The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Do you think Rangers and Celtic should move to the preimiership? I certinly do! Ok, yes, Celtic got beat from Man U what was it? 4 - 0? Anyway, I think that was just their off-day. I think both tteams would do really weel. I magine it! Arsnal Man U Rangers and Celtic! Who would win? Some people actually say that Rangers and Celtic are the two best teams in Britian, well lets prove it! Stick them in I say! It'll certinly make our Scottish Preimier division more exiting! We'll see the likes of Dundee win!
Anyway, people talk about "The battle of Britian" So many times but the REAL battle of britian (I would think) Would be Rangers or Celtic Vs Man U or Arsnal, and we'd be seeing that all the time! It makes perfect sense!
Anyway, people talk about "The battle of Britian" So many times but the REAL battle of britian (I would think) Would be Rangers or Celtic Vs Man U or Arsnal, and we'd be seeing that all the time! It makes perfect sense!
Page:
Ok we all friends again? Good, have a group hug and get on with things.
Sdrawkcab wrote:
> Morius wrote:
> not having a full team on is though
>
> Eh?
> Morius wrote:
> not having a full team on is though
>
> Eh?
thats ok, we just got a little carried away! lol
Good work - you've changed your mind. Sorry about calling you an idiot. I thought you'd refuse to see sense.
Ho-hum.
Ho-hum.
I only agree with Isane Bartenders point though mind you.
AfroJoe wrote:
> I'm sorry if it seemed as if I was arguing that they're the two best
> teams in Britain. I was going more along the lines of "one of the
> best teams in Britain".
>
> Maybe Morius wasn't, and I followed on from his argument, which
> must've made it seem like this. But I certainly don't think either are
> the best.
Ah ok then, misunderstanding on my part too.
> I'm sorry if it seemed as if I was arguing that they're the two best
> teams in Britain. I was going more along the lines of "one of the
> best teams in Britain".
>
> Maybe Morius wasn't, and I followed on from his argument, which
> must've made it seem like this. But I certainly don't think either are
> the best.
Ah ok then, misunderstanding on my part too.
Morius wrote:
> Insane Bartender, that is actually an exallent point. You changed my
> opinoin! They SHOULD stay.
Thank god for that. Now can we put this discussion away for another month for someone else to bring up.
> Insane Bartender, that is actually an exallent point. You changed my
> opinoin! They SHOULD stay.
Thank god for that. Now can we put this discussion away for another month for someone else to bring up.
lalakersrule wrote:
> Well if they're not better than Arsenal or United they aren't the best
> team in Britain which was kind of my point i was arguing.
---
I'm sorry if it seemed as if I was arguing that they're the two best teams in Britain. I was going more along the lines of "one of the best teams in Britain".
Maybe Morius wasn't, and I followed on from his argument, which must've made it seem like this. But I certainly don't think either are the best.
> Well if they're not better than Arsenal or United they aren't the best
> team in Britain which was kind of my point i was arguing.
---
I'm sorry if it seemed as if I was arguing that they're the two best teams in Britain. I was going more along the lines of "one of the best teams in Britain".
Maybe Morius wasn't, and I followed on from his argument, which must've made it seem like this. But I certainly don't think either are the best.
Insane Bartender, that is actually an exallent point. You changed my opinoin! They SHOULD stay.
Morius wrote:
> not having a full team on is though
Eh?
> not having a full team on is though
Eh?
Page: