Mario Bib-lotelli

[H_B]

When people claim your view is not valid because the incredibly narrow of people who post on this section on this forum do not share my view

Two things.

Your view wasnt valid because it wasn't valid.

I didn't mention the peoiple on this website. I said I had seen no one other than you claim Ibrahimovic outperformed Pato, because he well, didn't. Please feel free to provide perhaps some journalist or pundits who share your view.

Whilst it's clearly possible in theory for one person's opinion to be correct, in the face of overwhelming views to the contrary, in general this is not the case. And in this specific case, it certainly isn't.

You backed yourself into a corner by making a ludicrous statement. Not for the first time I expect.

if you look back to that thread nobody brought forward evidence to counter the claim

What evidence would you suggest is brought forward to support an opinion on two players' relative performances?

It was an entirely appropriate position to take, and one I am more than willing to defend now.

Your defence is really just repeating the same falsehoods though. That's not really a defence, more the squealings of a child.

[dubs]

Who is Yoann Gouffran anyway?

[H_B]

What, the shot that deflected of a defender?

Yeah, i was wondering which goal Balotelli assisted too.

[dubs]

Excellent retort, can see me going back into 'hiding' after that one.

[port-ton]

Excellent retort, can see me going back into 'hiding' after that one.

good.

[Supras]

I didn't mention the peoiple on this website. I said I had seen no one other than you claim Ibrahimovic outperformed Pato, because he well, didn't. Please feel free to provide perhaps some journalist or pundits who share your view.

Whilst it's clearly possible in theory for one person's opinion to be correct, in the face of overwhelming views to the contrary, in general this is not the case. And in this specific case, it certainly isn't.

You backed yourself into a corner by making a ludicrous statement. Not for the first time I expect.

Your defence is really just repeating the same falsehoods though. That's not really a defence, more the squealings of a child.

Did you look? I certainly didn't, the overwhelming majority of football journalists are morons. If some journalists did state it would that make it valid? That's a ridiculous stand point to take. What jorunalists have explicitly said Pato was better - despite doing pretty much nothing in the game whilst Ibrahimovic did quite a bit in an attacking sense.

Overwhelming views to the contrary? You place far too much importance on the views on others, it really doesn't bother me.

Not at all, if anyone wants to talk specifically about the performance of the two - hint : not just Mark Lawrenson said Pato was better - then I would be happy to do so. Nobody took me up on it, because they knew they wouldn't be able to.

Your recent descent into childish insults is both cringeworthy and disappointing.

[port-ton]

Did you look? I certainly didn't, the overwhelming majority of football journalists are morons. If some journalists did state it would that make it valid? That's a ridiculous stand point to take. What jorunalists have explicitly said Pato was better - despite doing pretty much nothing in the game whilst Ibrahimovic did quite a bit in an attacking sense.

Overwhelming views to the contrary? You place far too much importance on the views on others, it really doesn't bother me.

Not at all, if anyone wants to talk specifically about the performance of the two - hint : not just Mark Lawrenson said Pato was better - then I would be happy to do so. Nobody took me up on it, because they knew they wouldn't be able to.

Your recent descent into childish insults is both cringeworthy and disappointing.

Every match report and player ratings i've looked at has had both Pato and Ibrahimovic with poor ratings, with Ibrahimovic having the worst. Pato managed to get a 7 rating in a few of them, while Ibrahimovic was always between a 5 and 6 rating.

Of course i haven't been able to find any articles with players, former players or managers dicussing it because funnily enough im sure they couldn't give two shits.

i guess we'll just have to form our own opinions!!!

[Supras]

Every match report and player ratings i've looked at has had both Pato and Ibrahimovic with poor ratings, with Ibrahimovic having the worst. Pato managed to get a 7 rating in a few of them, while Ibrahimovic was always between a 5 and 6 rating.

Of course i haven't been able to find any articles with players, former players or managers dicussing it because funnily enough im sure they couldn't give two shits.

i guess we'll just have to form our own opinions!!!

The old 'my own two eyes' argument, why don't you provide at least some of them? I don't remember looking at any match reports because I actually watched the second leg.

I have no idea what the point of the second paragraph is. I'm not the one who brought it up in this thread, but where were all these people when the statement was originally made? What did Pato do in the game that was so good? Nobody has provided an answer which Ibrahimovic incisive passing lead to a great opportunity for Robinho and he had the best effort in the game. But still, no journalists have stated it explicitly, so it can't possibly be true.

New territory for quite a few, it would seem.

[H_B]

Overwhelming views to the contrary? You place far too much importance on the views on others, it really doesn't bother me.

Actually no. I set store in pretty much no one's opinion bar my own.

That said, if I have an opinoin on a performance that disagrees with well, pretty much every other viewer, i would have to be a rampant egomanic not to think "hmm, maybe I'm missing something here".

I also don't believe for a second you think Ibrahimovic outperformed Pato at White Hart Lane incidentally. Your motives for claiming he did don't exactly need Columbo called in to investigate.

[H_B]

The old 'my own two eyes' argument, why don't you provide at least some of them? I don't remember looking at any match reports because I actually watched the second leg.

I have no idea what the point of the second paragraph is. I'm not the one who brought it up in this thread, but where were all these people when the statement was originally made? What did Pato do in the game that was so good? Nobody has provided an answer which Ibrahimovic incisive passing lead to a great opportunity for Robinho and he had the best effort in the game. But still, no journalists have stated it explicitly, so it can't possibly be true.

New territory for quite a few, it would seem.

I gave you independent reviews of the first leg, indicating Crouch's performance pissed all over Ibrahimovic'. Which of course it did.

Your response? "Umm, that's not fair as they are English speaking websites.."

[Supras]

Actually no. I set store in pretty much no one's opinion bar my own.

That said, if I have an opinoin on a performance that disagrees with well, pretty much every other viewer, i would have to be a rampant egomanic not to think "hmm, maybe I'm missing something here".

I also don't believe for a second you think Ibrahimovic outperformed Pato at White Hart Lane incidentally. Your motives for claiming he did don't exactly need Columbo called in to investigate.

Yeah, but it's not pretty much every other viewer, it is only the very few people who post on this section, on this forum, on that particular match day thread, and on that particular issue. I'd be surprised if more than 5, 6 people commented on it. Apart from these hallowed journalists ratings which have never surfaced. Maybe you'd feel pressure to change your opinion because of 5 or 6 forum posts (that's quite a generous estimate the more I think about it) but I don't. Maybe you have crippling self doubt.

Well, when I was more than keen for a debate on the issue at the time, no one took it up, and now you bizarrely bring it up weeks later at no apparent behest, why? What are your motives for doing so?

Oh yes, that must be my rampant anti Brazilian - anti Pato bias that was must be entirely sub conscious, much like all my other supposedly bias behaviour.

The mudslinging is average at best, but there has been a distinct lack of actual credence in this debate from you beyond "well, journalists gave him a low rating!!112"

[Supras]

I gave you independent reviews of the first leg, indicating Crouch's performance pissed all over Ibrahimovic'. Which of course it did.

Your response? "Umm, that's not fair as they are English speaking websites.."

Evidence?

I didn't even see most of the first leg.

And, hint, maybe some media outlets will display bias! The amount of credence you place on journalists is concerning, it's people like you who believe everything they read in a newspaper.

[port-ton]

The old 'my own two eyes' argument, why don't you provide at least some of them? I don't remember looking at any match reports because I actually watched the second leg.

I have no idea what the point of the second paragraph is. I'm not the one who brought it up in this thread, but where were all these people when the statement was originally made? What did Pato do in the game that was so good? Nobody has provided an answer which Ibrahimovic incisive passing lead to a great opportunity for Robinho and he had the best effort in the game. But still, no journalists have stated it explicitly, so it can't possibly be true.

New territory for quite a few, it would seem.

http://www.goal.com/en-gb/match/54838/tottenham-vs-milan/report

http://www.skysports.com/football/match_report/0,19764,11065_3349249,00.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/champions-league/8371566/Tottenham-Hotspur-v-AC-Milan-how-the-players-rated.html

Alexandre Pato: Proved his quality when he changed the game as a second-half substitute during the first leg and was again a huge danger. His pace caused real problems and almost created a first-half goal when he rounded Gomes. Also shot into the side-netting during the second-half. 7

Zlatan Ibrahimovic: Milan’s target man began brightly but gradually drifted out of the game. Forced a good first-half save with his free-kick but was the least dangerous of Milan’s attacking trio. 5

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/playerratings/football/match/3125028

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Tottenham-v-AC-Milan-player-ratings-MirrorFootball-Neil-McLeman-on-who-were-the-best-and-worst-performers-on-the-night-article712522.html

Alexandre Pato: The young Brazilian looked the best of Milan's attacking three with his pace and trickery. Picked up a silly booking for encroachment. Rating - 8

Zlatan Ibrahimovic: The big Swede, who scored twice on his last visit to North London at Arsenal last season, extended his run of wins against English clubs to 13. Rating - 6

http://www.espnstar.com/football/from-the-desk/news/detail/item593135/Tottenham-vs-AC-Milan-Player-Ratings/

Alexandro Pato - 7

The most lively of the three Milan forwards - always looking to run in to through balls, always trying to make something happen. Got desperately close to goal a couple of times, but it was not his night.

Zlatan Ibrahimovic - 3.5

Failed to live up to his big reputation as the Spurs centre-backs kept close tabs on him. Did not put in the extra effort which could have made a difference.

http://www.skysports.com/football/user_ratings/0,19768,11065_3349249,00.html

[H_B]

Apart from these hallowed journalists ratings which have never surfaced.

Why bother. You ignored them the last time because they were in English (despite some not being from England).

[port-ton]

There you go, i picked the first 7 i could see from google from reputable sources that didnt look like they'd give my computer a virus, and not one of them, just like every single person on here agreed with your two eyes.

I also love it how you continually ask for evidence when debating, but if someone asks you for evidence you give it the old " i dont have to give evidence to be proven right, you have to give evidence to prove me wrong " spiel.

[H_B]

Evidence?

Here you go :-

I'm not sure if you want me to replay every minute of the game, but here are some of the media's player ratings :-

Telegraph :- Peter Crouch led the line superbly. Caused considerable aerial problems throughout the first half... 8 out of 10

Zlatan Ibrahimovic :- Starved of service throughout the first half, but did almost win a penalty. 6 out of 10

Goal.com :-

Peter Crouch :- Was Tottenham's main target when they won the ball...The England striker looked to pull away to the far post at every opportunity and won his fair share of balls in the air. 7/10

Zlatan Ibrahimovic :- Did not feature at all in the first half, but after the break he showed small glimpses of his talent, but the big Swede had had far better nights. 6.5/10

ESPNSTAR.com :-

Zlatan Ibrahimovic :-

Worked hard, but Tottenham denied him any space whatsoever. Consequently, the Swede was rendered largely ineffective. Not too great defensively, as usual. 5.5/10

Peter Crouch :-

Worried Milan throughout, with the Italians struggling to deal with his height and heading prowess. Made a good run to bury Lennon's square ball into the net. 8/10.

You :-

"And I wonder how many of these neutral sources were English focused media outlets and how many were Italian?

I didn't even see most of the first leg.

Yes I know. Didn't of course stop you passing comment on the realtive performances of Crouch and Ibrahimovic in a game you didn't even watch the entire first half of.

[Swampy]

You've walked right into his trap. When he asks for evidence it's so he can say that the evidence doesn't count because "people are flawed."

It's classic zealot thinking. If X proves my point, the opposite of X must prove it too.

[port-ton]

You've walked right into his trap. When he asks for evidence it's so he can say that the evidence doesn't count because "people are flawed."

It's classic zealot thinking. If X proves my point, the opposite of X must prove it too.

No no his usual is asking for evidence, then when it's provided he mocks the person for wasting time going to look for evidence because really, it really REALLY isn't that important to him, despite the previous 12 posts asking for evidence.

[Supras]

http://www.goal.com/...vs-milan/report

http://www.skysports...3349249,00.html

http://www.telegraph...yers-rated.html

http://www.guardian....l/match/3125028

http://www.mirrorfoo...icle712522.html

http://www.espnstar....Player-Ratings/

http://www.skysports...3349249,00.html

Why are you providing less quotes than sources, do some of the sources not say Pato was better?

I have to say, all these journalists are making me change my mind. I am really that weak willed.

Why bother. You ignored them the last time because they were in English (despite some not being from England).

Again, when? You just make things up, don't you?

There you go, i picked the first 7 i could see from google from reputable sources that didnt look like they'd give my computer a virus, and not one of them, just like every single person on here agreed with your two eyes.

I also love it how you continually ask for evidence when debating, but if someone asks you for evidence you give it the old " i dont have to give evidence to be proven right, you have to give evidence to prove me wrong " spiel.

Every single person on here? Well, that's totally incorrect for a start.

Why have you quoted that? It's the case of whoever makes the first assertion.

Here you go :-

I'm not sure if you want me to replay every minute of the game, but here are some of the media's player ratings :-

Telegraph :- Peter Crouch led the line superbly. Caused considerable aerial problems throughout the first half... 8 out of 10

Zlatan Ibrahimovic :- Starved of service throughout the first half, but did almost win a penalty. 6 out of 10

Goal.com :-

Peter Crouch :- Was Tottenham's main target when they won the ball...The England striker looked to pull away to the far post at every opportunity and won his fair share of balls in the air. 7/10

Zlatan Ibrahimovic :- Did not feature at all in the first half, but after the break he showed small glimpses of his talent, but the big Swede had had far better nights. 6.5/10

ESPNSTAR.com :-

Zlatan Ibrahimovic :-

Worked hard, but Tottenham denied him any space whatsoever. Consequently, the Swede was rendered largely ineffective. Not too great defensively, as usual. 5.5/10

Peter Crouch :-

Worried Milan throughout, with the Italians struggling to deal with his height and heading prowess. Made a good run to bury Lennon's square ball into the net. 8/10.

You :-

"And I wonder how many of these neutral sources were English focused media outlets and how many were Italian?

Yes I know. Didn't of course stop you passing comment on the realtive performances of Crouch and Ibrahimovic in a game you didn't even watch the entire first half of.

Eh, I'm pretty sure it did. I don't even remember saying Ibrahimovic did better than Crouch in the first leg, so all this hand wringing is for nothing.

And did you ever answer that question?

You've walked right into his trap. When he asks for evidence it's so he can say that the evidence doesn't count because "people are flawed."

It's classic zealot thinking. If X proves my point, the opposite of X must prove it too.

Zealot thinking? You mean a strongly held belief in God?

Yeah, that's relevant in this debate

I've already stated my almost complete lack of regard for most football journalists, and everyone on this site, but if other people want to base or alter their opinions at the behest of these groups then that is their prerogative.

Still, no one want to debate the actual incidents in the game with me? Thought not, no it's google and links to the Daily Mirror

No no his usual is asking for evidence, then when it's provided he mocks the person for wasting time going to look for evidence because really, it really REALLY isn't that important to him, despite the previous 12 posts asking for evidence.

Well, sure, but I can't really do it now you posted this.

Oh, and x out of 10 ratings for players? As a football fan I find such Daily Record analysis abhorrent. It's lazy, shite and patronising attempt at judging the performance of players. Simple though, which is maybe find so many invest such significance in it.

[port-ton]

Why are you providing less quotes than sources, do some of the sources not say Pato was better?

I have to say, all these journalists are making me change my mind. I am really that weak willed.

Quite clearly because some of them are just match ratings while the ones i quoted were match ratings with descriptions of the players' performances.

No one is saying change your mind, all we're saying is you're quite clearly wrong.

But well done on changing your tact slightly. This time you've went for the ask repeatedly for evidence of journalists who said that Pato played better, then when given plenty of evidence to support this you say it doesn't matter.

it's amazing how you take things so literally when someone says something like " everyone thinks.... ", yet you see no irony when you continue to say that Ibrahimovic had a great game against spurs.