularly the bolded bit?
 
braineclipse said:
My preference for democratic nation states over semi-dictatorial socialist republics with severe limits on political and individual freedom.
Click to expand...

Last one on this thread: so are you saying that Tito's Yugoslavia really did have severe limits on political and individual freedom?
All that i've read thus far is that it was nowhere near the Soviet Union in that regard (apparently he stuck two fingers to the Kremlin most times) but that he wasn't fully Western-leaning either.
The impression i've always had was that Tito's Yugoslavia trod a rare line between 'East' and 'West', between 'Capitalist' and 'Socialist'.
 
glorygloryeze said:
Last one on this thread: so are you saying that Tito's Yugoslavia really did have severe limits on political and individual freedom?
All that i've read thus far is that it was nowhere near the Soviet Union in that regard (apparently he stuck two fingers to the Kremlin most times) but that he wasn't fully Western-leaning either.
The impression i've always had was that Tito's Yugoslavia trod a rare line between 'East' and 'West', between 'Capitalist' and 'Socialist'.
Click to expand...

Yes, or at least that's been my impression for sure. Though I'm not an expert.

Somewhere between the west and Stalinist/Soviet east is not a good middle ground to be in. The ethnic strife you talk about did not ignite over night, it was always there.
 
braineclipse said:
Yes, or at least that's been my impression for sure. Though I'm not an expert.

Somewhere between the west and Stalinist/Soviet east is not a good middle ground to be in. The ethnic strife you talk about did not ignite over night, it was always there.
Click to expand...

I'll take this to a new thread...
 
clownfoot said:
In answer to the original topic question - a racist orgy in Thailand
Click to expand...

Never thought about it like that!

Just like when John Terry was racist, Capello stepped down and Redknapp flirted with the England job from that point on! Scandals in football seem to always go against us even when it's not at our club.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back