Nobody that posts on here is better than Zat Knight! Any that could get anywhere near him are well passed their sell by date!! Sorry to be realistic but I have played with some real quality players in my younger days, one who played for Wanderers, and I can confidently say that the younger ones will not be upto the aforementioned standard.
Are You Better Than Zat Knight?
+12
Sluffy
scottjames30
Copper Dragon
Soul Kitchen
Keegan
wanderlust
Mr Magoo
Culcheth_White
observer
boltonbonce
Boggersbelief
Natasha Whittam
16 posters
Go to page : 1, 2, 3
22 Re: Are You Better Than Zat Knight? Mon Jan 20 2014, 20:32
Copper Dragon
Ivan Campo
There must be room for at least one foreigner in this team?
Here I am, right full back who doesn't shirk his defensive duties.
Although when we play Burnley, I'll have a poncy ankle knock or thigh strain.
Here I am, right full back who doesn't shirk his defensive duties.
Although when we play Burnley, I'll have a poncy ankle knock or thigh strain.
23 Re: Are You Better Than Zat Knight? Mon Jan 20 2014, 20:52
Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
Copper Dragon wrote:There must be room for at least one foreigner in this team?
Here I am, right full back who doesn't shirk his defensive duties.
Although when we play Burnley, I'll have a poncy ankle knock or thigh strain.
We have a strict "no Dingle" policy.
24 Re: Are You Better Than Zat Knight? Mon Jan 20 2014, 20:53
Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
Soul Kitchen wrote:Nobody that posts on here is better than Zat Knight!
You absolute cretin. I bet the majority of posters who can still run a bit are better than Zat Knight and Matt Mills.
Just because you've played with some right stumps doesn't make the rest of us crap.
25 Re: Are You Better Than Zat Knight? Mon Jan 20 2014, 21:12
Soul Kitchen
Ivan Campo
It comes down to one thing, judgement. You will never better me on anything football wise, it's as simple as Bogdan the Meerkat. If you wanted to argue about burning bacon and donkey stoning steps I would gladly bow to your experience!!Natasha Whittam wrote:Soul Kitchen wrote:Nobody that posts on here is better than Zat Knight!
You absolute cretin. I bet the majority of posters who can still run a bit are better than Zat Knight and Matt Mills.
Just because you've played with some right stumps doesn't make the rest of us crap.
For now I know I am right and you are shovelling bullshit once again. Don't forget to shower before bed, wouldn't want "teddy" catching any germs!!!
27 Re: Are You Better Than Zat Knight? Mon Jan 20 2014, 21:21
Soul Kitchen
Ivan Campo
Can you actually read?Mr Magoo wrote:1-0 to Nat
28 Re: Are You Better Than Zat Knight? Mon Jan 20 2014, 21:23
scottjames30
Nat Lofthouse
Soul 1-0 Magoo.
29 Re: Are You Better Than Zat Knight? Mon Jan 20 2014, 21:29
Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
Soul Kitchen wrote:
It comes down to one thing, judgement. You will never better me on anything football wise
I think the last few years prove that theory incorrect.
30 Re: Are You Better Than Zat Knight? Mon Jan 20 2014, 21:37
Soul Kitchen
Ivan Campo
You need to realise Nat that football is more than just looking at mens' legs and fantasising that one of them might take you to his appartment in Bulgaria for a fanny singe!
31 Re: Are You Better Than Zat Knight? Mon Jan 20 2014, 21:47
Mr Magoo
Youri Djorkaeff
I had forgot that one,
32 Re: Are You Better Than Zat Knight? Mon Jan 20 2014, 21:49
Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
Soul Kitchen wrote:You need to realise Nat that football is more than just looking at mens' legs and fantasising that one of them might take you to his appartment in Bulgaria for a fanny singe!
Despite the fact I'm half your age I bet I've been to more BWFC matches. I also bet I've shared more pillow talk with professional footballers than you've even dreamt of.
35 Re: Are You Better Than Zat Knight? Mon Jan 20 2014, 21:53
Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
scottjames30 wrote:SLAG.
If you had tits and a fanny wouldn't you use them to sleep with Iain Dowie, Rob Earnshaw and Dean Windass?
36 Re: Are You Better Than Zat Knight? Mon Jan 20 2014, 21:56
scottjames30
Nat Lofthouse
Not really no, they all look like something out of star-wars.
37 Re: Are You Better Than Zat Knight? Mon Jan 20 2014, 21:58
Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
scottjames30 wrote:Not really no, they all look like something out of star-wars.
Harrison Ford was fit.
38 Re: Are You Better Than Zat Knight? Mon Jan 20 2014, 22:17
Soul Kitchen
Ivan Campo
Highly unlikely on the first one, and l wouldn't be interested in the second one!Natasha Whittam wrote:Soul Kitchen wrote:You need to realise Nat that football is more than just looking at mens' legs and fantasising that one of them might take you to his appartment in Bulgaria for a fanny singe!
Despite the fact I'm half your age I bet I've been to more BWFC matches. I also bet I've shared more pillow talk with professional footballers than you've even dreamt of.
Given the fact that the only action your fanny has seen in the last ten years involved the smell of burning pubes, were the footballers concerned of the Hitzlsperger ilk?
39 Re: Are You Better Than Zat Knight? Mon Jan 20 2014, 22:37
Sluffy
Admin
I'm probably Knight's biggest critic - I'm on record of saying how shit he is on the day that Megson signed him - but he's a professional athlete, so no, I could never, ever played professional football whereas he has (or rather he gets paid for doing so!).
Were I WAS better than the fecking clown, was that I had an ability to 'read' a game and organise the defence.
Many years back I played with a bloke who was a good player (for the standard that we played at) and he played the 'sweeper' role. The problem was though that the games we played had no proper linesmen - usually someone from our team who wasn't playing ran one line and someone from the opposition ran the other. So depending on which linesmen you had determined if you got the off-side decissions or not.
It seemed clear to me that our best player was being wasted for at least half of every match we played because of the dodgy opposition linesmen, so I told him to 'sweep' in FRONT of the back four instead - and it worked a treat for him and our side.
These days that very same role is called a defensive midfielder and every team as one but back then nobody had even thought about such a role - it simply did not exist.
Now I'm certainly not claiming I invented the role but merely showing an example of how I could see a problem we had in the team and how I managed to solve it and improve the defence based on the circumstances and the ability of the player we had.
Now cast your minds back a couple of weeks to when Knight was running towards our keeper who had come too far off his line - did Knight put the ball in row Z - did he fuck. He passed to a badly placed Lonegran and let in their forward to score a goal. Fecking disgraceful in all honesty.
Yes Knight may be a fine athlete but he's fucking clueless in his head.
And worse still in my opinion are the three clowns, Megson, Coyle and Freedman who have picked him to play in over 200 games for our club!
On reflection you may as well have played me, at least I would have known what positions I should have been in and what I should do with the ball - even though I would have been miles to slow to do them. The results would still have been the same - but at least I wouldn't be grinning like a Cheshire cat after we'd just been stuffed again - unlike Mr Knight.
Were I WAS better than the fecking clown, was that I had an ability to 'read' a game and organise the defence.
Many years back I played with a bloke who was a good player (for the standard that we played at) and he played the 'sweeper' role. The problem was though that the games we played had no proper linesmen - usually someone from our team who wasn't playing ran one line and someone from the opposition ran the other. So depending on which linesmen you had determined if you got the off-side decissions or not.
It seemed clear to me that our best player was being wasted for at least half of every match we played because of the dodgy opposition linesmen, so I told him to 'sweep' in FRONT of the back four instead - and it worked a treat for him and our side.
These days that very same role is called a defensive midfielder and every team as one but back then nobody had even thought about such a role - it simply did not exist.
Now I'm certainly not claiming I invented the role but merely showing an example of how I could see a problem we had in the team and how I managed to solve it and improve the defence based on the circumstances and the ability of the player we had.
Now cast your minds back a couple of weeks to when Knight was running towards our keeper who had come too far off his line - did Knight put the ball in row Z - did he fuck. He passed to a badly placed Lonegran and let in their forward to score a goal. Fecking disgraceful in all honesty.
Yes Knight may be a fine athlete but he's fucking clueless in his head.
And worse still in my opinion are the three clowns, Megson, Coyle and Freedman who have picked him to play in over 200 games for our club!
On reflection you may as well have played me, at least I would have known what positions I should have been in and what I should do with the ball - even though I would have been miles to slow to do them. The results would still have been the same - but at least I wouldn't be grinning like a Cheshire cat after we'd just been stuffed again - unlike Mr Knight.
40 Re: Are You Better Than Zat Knight? Mon Jan 20 2014, 23:51
Alf Hooker
David Lee
In reply to the original question - my granny is still better than 'Twat Shite' and she died in 1978 - he was shit at Fulham, shite at Villa and has just gone on to perfect his brand of 'total shitness' here.
Go to page : 1, 2, 3
Similar topics
Permissions in this forum:
You can reply to topics in this forum