Football 2010-2011

[worm]

Glad someone brought that up.

Baggio missed a penalty under pressure. He was (correctly) never called a donkey. If one of the greatest players of all time can miss one, I hardly think a centre half can be labelled one for missing a penalty.

[worm]

a very very very very long list then. pmsl.

[ampersand]

So it wasn't that you said something daft, it's that you believe something daft. That's a different matter altogether.

[worm]

hows it daft to think that gareth southgate and elite shouldn't go hand in hand?

[eFestivals]

Tourettes?

I guess you have, yep - nothing else makes sense for the number of times today that you're agreeing wholeheartly with what I'm saying while telling me I'm wrong.

[Ed209]

at least give it a chance before you criticise it.

the whole f**king country has gone negative on everything even before plans are implemented, or even suggested.

get a f**king grip and give it a chance to see if it works, if it doesn't then at least you've tried to see if it works!

[jump]

Because he was so obviously an excellent player at the top level of the sport.

[lharris92]

going back a few pages (in reference to the Olympic Stadium):

seemingly as a hammers fan i dont really want to move there but, considering the other options that were available, it was the lesser of all the evils.

1. let the stadium be used only for athletics, once or twice a year

2. let THFC get the stadium, and remove the olympic legacy

3. WHU get the stadium and use it as a multi-venue stadium.

the pro's and con's to each:

1. pro: it continues the olympic legacy.

cons: by not being used often money wont be made back quickly for the costs of building it etc.

i have been to the site where the olympic park is in Beijing and all that is is a tourist attraction and the stadium is on the main disused as far as i am aware.

2. pros: the fans are closer to the action, will be used for 9 months of the year.

cons: the olympic legacy is lost, taxpayers money will have been thrown down the drain as spurs wanted to rebuild part of the stadium.

3. pros: keeps the olympic legacy, will be used all year round (with athletics and other events happening during the summer)

cons: fans are further from the action, costs the taxpayer an extra £40m

ok there are probably more pros and cons to each of these but those are some of the basic ones that i could think of.

now out of those 3, the WHU bid is probably best in general because it keeps the legacy, the stadium is used all year round for different events, and from a few polls taken it is preferred by the public who were asked.

sure the fans will suffer a bit by being a bit further away from the action (theres no denying that), but the transport links will have been improved for the OG so that will ease the pressure a bit more (compared to upton park station after matches sometimes).

and on the extra money funded by the taxpayer, in the bid there is probably an agreement in that a certain amount will have to be payed back each month or something, and with all the other events that will be happening (World Championship Boxing, concerts, athletics,...) then im sure the money will be made back no later than a decade after it was given out.

take from this what you will but although i dont want it to happen, it probably is the best option to take

edit: @ people telling me to pipe down, look at the time my original post was written, i'd got in from a night out a bit before that so obviously it wasnt thought through as it should have been.

the track if a major negative there is no denying that.

Edited February 10, 2011 by lharris92

[jump]

What is the Olympic Legacy really?

[worm]

I guess you have, yep - nothing else makes sense for the number of times today that you're agreeing wholeheartly with what I'm saying while telling me I'm wrong.

[Ed209]

I don't think southgate is a terrible decision. None of us really know how good he is on the intellectual side of football, but I've definitely heard people say he was one of the most intellegent footballers of recent years. He's got youth on his side which can be a massive plus as he can bring energy and new ideas in. His footballing days are not too far behind him, he's also recently been a manager so he knows how the modern game works and its obvious that he's very well liked and respected in the game. Being a manager is a very different role to this.

Could be a very good appointment

[TheGayTent]

hows it daft to think that gareth southgate and elite shouldn't go hand in hand?

has he shown anything that suggests he is capable of producing elite players? his managerial and punditry skills would suggest not.

[eFestivals]

It could be that you're completely missing the point? It's a common enough symptom of yours.

or it could be that you're a moronic troll. Yep, you're a moronic troll.

After all, just yesterday you said I was wrong when I said that the top unis operated a policy of discrimination against kids from poorer backgrounds. Today you fully agree that they do.

[TheGayTent]

West Ham - the academy of football. A place where the good football is only from kids, and where the supporters have the minds of kids. It seems like that round here, anyway.

There's nothing like the absence of 'sir' to make a moron come out of his shell.

[eFestivals]

I don't think southgate is a terrible decision. None of us really know how good he is on the intellectual side of football, but I've definitely heard people say he was one of the most intellegent footballers of recent years. He's got youth on his side which can be a massive plus as he can bring energy and new ideas in. His footballing days are not too far behind him, he's also recently been a manager so he knows how the modern game works and its obvious that he's very well liked and respected in the game. Being a manager is a very different role to this.

Could be a very good appointment

I'll just point out that at no point did I say it was even a remotely bad decision, let alone a 'terrible' one.

What I said was that his job title sounds misplaced, because it's a reasonable expectation that someone with a job title of 'elite' would come from the very top end of a list of those considered the elite.

I've not expressed any strong opinion on how he might do in that job.

[Ed209]

I'll just point out that at no point did I say it was even a remotely bad decision, let alone a 'terrible' one.

What I said was that his job title sounds misplaced, because it's a reasonable expectation that someone with a job title of 'elite' would come from the very top end of a list of those considered the elite.

I've not expressed any strong opinion on how he might do in that job.

[eFestivals]

It was neither funny nor clever the first time.

You said he was as much as skillful as he was a donkey.

He wasn't a donkey so you're saying he wasn't skillful? - which is clearly stupid

He was skillful so you're saying he was a donkey? - which is clearly stupid

Retard.

West Ham - the academy of football. A place where the good football is only from kids, and where the supporters have the minds of kids. It seems like that round here, anyway.

There's nothing like the absence of 'sir' to make a moron come out of his shell.

It's still funny. And true.

[The Nal]

Because he was so obviously an excellent player at the top level of the sport.

[eFestivals]

Defensive, Neil.

And I wasn't specifically replying to you, I was just making a statement about how I thought he was a good candidate. The 'terrible' part was a figure of speech

when the morons get on one as they have this morning because they've left their brains at home in bed, it's hardly surprising that I feel the need to re-state what I said against the bullshit fantasies they invent from what I've said.

[eFestivals]

What have his managerial and punditry skills got to do with:

1. heading up the changing of the coaching structure in youth football
2. increasing the number and quality of the coaches themselves
3. improve the relationship between clubs and country with special regard to releasing players for U17, U19, & U21 international matches

I'd suggest none.

I'd also suggest that he's a bloody good candidate for the role.

I'd say that it's a bit rich having an unqualified coach in charge of increasing the quality of coaches who are better qualified than he is himself.

[eFestivals]

Do you think?

I wouldn't have him at the top level. Not near. Top level, even just defenders at that time, are people like Maldini, Baresi, Adams, Stam, Nesta, Cafu, Blanc, Hierro, Koeman, Desailly, Zanetti, Roberto Carlos, Thuram, Sammer, Kohler, Cannavaro, Bergomi etc.

Theres 17 odd players for starters. Would you really have Southgate up there with that lot?

+1

[TheGayTent]

Do you think?

I wouldn't have him at the top level. Not near. Top level, even just defenders at that time, are people like Maldini, Baresi, Adams, Stam, Nesta, Cafu, Blanc, Hierro, Koeman, Desailly, Zanetti, Roberto Carlos, Thuram, Sammer, Kohler, Cannavaro, Bergomi etc.

Theres 17 odd players for starters. Would you really have Southgate up there with that lot?

[The Nal]

Due to the remit of the role, the job was always going to go to an Englishman - and a young one at that.

How many ex English players that already hold good relationships with many in the game and is almost universally liked and respected by the people he will have to deal with, and played a the top level are there?

[TheGayTent]

I'd say that it's a bit rich having an unqualified coach in charge of increasing the quality of coaches who are better qualified than he is himself.

Edited February 10, 2011 by TheGayTent

[TheGayTent]

Not many, agree with you there. I was just pointing out to Worm that GS is not in the same league as those mentioned above.