[Football] “We’d of won if Pedro scored” aka “ We'd have won if Pedro scored”

[KZNSeagull]

I hope you're not making OP an escape goat. Although it's a simple shoe-in to request a greater level of literacy, I strongly suspect that request would fall on death ears

Pedro's finish was a damp squid to an otherwise exiting passage of play.

 

[Eeyore]

Baleba's was hardly a big chance, Adringra's 1on1 was a big chance

Adringa's shot was perfectly placed in the gap, all credit to the keeper there.

 

[Live by the sea]

We probably would have won I think .

 

[KZNSeagull]

Although could be that 'of' is now so prevalent that should've would've could've etc has sort of slipped into a former form of ye olde English that has now evolved. Because that's how languages evolve

I hope it doesnt catch on as do I hope that the latest trend of people typing long sentences like this one without any punctuation doesnt catch on either as you have to reread it over and over to try and work out what someone is saying its very annoying

 

[raymondo]

Come on HeavyTedBoy, sort it aat,

"We'd have won."

Or we'd've

 

[London Irish]

Adringa's shot was perfectly placed in the gap, all credit to the keeper there.

Good save but a bit too near-posty for me, if he'd gone across keeper that would have been the percentage scoring shot I reckon

 

[deletebeepbeepbeep]

Liverpool's miss was far far worse.

 

[Bob!]

Especially as there looked like a player free in the middle he could have past to

It was Pedo though, wasn't it? He'd of mist.

Brain mist. I knew it was wrong but just couldn't think!!!!! I never use 'of' when it should be 'have'.

Never mind.
It's all in the passed now.

 

[Brok]

Or we'd've

Really? Is that a word?
It just looks... er ... a bit sort of... uncomfortable.
Not a good looking word at all.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Never mind.
It's all in the passed now.

Kaye Sarah Sarah

 

[Hamilton]

It is worrying Pedro is absolute kack in front of goal hopefully he will find his shooting boots.

Are you PPF?

Honestly, you write some of the most ill-informed posts that I can only assume they are designed to wind up other posters.

What's your agenda on here? Or do you actually believe what you write?

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Are you PPF?

Honestly, you write some of the most ill-informed posts that I can only assume they are designed to wind up other posters.

What's your agenda on here? Or do you actually believe what you write?

I would guess, reactions exactly like that

 

[Hamilton]

I don't think we'd have neccessarily won if he had scored. We may have won, we may have drawn or possibly lost.

Going 3-2 up changes the whole dynamic of the game yet again, and whilst late-on could well have seen Albion sit back for 10-minutes. to defend the lead.

Liverpool were still creating chances - Diaz also missed from an angle after Pedro's miss - and it's possible that the intensity from Liverpool's attack would have increased as our lessened. That's more than enough time to grab a goal against what's proved to be a leaky defence.

So, no, we didn't fail to win* because Pedro missed.

Both their goals came from errors. We need to tighten up on unforced errors. If anything, we lost because of those.





(*edited after @Tom Hark Preston Park pointing out that we did not lose. It must have just felt like it to me )

 

[Hamilton]

I would guess, reactions exactly like that

No, it's a genuine question to the chap. I'm interested into why he's here.

 

[Brok]

I don't think we'd have neccessarily won if he had scored. We may have won, we may have drawn or possibly lost.

Correct. If we didn't draw, or even win, there is a bloody good chance we could of lost.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Didn't the call bobble badly just before he struck it?

Just watched the highlights. No, it didn't.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Not sure about anyone else, but I've defiantly had enough of these typos.

 

[Wozza]

Just watched the highlights. No, it didn't.

Oh. Poor, poor miss then.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I hope you're not making OP an escape goat. Although it's a simple shoe-in to request a greater level of literacy, I strongly suspect that request would fall on death ears

I feel you're trying to make the OP a prawn in your game.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

I don't think we'd have neccessarily won if he had scored. We may have won, we may have drawn or possibly lost.

Going 3-2 up changes the whole dynamic of the game yet again, and whilst late-on could well have seen Albion sit back for 10-minutes. to defend the lead.

Liverpool were still creating chances - Diaz also missed from an angle after Pedro's miss - and it's possible that the intensity from Liverpool's attack would have increased as our lessened. That's more than enough time to grab a goal against what's proved to be a leaky defence.

So, no, we didn't lose because Pedro missed.

Both their goals came from errors. We need to tighten up on unforced errors. If anything, we lost because of those.

We LOST? Blimey, must 'of' missed that somehow