wazua Thu, May 7, 2026
Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Log In

5 Pages«<2345>
Man - U vs Chelsea
TAZ
#31 Posted : Wednesday, December 22, 2010 4:41:31 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 11/14/2007
Posts: 4,152
The Arsenal/Stoke game was postponed despite the Emirates Stadium having some of the best facilities in England.....Stamford Bridge is also in London so clearly they experienced the same weather conditions. Man Utd have a poor record at Stamford Bridge so i really can't see why Chelsea would be afraid to play them...
MaichBlack
#32 Posted : Wednesday, December 22, 2010 5:24:04 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 7/22/2009
Posts: 7,912
TAZ wrote:
The Arsenal/Stoke game was postponed despite the Emirates Stadium having some of the best facilities in England.....Stamford Bridge is also in London so clearly they experienced the same weather conditions. Man Utd have a poor record at Stamford Bridge so i really can't see why Chelsea would be afraid to play them...

The Arsenal game was postponed 3 hours to kick off. The Chelsea game more than 24hrs before! What was the hurry for? They were worried that if they don't seize the chance to postpone it might be too late - the weather might get better the next day.

To the best of my knowledge, the only games that are postponed a day before are the ones being played in stadiums without under soil heating - and this basically affects newly promoted sides!
Never count on making a good sale. Have the purchase price be so attractive that even a mediocre sale gives good returns.
mwenza
#33 Posted : Wednesday, December 22, 2010 5:56:13 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 4/22/2009
Posts: 2,863
For me the reason why the match was postponed is a no-brainer. Somebody must have been very afraid. Want to bet who?
IF YOU EXPECT ME TO POST ANYTHING POSITIVE ABOUT ASENO, YOU MAY AS WELL SIT ON A PIN
jguru
#34 Posted : Wednesday, December 22, 2010 7:25:33 PM
Rank: Veteran

Joined: 10/25/2007
Posts: 1,574
The reason why the matches were postponed was mainly because the slippery conditions around the stadium and the harsh weather posed safety threats to the fans, especially traveling fans. All the stadiums were alright to play in.
Set out to correct the world's wrongs and you will most certainly wind up adding to them.
mwenza
#35 Posted : Wednesday, December 22, 2010 9:08:59 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 4/22/2009
Posts: 2,863
jguru wrote:
The reason why the matches were postponed was mainly because the slippery conditions around the stadium and the harsh weather posed safety threats to the fans, especially traveling fans. All the stadiums were alright to play in.



Problem was that there were more championship matches played than EPL matches. Not withstanding the fact that the premiership clubs, with their affluence, have better facilities.

The conditions around the stadia for the championship teams are surely expected to be worse. Unless of coz the safety of their fans is less important than that of their EPL counterparts. Or are there no travelling fans for the championship teams?

Hapa iko kitu.
IF YOU EXPECT ME TO POST ANYTHING POSITIVE ABOUT ASENO, YOU MAY AS WELL SIT ON A PIN
Buster
#36 Posted : Thursday, December 23, 2010 10:46:04 AM
Rank: Veteran

Joined: 5/17/2007
Posts: 1,345
FROM THE ENGLISH PRESS.....

People Who Like To Say 'Hmmm'
It is not a question that can be easily answered. Just why was Chelsea v Manchester United called off early on Saturday afternoon when Ipswich v Leicester was played a couple of hours later in a blizzard?

Sven-Goran Eriksson described the Portman Road farce as "very bad PR for football", but with no further snow falling on Saturday afternoon in west London, the decision to call off this weekend's Premier League's showdown event seemed equally perplexing as early as Saturday night. On a weekend when Stoke fans, only informed of Arsenal's postponement three hours before the scheduled kick-off, were stuck on gritless, gridlocked motorways until 1am, any suggestion that a postponement was made in haste can be considered untimely, but by Sunday morning it was hard not to be slightly perplexed at the decision made from Stamford Bridge.

In their ultra-brief announcement issued at around 1pm on Saturday, Chelsea declared that the postponement had been made 'following consultation with the Police and the local authority', with the club apparently deeming the words 'There has been heavy snow in London on Saturday' as sufficient explanation for the decision. It could be argued that there was nothing more to be said, but those words do not tally with the Chelsea statement issued ten days ago when another news item on their website modestly announced:

'The pitch would have to be frozen solid or completely under water to be the reason for a game to be called off, which shouldn't happen at Stamford Bridge. In this day and age, with all the modern technology, it is very rare you get a game called off.'

Hmmm.
winston
#37 Posted : Thursday, December 23, 2010 11:10:02 AM
Rank: Member

Joined: 4/14/2010
Posts: 806
Location: Nairobi
And the accusations go on and on.

But Man-u fans should also know that

(1)they have not won at the bridge in 8 years,
(2) Chelsea played with lots of belief in the previous game against spurs and are on the mend.
(3) it is never a foregone conclusion that you are going to walk-allover a team with its back against the wall
(4)chelsea did the double on man-u last season.

Agreed it would have been the best time to meet chelsea...but a win was not guaranteed for man-u.

Chelsea would have known that postponing the game would definately mean that the two manu/chelsea games were most likely going to be title-deciders as they would have to played towards the end of the season with 6 points up for grabs.

Now if chelsea knew that, as they must have, then it is either supreme confidence that they can take off the 6 points off man-u or sheer gambling. I would go for the confidence (plus we can always count on gerrard/liverpool to back pass and help us stop man-u from another title!).

As for now man-u can worry about sunderland, as chelsea prepare to visit Arsenal. Maybe the table would have changed come tuesday morning.
mwenza
#38 Posted : Thursday, December 23, 2010 12:00:37 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 4/22/2009
Posts: 2,863
Almost everybody believes that the reason Man U surrendered the title to chelsea last season was as a result of the former's controversial double loss to the latter. Personally I know how the title was lost.......By losing 1-0 to lowly Burnley earlier on in the season!! The same way aseno fans came to rue the loss to lowly shakhtar Donetsk in CL this season.


True there is no knowing what would have happened had Man U played Chelshit last weekend. However we now know what chelshit think of Man U!!
IF YOU EXPECT ME TO POST ANYTHING POSITIVE ABOUT ASENO, YOU MAY AS WELL SIT ON A PIN
pesa paps
#39 Posted : Thursday, December 23, 2010 2:28:01 PM
Rank: New-farer

Joined: 12/17/2010
Posts: 18
Location: naivasha
mwenza, man utd lost the title when they could not even score a goal vs blackburn. the 3rd last game of the season.

Chelscum postponing the match last weekend clearly revealed them for whom they are, tell me the county council did not receive a generous xmass gift from abromovich to postpone the game.
Lets see how chelscum fairs against arsenil on 27th. Am seeing a draw.
winston
#40 Posted : Thursday, December 23, 2010 4:52:55 PM
Rank: Member

Joined: 4/14/2010
Posts: 806
Location: Nairobi
@pesa paps...the answer to you last question is obvious. A chelsea win. Let's revisit come tuesday.

@mwenza...nice one. But as always, we have respect for man-u.
5 Pages«<2345>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Copyright © 2026 Wazua.co.ke. All Rights Reserved.