娛樂滿紛 26FUN's Archiver

丹山 發表於 2005-10-3 09:33 PM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]ciger[/i] at 2005-10-2 05:06 PM:

如果咁講以後26FUN咪唔可以有話題批評朗拿度,點計朗拿度級數地位都高過李奧好多,佢踢得唔好又唔可以批評佢呀 [/quote]
唔該你唔好扭曲我d發言得唔得啊
我係話d人見高就拜 見低就踩o者  
我亦都無表達過你地唔應該開話題批評 之類既野  我見到你咁回覆我都真係有少少汗顏
可能你需要進修一下中文 可能你唔太理解我既發言

丹山 發表於 2005-10-3 09:38 PM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]adamjacky123[/i] at 2005-10-2 05:11 PM:

冇話憎唔憎曼聯....
我自己就係曼... [/quote]
可惜佢醒果陣 好似上季咁 條中前埸又唔醒
我相信果陣條中前埸受既壓力比李奧少 大家都繼續支持

我個fd講得真係好鬼岩 佢話踢學界 d後衛解唔到個波 就係咁比人插
d前鋒射個波射到炒哂飛機 就話gd try 好波
有時d野我覺得點都要支持既 若果我連曼聯球員都唔支持 我都諗唔到仲有咩理由支持曼聯

[[i] Last edited by 丹山 on 2005-10-3 at 09:39 PM [/i]]

Beckham4072 發表於 2005-10-3 09:51 PM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]丹山[/i] at 2005-10-3 09:38 PM:

可惜佢醒果陣 好似上季咁 條中前埸... [/quote]
救到英雄 救唔到罪人..
冇人想做罪人架.....所以我都係打前多
唔洗咩飛

ciger 發表於 2005-10-3 10:44 PM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]丹山[/i] at 2005-10-3 21:33:

唔該你唔好扭曲我d發言得唔得啊
我... [/quote]
需要進修一下中文果個應該係你喎,人地批評李奧,就等於憎曼聯,你知唔知這裡有幾多人係愛之深,恨之切呀,就係覺得以佢水準唔應該犯咁嘅錯先發言批評,又唔見有人批評香港甲組

ciger 發表於 2005-10-3 10:46 PM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]Beckham4072[/i] at 2005-10-3 17:06:
打後衛就好似打龍門咁
救到就英雄救唔到就罪人
邊個唔想守住唔失
當年杜滴黑 哦 旦 變罪人
囉歐冠做英雄..... [/quote]
佢果兩球波根本談不上個'救'字,可以話成功解圍係基本責任

丹山 發表於 2005-10-3 11:05 PM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]ciger[/i] at 2005-10-3 10:44 PM:

需要進修一下中文果個應該係你喎,人... [/quote]
覺得人地憎唔憎係主觀
但係覺得咁就要憎里奧 咁呢隊曼聯都應該要憎左好耐
呢兩年曼聯成隊波 其實未必一定差左 但係只不過無成績
冠軍我都想左好耐 可惜費sir既方程式可能真係有d不合時宜
但係我都無辦法 佢係曼聯一份子 我就要支持 就算我唔支持
佢都唔會因為咁而離隊 我又唔係大老闆 無辦法
咁既然係球迷 支持同唔支持都影響唔到球會決定
咁我寧願對曼聯球員比正面既支持
乜野愛之深,恨之切呀 睇唔到 唔通你係到噓佢地 佢地會知到你愛緊佢地?
我亦都唔相信 剩係係到批評佢地就可以令佢地踢波勁d 技術有改善
佢地本身有技術 但係無信心既時候 球迷去支持佢地令佢地重拾信心 就係最大既責任


不過我係咁諗o者 我認識既大部份曼聯球迷 都唔係 係愛之深,恨之切呀

你話我叫d人唔應該開話題批評之類 就一定我無講過半句

[[i] Last edited by 丹山 on 2005-10-3 at 11:11 PM [/i]]

ciger 發表於 2005-10-4 12:24 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]丹山[/i] at 2005-10-3 23:05:

覺得人地憎唔憎係主觀
但係覺得咁... [/quote]
正如你所講,批評李奧唔會令佢踢得更好,但你包容佢同樣地一樣唔會比佢知道(除非你有佢電話打比佢),係討論區見一個球員犯錯批評佢係好正常,批評佢唔等於唔支持,正如你考試肥佬你亞媽鬧你'衰仔,冇鬼用架考得咁差,第日讀唔到書做乞兒就知死'唔通佢又唔支持你?佢又好憎你?每人表達方式唔同,有人激d有人斯文d,但唔代表見高就拜,見低就踩,做得好比人讚做得差比人鬧係天經地義,冇乜唔啱

丹山 發表於 2005-10-4 09:38 PM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]ciger[/i] at 2005-10-4 12:24 AM:

正如你所講,批評李奧唔會令佢踢得更... [/quote]
喔 原來係咁解
你唔係o者 你敢講其他人唔係見隊波踢到識飛就死捧爛捧
踢得唔好咁就死踩爛踩
好似皇馬咁呢兩個禮拜同九月頭就好似天堂同地獄 而家個個都話佢勁到無人有
批評係好既 不過都唔見大家有咩好建議可以令佢踢好d
剩係識係到鬧佢敗家話佢d波高張 又話佢高傲 由頭到尾都係踩
簡單d就係剩識鬧
我覺得佢踢波得閒上兩腳幾好睇 你唔好理佢係呢d波有錯誤未 球員唔係機器
應該有自己風格
但係起馬 我諗若果佢真係上網睇到官方留言板有d人咁留言
係球埸上又比人噓 都唔會踢得好

srfqt1 發表於 2005-10-4 10:29 PM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]ciger[/i] at 2005-10-3 10:46 PM:

佢果兩球波根本談不上個'救'字,可以話成功解圍係基本責任 [/quote]

:o
基本責任??
龍門既基本責任係救波
咁有失波果場味就連基本責任都做唔到:lol:
前鋒既基本責任係入波
一場波冇入波就連基本責任都做唔到:lol:
咁中場既基本責任係咩,分波,hold波or其他??
如果係hold波就好啦
全場波,有波唔踢,hold住個波就完成基本責任:lol:

[[i] Last edited by srfqt1 on 2005-10-4 at 10:34 PM [/i]]

ciger 發表於 2005-10-4 11:13 PM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]srfqt1[/i] at 2005-10-4 22:29:


:o
基本責任??
龍門既基本責任... [/quote]
我唔知你有冇踢過波,踢波唔係一個人嘅事,有陣時隊友犯錯導致龍門失波我諗唔會有人話龍門冇盡責,李奧果兩球波要解圍絕對唔難,作為一個英超後衛被要求能夠成功解圍並唔過分,球場上冇人會只被要求hold住個波,有時間踢下波你就知乜野係責任

chicken 發表於 2005-10-4 11:34 PM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]ciger[/i] at 2005-10-4 11:13 PM:

我唔知你有冇踢過波,踢波唔係一個人... [/quote]

This time support you. The wage reflects the responsibility of the player to the team.
This means, e.g. Rio should take more responsibility to Brown for more interception, more tackle, more heading, etc. Otherwise why he get higher wage than Brown?

shaqkobe 發表於 2005-10-5 01:45 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]ciger[/i] at 2005-10-4 23:13:

我唔知你有冇踢過波,踢波唔係一個人... [/quote]
最大問題係里奧係唔係成日做唔到你所謂既基本責任先。我睇過曼聯好多好多場波,佢做得非常稱稱。偶有失手不代表個人能力的不足。

ciger 發表於 2005-10-5 01:52 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]shaqkobe[/i] at 2005-10-5 01:45:

最大問題係里奧係唔係成日做唔到你所謂既基本責任先。我睇過曼聯好多好多場波,佢做得非常稱稱。偶有失手不代表個人能力的不足。 [/quote]
你平時上堂好乖好留心聽書但有一次上堂傾計你話老師鬧唔鬧你吖

shaqkobe 發表於 2005-10-5 01:54 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]ciger[/i] at 2005-10-5 01:52:

你平時上堂好乖好留心聽書但有一次上堂傾計你話老師鬧唔鬧你吖 [/quote]
D比喻唔可以亂用架。非常牽強喎:lol:

ciger 發表於 2005-10-5 02:00 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]shaqkobe[/i] at 2005-10-5 01:54:

D比喻唔可以亂用架。非常牽強喎:lol: [/quote]
佢唔係冇能力解圍,佢係犯錯冇解圍,冇能力解圍就話冇計啦,唔抵鬧,但判決錯誤冇解圍就唔同

shaqkobe 發表於 2005-10-5 02:26 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]ciger[/i] at 2005-10-5 02:00:

佢唔係冇能力解圍,佢係犯錯冇解圍,冇能力解圍就話冇計啦,唔抵鬧,但判決錯誤冇解圍就唔同 [/quote]
當然我都覺得佢抵罵既。呢一場!!

Beckham4072 發表於 2005-10-5 03:26 AM

第一球係對手射中佢 個波彈返前鋒到..再出腳都踢唔到個波 先舉手 再追都追唔到
問題係程序  應該先追波 後出腳 再舉手
第二球正常係解圍..但佢唔踢想比龍門接...可以話佢高章
最後第一球只係唔夠冷靜
      第二球係冷靜過龍
點解有第2球呀 因為想話比人聽我夠冷靜有料 值12萬
點知就中招

Beckham4072 發表於 2005-10-5 03:32 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]ciger[/i] at 2005-10-5 01:52 AM:

你平時上堂好乖好留心聽書但有一次上堂傾計你話老師鬧唔鬧你吖 [/quote]
鬧架.........留心係一定要架啦
點同踢波
踢都就踢到 踢唔到係唔夠班  有咩理由會唔留心
唔通有索女係隔離位做同學??

abc123aa 發表於 2005-10-5 04:13 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]Beckham4072[/i] at 2005-10-5 03:26 AM:
第一球係對手射中佢 個波彈返前鋒到..... [/quote]
里奧都幾好野,明明想出腳,就黎到果時就收腳......真係唔知可以講咩好= ="

Beckham4072 發表於 2005-10-5 05:25 AM

[quote]Originally posted by [i]abc123aa[/i] at 2005-10-5 04:13 AM:

里奧都幾好野,明明想出腳,就黎到果時就收腳......真係唔知可以講咩好= =" [/quote]
里奧買左3比2買膽呀 要輸多球

頁: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6

Powered by Discuz! Archiver 7.0.0  © 2001-2009 Comsenz Inc.