What's new

World Cup Worst XI - biased article against Chelsea

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hazard (apart from one match) and Costa both had absolutely awful tournaments.

Neymar had a good world cup, Ozil had a few assists and was part of the winning XI, there were players worse than Gerrard in that position.

I dont really have an issue with that Worst XI

 
Can't see any problem either, although the number of players having had a bad WC is certainly bigger than 11.

 
AnIrishTrueBlue said:
Hazard (apart from one match) and Costa both had absolutely awful tournaments.

Neymar had a good world cup, Ozil had a few assists and was part of the winning XI, there were players worse than Gerrard in that position.

I dont really have an issue with that Worst XI
Click to expand...
Hazard's including is harsh, he didn't set the tournament on fire but he set up two winning goals, not really worthy of inclusion as a worst player when you had someone like Gerrard contribute nothing but settling up a winner for the opposition with an ill judge back header. 

Costa I understand because of his choosing Spain over Brazil and then Spain just being pants. 

 
Typical anti-Chelsea bias, went on all through the competition. Ian Wright couldn't seem to go longer than five minutes without telling us all how crap Oscar was. Even when the other pundits were discussing totally different things, Wright would suddenly declare that Oscar 'had a very bad game' out of nowhere.

All the pundits were arseholes to varying degrees, but Ian Wright was in a class of his own. What a prize c*nt.

 
Hazard and Costa shouldn't be there, Gerrard was literally the worst midfielder in the entire tournament and has a strong shout for worst player, but clearly he was never going to be included.

 
Really dont see how there is anything for Chelsea fans to be offended about in that article. Lets not look for something that isnt there!

 
Who reads the DM, who cares what the write ?

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top