3 minutes ago, nonotnowjim said:

The lead wasn't lost - because of Nkunku's goal. Fact. Take off Nkunkus goal - and it's 1v1.

Chris here has not been world class. He has been mostly rubbish - particularly 2nd half of last season when he had checked out.

Played in the right system and position, he is class. As proven When winning player of the season and top scorer across 2 seasons for red bull

Take off Palmer's goal, and its 1-1. Give Burnley another goal and its 2-2.

If me nan had wheels she;d be a bike. The sport doesn't care about your hypotheticals, as the lead was never lost. Hypothetically, had Nkunku not got his consolation goal, Welbeck would never have had the chance in the 97th minute and Chelsea would have defended to the last minute to hold onto a 1-0 win.

Nkunku is of the same level and ilk as Werner. Pants.

1 minute ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

Take off Palmer's goal, and its 1-1. Give Burnley another goal and its 2-2.

If me nan had wheels she;d be a bike. The sport doesn't care about your hypotheticals, as the lead was never lost. Hypothetically, had Nkunku not got his consolation goal, Welbeck would never have had the chance in the 97th minute and Chelsea would have defended to the last minute to hold onto a 1-0 win.

Nkunku is of the same level and ilk as Werner. Pants.

The hoops you jump through to avoid admitting you are wrong. 🤣

3 minutes ago, nonotnowjim said:

The hoops you jump through to avoid admitting you are wrong. 🤣

2 hours ago, nonotnowjim said:

Nkunku's goal was the goal that gave us a lead we didn't lose.

No it didn't. You're either trolling or stupid at this point. Either way, it's a pointless argument and Nkunku has been an even bigger flop for us than Jackson. I'm done.

I have no idea what this argument is really about, but a "winning goal", by any definition, is the first goal which puts a team into a winning position, from which they are never removed.

E.g.

Chelsea 0-1 Everton
Chelsea 1-1 Everton
Chelsea 2-1 Everton
Chelsea 2-2 Everton
Chelsea 3-2 Everton <- This one is the "winning" goal by any normal definition.
Chelsea 4-2 Everton
Chelsea 5-2 Everton

Edited August 5, 2025Aug 5 by Zeta

14 minutes ago, bluedave said:

No it didn't. You're either trolling or stupid at this point. Either way, it's a pointless argument and Nkunku has been an even bigger flop for us than Jackson. I'm done.

Yes it did. It's not difficult. Without Nkunku's winning goal - the score is 1v1. The second goal, in a 2v1 win is the winning goal.

Been over this with UB - who is a much more fun arguing partner. Don't think he needs your help - although it's cute that you try....

Glad you are "done". Wrong and done. But you are done - so no need to reply further.

1 minute ago, Zeta said:

I have no idea what this argument is really about, but a "winning goal", by any definition, is the first goal which puts a team into a winning position, from which they are never removed.

E.g.

Chelsea 0-1 Everton
Chelsea 1-1 Everton
Chelsea 2-1 Everton
Chelsea 2-2 Everton
Chelsea 3-2 Everton <- This one is the "winning" goal by any normal definition.
Chelsea 4-2 Everton
Chelsea 5-2 Everton

It is the goal that wins the game for us. In this case, Nkunku scored the 2nd goal in a 2v1 win.

Some are trying to argue that the opening goal that put us 1v0 ahead is the winning goal.

In that case, the 2nd goal is clearly the winner. Otherwise we wouldn't have won...

1 hour ago, Zeta said:

In that case, the 2nd goal is clearly the winner. Otherwise we wouldn't have won...

Exactly right - which is my point. But Ukraine Bolt and Bluedave dont agree.

Edited August 5, 2025Aug 5 by nonotnowjim

2 hours ago, Zeta said:

In that case, the 2nd goal is clearly the winner. Otherwise we wouldn't have won...

Edit - Never mind. Not worth it.

Edited August 5, 2025Aug 5 by bluedave

1 hour ago, bluedave said:

Edit - Never mind. Not worth it.

Thicker than mince, not worth wasting your time.

43 minutes ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

Thicker than mince, not worth wasting your time.

Thats not very nice....why are you calling Zeta 'thicker than mince'? Because he doesnt agree with you?

Edited August 5, 2025Aug 5 by nonotnowjim

1 hour ago, nonotnowjim said:

Thats not very nice....why are you calling Zeta 'thicker than mince'? Because he doesnt agree with you?

Nope, I was saying it about you. Because you are.

Was hoping activity in the thread meant this useless flop had been sold. 😂

2 hours ago, Gordon Bennett said:

Was hoping activity in the thread meant this useless flop had been sold. 😂

Agreed.

Is a good thing both UB and Jim are such likeable chaps or it would be very aggravating.

6 hours ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

Nope, I was saying it about you. Because you are.

....but you were replying to a post, that was itself in response to Zeta. Not me. It's ok to be wrong.....again.

2 hours ago, nonotnowjim said:

....but you were replying to a post, that was itself in response to Zeta. Not me. It's ok to be wrong.....again.

Well done mate, out of all the Bluedave’s posts to you, I clicked reply to one in response to Zeta.

9 hours ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

Nope, I was saying it about you. Because you are.

You seemed to have missed it so I’ll stick it back in here. You are thicker than mince. You made Drool Winner seem intelligent.

1 minute ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

Well done mate, out of all the Bluedave’s posts to you, I clicked reply to one in response to Zeta.

I forgive you for being wrong....again. Well done for (eventually) admitting it.

As a reward - i'll teach you the offside rule next.

Edited August 6, 2025Aug 6 by nonotnowjim

Just now, nonotnowjim said:

I forgive you for being wrong....again. If you are lucky - i'll teach you the offside rule next.

No problem, let me know when you understand what a winning goal is 👍

Just now, Ukraine Bolt said:

No problem, let me know when you understand what a winning goal is 👍

Well - it's not an opening goal in a 2v1 win. So you are probably not the best person to "teach" me.

Will stick with Opta and Zeta on that.

10 hours ago, Gordon Bennett said:

Was hoping activity in the thread meant this useless flop had been sold. 😂

Unfortunately not, it's just a deranged troll with nothing better to do.

2 hours ago, bluedave said:

Unfortunately not, it's just a deranged troll with nothing better to do.

@Ukraine Bolt isn't a troll - he has been around a long time and contributes well to the forum. He is just argumentative - Which is a good thing. Standing up for what you believe should be applauded (even if you, I or others think it is wrong).

I am not a troll either. I just don't like Jackson, and I do like Nkunku (and Werner). I will continue to call out one, and support the other until they both leave us.

Jim will wear you down about Jackson until you’re in a straitjacket and UkraineBolt will die on a hill saying the sky is green when it’s clearly blue.

Both arguing in a thread will make you contemplate life.

23 hours ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Jim will wear you down about Jackson until you’re in a straitjacket and UkraineBolt will die on a hill saying the sky is green when it’s clearly blue.

Both arguing in a thread will make you contemplate life.

The sky is blue mate.

17 hours ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

The sky is blue mate.

greenish blue .....