Football 16-17

[eFestivals]

PS: James Milner ... best left back in the league?

OK, he's not perfect, but he's mister consistent and reliable, with always a high quality to his game.

The whole team played really well on Saturday, but for some reason it was him who stood out for me.

[mjsell]

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

PS: James Milner ... best left back in the league?

OK, he's not perfect, but he's mister consistent and reliable, with always a high quality to his game.

The whole team played really well on Saturday, but for some reason it was him who stood out for me.

Haha. He has definitely found his correct position after all these years. He has never been quite good enough creatively to be CM or RM/LM, but yeah full back suits him down to the ground - has never been bad defensively and has always had above average delivery (especially in comparison to other full backs).

People often fail to realise that it is the full backs that more often than not have more time and space to deliver from wide than those playing ahead of them. It was my reason for hating Sagna when he was at Arsenal, was always the man in space but couldn't cross for shit. 

[thetime]

Liverpool 2nd favourites? Perhaps about right on that betting.

De bruyne out for a month, time will tell if that has any affect on city.

[eFestivals]

7 minutes ago, thetime said:

Liverpool 2nd favourites? Perhaps about right on that betting.

Note sure about that. As I say, there's questions about their consistency. I can't see them winning when Moaniho parks the bus, for example.

I don't think a top 4 (pick your own order) of City, Spurs, Arsenal and Liverpool looks too unrealistic on the games so far, tho I could also see either of Spurs or Liverpool dropping out and Utd being in.

 

[kaosmark2]

59 minutes ago, thetime said:

Liverpool 2nd favourites? Perhaps about right on that betting.

De bruyne out for a month, time will tell if that has any affect on city.

I'm sure it'll have an effect, but whether it restricts their points or just their goal tally remains to be seen. They've been imperious.

[mjsell]

I've got liverpool finishing 3rd or 4th. Current form continued would see them challenge, but like has been said you just fear the odd bad day will slow that down slightly.

City v Liverpool will be a cracker of a game whenever that comes.

Just looked back at my pre season predictions and would say that i would keep them the same as of now

City

Arsenal

Liverpool

Tottenham

United

Chelsea

[eFestivals]

12 minutes ago, mjsell said:

I've got liverpool finishing 3rd or 4th. Current form continued would see them challenge, but like has been said you just fear the odd bad day will slow that down slightly.

City v Liverpool will be a cracker of a game whenever that comes.

Just looked back at my pre season predictions and would say that i would keep them the same as of now

City

Arsenal

Liverpool

Tottenham

United

Chelsea

I can't see anyone topping City, i've gotta say.

And Arsenal are a definite, Wenger has put down a deposit and everything.

Now Moaniho has sorted out the Rooney problem I wouldn't be surprised to see them getting going - particularly if Pogba deserves that price so I don't think they can be ruled out just yet, but there's no way Chelsea are going to be a big force this season.

[Wooderson]

Rooney and Fellaini dropped and Utd look a different side.

[pink_triangle]

6 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

I'm sure it'll have an effect, but whether it restricts their points or just their goal tally remains to be seen. They've been imperious.

Its difficult to say as I thought the same at the beginning of last season. However its probably a good sign that they have won without Aguero and Kompany. this season.

I personally hope Liverpool win the thing. I am a big fan of Klopp and find them a lot more likable not Stevie G has gone.

[kaosmark2]

It looks like neither Chelsea or Man U will be in with a shot. Again. Which I love.

[eFestivals]

So.... Sam is all over the papers, and if you don't pay attention it looks like he mitght have done something wrong.

But I reckon it's hard to say he's done anything wrong when he says he'll have to clear the work offer with his employer, and throws a "you can't say that" fit when dodgy stuff is discussed within his earshot.

And so all we're left with is that dodgy stuff goes on in footie, like 'who knew?' If the FA try to turn this on Sam and not themselves for the failings in the game they're meant to regulate, something is very wrong.

 

[zahidf]

 

Someone on twitter has pointed out that he should be sacked by the FA for demonstrating his failure to understand knockout football if nothing else : “We'd drawn with Russia, we should have won. We beat Wales, and that was our worst performance. We drew with Slovakia, and we only had to draw with Iceland to get through ..."

[eFestivals]

15 minutes ago, zahidf said:

 

Someone on twitter has pointed out that he should be sacked by the FA for demonstrating his failure to understand knockout football if nothing else : “We'd drawn with Russia, we should have won. We beat Wales, and that was our worst performance. We drew with Slovakia, and we only had to draw with Iceland to get through ..."

did he really? Fantastic!

 

[TheGayTent]

Big Sam in liking his own voice and dirty cash shocker...

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Big Sam in liking his own voice and dirty cash shocker...

there's liking money, and then there's taking money. Everyone likes money, but that's a different thing to taking it unconditionally..

And its clear in those vids that he'd only take it if the FA said it was OK.

I'm not entirely sure what he might have done wrong, unless his FA contract explicitly excludes all possibilities of outside employment running concurrently. He would have had to investigate what was being offered to him - by meeting the people involved - before he could know there might be something dodgy about it.

I think it reveals more about lax regulation by the FA than it does anything about Sam. Yes, it shows him as chasing cash when it would be wiser for him to settle for what he has currently, tho that can't be a crime to someone lauding the tories in their sig.

[big__phil]

59 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I'm not entirely sure what he might have done wrong...

Yeah you're probably right, but it's still a stupid thing to do. I wonder if he knew what would be discussed before he arrived, but I guess we'll never know.

Hardly scandal of the century though. I'm more interested in the game UEFA knew was fixed, and did nothing about it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-37453762

[mjsell]

11 minutes ago, big__phil said:

I wonder if he knew what would be discussed before he arrived, but I guess we'll never know.

Good question. This whole thing stinks of a set up to me (in my conspiracy theory world). Someone at the FA isnt a fan of him and set the whole thing up. Thats what I'm going to completed unfoundedly believe until someone proves it wrong.

[big__phil]

1 minute ago, mjsell said:

Good question. This whole thing stinks of a set up to me (in my conspiracy theory world). Someone at the FA isnt a fan of him and set the whole thing up. Thats what I'm going to completed unfoundedly believe until someone proves it wrong.

[eFestivals]

13 minutes ago, mjsell said:

Good question. This whole thing stinks of a set up to me (in my conspiracy theory world). Someone at the FA isnt a fan of him and set the whole thing up. Thats what I'm going to completed unfoundedly believe until someone proves it wrong.

well, it definitely IS a set-up when journo's arrange a meeting to put a dodgy offer to their target.

From the bits of video i've seen, Sam is guilty of knowing how the rules are undermined and by whom, tho it would be more surprising I think if someone in his position wasn't aware of that sort of stuff.

What we never get to find out is who this sort of stuff is tried against but come out squeaky-clean. That'd be an interesting thing to see, i reckon.

[TheGayTent]

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

tho that can't be a crime to someone lauding the tories in their sig.

Careful now Aldershot fan, you're almost into Godwin's Law territory... 

[eFestivals]

7 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Careful now Aldershot fan, you're almost into Godwin's Law territory... 

eh? It's you West Ham fans that are full of Nazis.

[TheGayTent]

11 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

eh? It's you West Ham fans that are full of Nazis.

Pipe down, you know nothing prick. 

[sdvruxk]

Wasn't he asking for a fee to tell them how to get around the rules? Isn't that the headline in the telegraph? 

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, sdvruxk said:

Wasn't he asking for a fee to tell them how to get around the rules? Isn't that the headline in the telegraph? 

I think it's a bit looser than that - that he was asking for a fee to give them some advice, tho what advice he might have given we cannot know.

He talked about and around dodgy dealings, but as far as any certainty of his meaning goes it was a factual acknowledgement of them happening and nothing further.

I'd suggest that because he was insisting the FA had to agree to him doing that 'work' he'd have stayed within the FA's allowed parameters (which wouldn't include anything dodgy), and it might even be the case that him saying he'd need to discuss with the FA was simply his way of non-explicitly declining what they were offering, in a way that didn't need him to say no to their faces.

His agent was present, and so it's quite possible that everything about the meeting was of more interest to his agent than to Sam.

More realistically there was probably something about what was being offered which interested Sam, but as far as I've seen of the video he's vague enough &/or clearly-not wanting to hear dodgy stuff that he's probably got enough of a get-out - tho I can see the FA insisting that he has to dump that agent to satisfy them that he's clean. I'm expecting his first public comment to say something about having parted with his agent.

[TheGayTent]

So Pearson part of the Telegraph 'revelations' too, or just a coincidence?