• Sign up free today!

    Join in on the discussion, prediction leagues and competitions today! Sign up takes no longer than 5 minutes.

Sign in to follow this  
football forum

Merson “Colombia are a poor side”

Recommended Posts

You’ve got to hand it to some ex pros and sections of the English media. They know jack shit about football. The bias and uneducated arrogance is astounding. Colombia won’t be a walk over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has he been on the sauce again. Embarrassing. Pundits like him are so reactionary. Base their opinions on seeing snippets of one game and not actually analysing the way they play or individuals within. Then get egg on their face. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing that is poor was his choice of words.. 

Anyone that thinks those players won't be giving 100% on that pitch during the knockouts has MDF between his ears... 

Is he forgetting this is England they are playing... xD

If anything can go wrong then it probably will, if we don't show them full respect we could end up on a flight home with all the rest.. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merson is a helmet. Why Skysports employ him is completely beyond me. Oh wait, he was a popular player that knows fuck all about football. That’s about the criteria these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually what he said is that Colombia have been poor, not Colombia are poor.

That is hardly that controversial an opinion if at all. Colombia should not have gone through, Senegal deserved to imo.

Whenever someone refers to a side as poor it is usually poor by a changeable standard not a universal one. So were Colombia poor by what we expected of them against Senegal? Possibly. 

Were England poor in the 2nd half against Tunisia despite dominating? Yes. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Harvsky said:

Actually what he said is that Colombia have been poor, not Colombia are poor.

That is hardly that controversial an opinion if at all. Colombia should not have gone through, Senegal deserved to imo.

Whenever someone refers to a side as poor it is usually poor by a changeable standard not a universal one. So were Colombia poor by what we expected of them against Senegal? Possibly. 

Were England poor in the 2nd half against Tunisia despite dominating? Yes. 

Amusingly, if that’s the case. It’s not how it’s been reported. Artistic license an all from the tabloids. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Harvsky said:

Actually what he said is that Colombia have been poor, not Colombia are poor.

That is hardly that controversial an opinion if at all. Colombia should not have gone through, Senegal deserved to imo.

So basically @Batard was just cherry picking bits out of the whole statement without providing a link either... 

What a Rascal... B|

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Harvsky said:

Actually what he said is that Colombia have been poor, not Colombia are poor.

That is hardly that controversial an opinion if at all. Colombia should not have gone through, Senegal deserved to imo.

Whenever someone refers to a side as poor it is usually poor by a changeable standard not a universal one. So were Colombia poor by what we expected of them against Senegal? Possibly. 

Were England poor in the 2nd half against Tunisia despite dominating? Yes. 

I'd say Japan were the least deserving of the three,  based on general play. Colombia are better than Senegal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Artful Dodger said:

I'd say Japan were the least deserving of the three,  based on general play. Colombia are better than Senegal.

I can buy that about Japan, but for me Senegal did not deserve to lose to Colombia on the day. I don't think Colombia could have had any arguments if they had of lost that game 1-0 even.

I watched that game hoping Colombia would go out because on paper they were the biggest threat to England from the group, but on the day they really didn't play as well as they should at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
football forum
8 hours ago, Harvsky said:

Actually what he said is that Colombia have been poor, not Colombia are poor.

That is hardly that controversial an opinion if at all. Colombia should not have gone through, Senegal deserved to imo.

Colombia have been scraping their way into "next rounds" for a while now. After losing at home to Paraguay, we had the chance to knock them out but we played a terrible game and drew 1-1, seeing us into 5th and them in directly. 

I think Chile were better than both us and Colombia, as much as I hate to admit it. I can't complain with how things went, but it amazes me that Colombia keep on getting further when they haven't played good football consistently in 3 years now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Cannabis said:

Just realised the quote was from Merson :dam:. Comfortably the worst pundit on Sky Sports, just behind Phil Thompson. 

Thompson was voted the worst pundit on tv. He is awful I think a lot of people on here could do better

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bluewolf said:

The only thing that is poor was his choice of words.. 

Anyone that thinks those players won't be giving 100% on that pitch during the knockouts has MDF between his ears... 

Is he forgetting this is England they are playing... xD

If anything can go wrong then it probably will, if we don't show them full respect we could end up on a flight home with all the rest.. 

To be fair a lot of teams get accused of not giving everything during the knock outs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Blue said:

Colombia have been scraping their way into "next rounds" for a while now. After losing at home to Paraguay, we had the chance to knock them out but we played a terrible game and drew 1-1, seeing us into 5th and them in directly. 

I think Chile were better than both us and Colombia, as much as I hate to admit it. I can't complain with how things went, but it amazes me that Colombia keep on getting further when they haven't played good football consistently in 3 years now.

I agree they´re inconsistent and perhaps it´s time for Miguel Borja to start in the place of Falcao, but man, when James and Juanfer Quintero are on their days, they´re a tough team to beat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
football forum
3 minutes ago, El Profesor said:

I agree they´re inconsistent and perhaps it´s time for Miguel Borja to start in the place of Falcao, but man, when James and Juanfer Quintero are on their days, they´re a tough team to beat.

Colombia's defence have gotten them this far. Davinson Sanchez and Yerry Mina are very effective, but in attack they look clueless. I think this is down to Falcao playing as a lone striker which has been shown to not work, and Pekerman insists. I'm glad they've decided to find an attacking midfield partnership but that wasn't the big issue at hand. 

Not sure if Miguel Borja is the solution. I've always seen him more as a player that needed a lot of space to score 1 every 5 chances. He may have developed at Palmeiras but I wasn't a big fan when he was at Atletico Nacional. That said, Carlos Bacca is definitely not the solution.

One thing Colombia is missing is Teo Gutierrez. I've never been a very big fan of him but Pekerman insisted and I kind of see why now. He's very different to what Falcao and Bacca were and could work as a lone striker. I'm not convinced this was the reason they succeeded in 2014, there were more underlying factors like a better game plan, more dynamic full backs and an on form Yepes which also allowed more leadership. Ospina back then was also one of the best keepers in the world. Now he's a shadow of what he once was. 

They have a lot of quality and for me are better on paper than England, but I'm not sure what happened to Pekerman. He experiments too much and can't decide on a lineup. And when they do click one game all of the sudden, they stick with the lineup only to perform poorly in the next game and then going back to the drawing board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Blue said:

Colombia's defence have gotten them this far. Davinson Sanchez and Yerry Mina are very effective, but in attack they look clueless. I think this is down to Falcao playing as a lone striker which has been shown to not work, and Pekerman insists. I'm glad they've decided to find an attacking midfield partnership but that wasn't the big issue at hand. 

Not sure if Miguel Borja is the solution. I've always seen him more as a player that needed a lot of space to score 1 every 5 chances. He may have developed at Palmeiras but I wasn't a big fan when he was at Atletico Nacional. That said, Carlos Bacca is definitely not the solution.

One thing Colombia is missing is Teo Gutierrez. I've never been a very big fan of him but Pekerman insisted and I kind of see why now. He's very different to what Falcao and Bacca were and could work as a lone striker. I'm not convinced this was the reason they succeeded in 2014, there were more underlying factors like a better game plan, more dynamic full backs and an on form Yepes which also allowed more leadership. Ospina back then was also one of the best keepers in the world. Now he's a shadow of what he once was. 

They have a lot of quality and for me are better on paper than England, but I'm not sure what happened to Pekerman. He experiments too much and can't decide on a lineup. And when they do click one game all of the sudden, they stick with the lineup only to perform poorly in the next game and then going back to the drawing board.

Agree about the defence. The Davinson-Mina partnership is really good and Mina is a huge threat on set pieces. He´s been Colombia best player in this World Cup, along with Quintero. 

I don´t think they´re missing Teo. The guy from Junior that Pékerman should have called is Yimmi Chará and not him. Having a guy like Chará in the bench to play fully rested with his level of commitment and intensity would´ve been big for Colombia. I´d also have called Edwin Cardona. 

Borja is what he is. He is not brilliant, but he works his socks off upfront and at this point, I´d have him over Radamel. 

 

 

 

Edited by El Profesor
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
football forum
4 minutes ago, El Profesor said:

Agree about the defence. The Davinson-Mina partnership is really good and Mina is a huge threat on set pieces. He´s been Colombia best player in this World Cup, along with Quntero. 

I don´t think they´re missing Teo. The guy from Junior that Pékerman should have called is Yimmi Chará and not him. Having a guy like Chará in the bench to play fully rested with his level of commitment and intensity would´ve been big for Colombia. I´d also have called Edwin Cardona. 

Borja is what he is. He is not brilliant, but he works his socks off upfront and at this point, I´d have him over Radamel. 

 

 

 

Chara is great, he was good for Colombia too in the last bit of the qualifiers. Surprised he wasn't called up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This won't be easy, especially given England's bad record against South American opposition in the knock outs of the tournament, although this Colombia team aren't like they were 4 years ago and are a lot more beatable, while the English team look in their best position in years. England are the favourite but the Colombians shouldn't be underestimated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardly poor, i even believe England will struggle against them. One off match both teams will go all out. However as stated above Merson is an tool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merson should give up punditry and stick to what he’s good at: slowly killing himself with his alcoholism.

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Merson should give up punditry and stick to what he’s good at: slowly killing himself with his alcoholism.

And cocaine 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Advertisement