Football 19/20

[chemica]

53 minutes ago, jyoung said:

Sorry mate but the Chelsea journo's* with very good track records are almost certain it is happening. It's a shame for Derby as I think he would definitely be able to build on what he has done this season but ultimately he might only get the chance to manager Chelsea once and he's hardly going to turn it down, is he?!

*Johnson from the Evening Standard and Law from the Telegraph

What I meant, is that you see a lot of wild claims that seem to be rushing to get a story that isn’t there. Like yesterday, reports of us going for Gerrard instead. 

And no, granted I doubt he would turn it down. If he stayed for one more year and flopped, the job may never come back round again. His stock is obviously high now - so why not? 

However people are forgetting he got exposed by Millwall last season, and getting the final glossed over the fact we nearly didn’t make the playoffs at all. Would he being talked about, if that were the case? Probably not. 

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, chemica said:

Hoping this Lampard to Chelsea speculation disappears soon. 

The media chose their new Chelsea manager six weeks ago before our Play off Final. There’s been a complete lack of respect to Derby County, with sensationalist journalism and no complete facts. Stirred up a storm, and honestly the mainstream media know absolutely nothing. 

As bitter as it sounds, I really don’t think he joins Chelsea. The longer it rumbles on, the less likely it feels. 

At least you can reclaim the name of your club if he leaves rather than being FL Derby!  I have heard a few pundits talking about the fantastic job he has done at Derby and I think thats overstating what is pretty much a par result. I would have thought championship would be the level he is best suited to because he has the contacts to get in the loan players which as Villa/Derby showed can be crucial at that level.  If I was a top 6 premiership club I wouldnt give him a job.

[Hugh Jass]

Everyone knows Gerrard and Lampard won't work in the same dugout.

[santowhir]

3 hours ago, eFestivals said:

the Glazers aren't going to give up their cut to spunk big by the look of it.

Either that, or it's Agent Ole determined to turn the club into Cardiff.  

Looks like a bit of both. The Glazers/Woodward only seem to spend big if the player has a high commerical/marketing value rather than getting the right player for the right position. 

The signings from 2002-2008 were incredible.

- Rio Ferdinand 02/03
- Cristiano Ronaldo 03/04
- Wayne Rooney 04/05
- Gabriel Heinze 04/05
- Alan Smith 04/05
- Gerard Piqué 04/05
- Nemanja Vidic‎ 05/06
- Patrice Evra 05/06
- Ji-sung Park 05/06
- Edwin van der Sar 05/06
- Michael Carrick 06/07
- Anderson 07/08
- Nani 07/08
- Owen Hargreaves 07/08
- Carlos Tévez 07/08

I won't list what happened after that as everyone knows it's been pretty terrible. 

[kaosmark2]

Just now, santowhir said:

Looks like a bit of both. The Glazers/Woodward only seem to spend big if the player has a high commerical/marketing value rather than getting the right player for the right position. 

The signings from 2002-2008 were incredible.

- Rio Ferdinand 02/03
- Cristiano Ronaldo 03/04
- Wayne Rooney 04/05
- Gabriel Heinze 04/05
- Alan Smith 04/05
- Gerard Piqué 04/05
- Nemanja Vidic‎ 05/06
- Patrice Evra 05/06
- Ji-sung Park 05/06
- Edwin van der Sar 05/06
- Michael Carrick 06/07
- Anderson 07/08
- Nani 07/08
- Owen Hargreaves 07/08
- Carlos Tévez 07/08

I won't list what happened after that as everyone knows it's been pretty terrible. 

That's missing out the shite that was signed in that period. There was still plenty of it. 

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, santowhir said:

Looks like a bit of both. The Glazers/Woodward only seem to spend big if the player has a high commerical/marketing value rather than getting the right player for the right position. 

The signings from 2002-2008 were incredible.

- Rio Ferdinand 02/03
- Cristiano Ronaldo 03/04
- Wayne Rooney 04/05
- Gabriel Heinze 04/05
- Alan Smith 04/05
- Gerard Piqué 04/05
- Nemanja Vidic‎ 05/06
- Patrice Evra 05/06
- Ji-sung Park 05/06
- Edwin van der Sar 05/06
- Michael Carrick 06/07
- Anderson 07/08
- Nani 07/08
- Owen Hargreaves 07/08
- Carlos Tévez 07/08

I won't list what happened after that as everyone knows it's been pretty terrible. 

I'd say that not too many of those were 'statement signings' at the time. They look good now because of their success at Utd (or at Barca in the case of Pique) after their signing. 

 

[santowhir]

5 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

That's missing out the shite that was signed in that period. There was still plenty of it. 

If you want to be pedantic I've left a few fringe players off and ones that didn't make the first team.

[santowhir]

4 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I'd say that not too many of those were 'statement signings' at the time. They look good now because of their success at Utd (or at Barca in the case of Pique) after their signing. 

 

That's exactly my point. 

[thetime]

17 minutes ago, santowhir said:

Looks like a bit of both. The Glazers/Woodward only seem to spend big if the player has a high commerical/marketing value rather than getting the right player for the right position. 

The signings from 2002-2008 were incredible.

- Rio Ferdinand 02/03
- Cristiano Ronaldo 03/04
- Wayne Rooney 04/05
- Gabriel Heinze 04/05
- Alan Smith 04/05
- Gerard Piqué 04/05
- Nemanja Vidic‎ 05/06
- Patrice Evra 05/06
- Ji-sung Park 05/06
- Edwin van der Sar 05/06
- Michael Carrick 06/07
- Anderson 07/08
- Nani 07/08
- Owen Hargreaves 07/08
- Carlos Tévez 07/08

I won't list what happened after that as everyone knows it's been pretty terrible. 

Big difference, united were signing players to freshen it up for a successful side. 

[santowhir]

1 minute ago, thetime said:

Big difference, united were signing players to freshen it up for a successful side. 

Exactly. But 2008 was a successful side and they failed to build from there, they brought Obertan and Owen in the same summer they sold Ronaldo ffs. 

[kaosmark2]

22 minutes ago, santowhir said:

If you want to be pedantic I've left a few fringe players off and ones that didn't make the first team.

That's exactly my point. You've left off the flops. 

[chemica]

Now Luis Enrique to Chelsea would make a lot more logical sense...

but when has football ever been logical?

[jyoung]

Annual preseason long shot accumulator placed.

Chelsea PL, West Brom EFL, Portsmouth EFL, Real Madrid LIG, Inter Milan SER, Bayern BUN,  Celtic SPL. 

330k return from a 5er.

[CRW5252]

On 6/19/2019 at 4:46 PM, chemica said:

Now Luis Enrique to Chelsea would make a lot more logical sense...

but when has football ever been logical?

That wouldn't make sense. One the reasons Chelsea fans didn't like Sarri was his tactics. Enrique would want Chelsea to play a similar style to Sarri.

Edited June 21, 2019 by CRW5252

[Hugh Jass]

3 hours ago, jyoung said:

Annual preseason long shot accumulator placed.

Chelsea PL, West Brom EFL, Portsmouth EFL, Real Madrid LIG, Inter Milan SER, Bayern BUN,  Celtic SPL. 

330k return from a 5er.

I can tell you now which team will let you down on that one...

[jyoung]

Just now, Hugh Jass said:

I can tell you now which team will let you down on that one...

Ha. I reckon Slav will get them in shape. Always go for a couple of favourites (Celtic, Bayern) and then a few outsiders (Chels, Inter etc) to bump the odds.

Cash out for 20p at Christmas probably.

[jyoung]

Sounds like de Ligt is going to Juve. Interesting move considering PSG and Barca were both interested. 

Crazy to think that they've signed Ramsey on a free, Rabiot possibly too and could also be about to splash the cash on de Ligt and Pogba!

[pink_triangle]

Great quote from Tim Vickery about VAR "Football wasn't made for this level of technological exactitude".

[CRW5252]

2 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

Great quote from Tim Vickery about VAR "Football wasn't made for this level of technological exactitude".

Why isn't it? VAR needs work but it is a great thing to add to the game. Will help stop cheating and avoid titles being decided on refereeing mistakes 

[pink_triangle]

3 hours ago, CRW5252 said:

Why isn't it? VAR needs work but it is a great thing to add to the game. Will help stop cheating and avoid titles being decided on refereeing mistakes 

Which titles have been decided on refereeing mistakes? A football league is the most fair way of doing it, but it will never be completely fair. It's not fair that transfer windows mean clubs can face a team before/after they sign  a player which can make it more easy/difficult to beat the team compared to other clubs. It's not fair injuries and suspensions mean clubs are at different levels of strength when they play different teams, it's not fair that clubs rest players before big matches that can effect some teams and not others. In my view over a season you just hope all these factors even out.  However you will never get total fairness.

I think VAR will change the way players play football in a negative way. I think it will make the game more set piece heavy, encourage players to kick the ball at defenders arms and move the balance too much in favour of attack instead of defence.

People have often said "that's a foul/handball" anywhere else on the pitch about things that happen in the box. I think in general people were content that there was a higher threshold in the box due to the reward of the penalty. It's hard to define that in a rulebook, but I think supporters in general were happy that there was an informal agreement to officiate in that way. 

[lost]

It been a bit bizarre watching some of the matches. I wonder if we will get to the point where when a goal goes in the crowd will sound subdued as they are expecting a VAR challenge.

The game now does feel completely different compared to say the changes in tennis or cricket.

Edited June 22, 2019 by lost

[CRW5252]

1 hour ago, pink_triangle said:

Which titles have been decided on refereeing mistakes? 

I was using titles to refer to all competitions, this includes knockout ones. There are many examples of teams getting knocked out unfairly due to refs decisions. If you want me to list some I can but I'm sure you're aware. 

1 hour ago, pink_triangle said:

 A football league is the most fair way of doing it, but it will never be completely fair. It's not fair that transfer windows mean clubs can face a team before/after they sign  a player which can make it more easy/difficult to beat the team compared to other clubs. It's not fair injuries and suspensions mean clubs are at different levels of strength when they play different teams, it's not fair that clubs rest players before big matches that can effect some teams and not others. In my view over a season you just hope all these factors even out.  However you will never get total fairness.

Refeering mistakes have a far bigger impact on the game than any of those factors. VAR will help ensure these mistakes are avoided. If fairness in the game can be increased substantially, why not do it? 

1 hour ago, pink_triangle said:

I think VAR will change the way players play football in a negative way. I think it will make the game more set piece heavy, encourage players to kick the ball at defenders arms and move the balance too much in favour of attack instead of defence.

Why would it be more set piece heavy? 

I agree regarding the point on attackers kicking the ball at defenders hands. They need to change the rule and hopefully they will. 

1 hour ago, pink_triangle said:

People have often said "that's a foul/handball" anywhere else on the pitch about things that happen in the box. I think in general people were content that there was a higher threshold in the box due to the reward of the penalty. It's hard to define that in a rulebook, but I think supporters in general were happy that there was an informal agreement to officiate in that way. 

That sounds more like you have an issue with the harshness of a penalty than VAR itself. I think it would be sensible if they rethink what consistutes a penalty now that fouls in the box are getting spotted more often. 

 

VAR is a big change that will take time to get right. I think everyone just needs a bit of patience. 

Edited June 22, 2019 by CRW5252

[pink_triangle]

27 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

I was using titles to refer to all competitions, this includes knockout ones. There are many examples of teams getting knocked out unfairly due to refs decisions. If you want me to list some I can but I'm sure you're aware.

When Wrexham bear Arsenal in the FA Cup (my favourite game of all time) they would not have won if VAR was in place. I feel that the advantage Arsenal had in terms of players far outweighed the disadvantage they got from a couple of dodgy decisions. I don’t feel football suffered from us getting the rub of the green. When I think of previous premiership, European and world champions none co,e across as undeserving. In any format there are loads of factors in play, some you control, some you can’t.

 

33 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

 

Refeering mistakes have a far bigger impact on the game than any of those factors. VAR will help ensure these mistakes are avoided. If fairness in the game can be increased substantially, why not do it? 

 

A far more effective way of making the game more fair would be to make all the clubs resources more equal. Money has far more of an impact on a teams position then refereeing decisions. So why not change the most unfair things first? You also wouldn’t interrupt the flow of the game as much

 

37 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

 

Why would it be more set piece heavy? 

 

Thinking about it I think that’s bad wording to my thought process. I’m thinking more it’s going to favour the more direct teams who launch the balls (from free kicks, corners, throw in etc) into the box, as the possibility of getting a penalty increases with VAR

 

47 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

. 

That sounds more like you have an issue with the harshness of a penalty than VAR itself. I think it would be sensible if they rethink what consistutes a penalty now that fouls in the box are getting spotted more often. 

 

 I think it’s easier to say that you can rethink what’s a penalty than define in a rulebook. I think penalties have generally worked ok because officials have been allowed to use their common sense to not call fouls as fouls in the penalty box, Im not sure how you define common sense in a rulebook.

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, lost said:

It been a bit bizarre watching some of the matches. I wonder if we will get to the point where when a goal goes in the crowd will sound subdued as they are expecting a VAR challenge.

The game now does feel completely different compared to say the changes in tennis or cricket.

The big thing in tennis and cricket is the natural (and quick) end points, which football doesn’t have.

[CRW5252]

4 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

When Wrexham bear Arsenal in the FA Cup (my favourite game of all time) they would not have won if VAR was in place. I feel that the advantage Arsenal had in terms of players far outweighed the disadvantage they got from a couple of dodgy decisions. I don’t feel football suffered from us getting the rub of the green. When I think of previous premiership, European and world champions none co,e across as undeserving. In any format there are loads of factors in play, some you control, some you can’t.

I think Arsenal fans might disagree! Arsenal having better players doesn't mean they deserve decisions against them to even things out. That's an odd thing to even suggest. 

4 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

A far more effective way of making the game more fair would be to make all the clubs resources more equal. Money has far more of an impact on a teams position then refereeing decisions. So why not change the most unfair things first? You also wouldn’t interrupt the flow of the game as much

Why not change both? 

Sorting out the inequality between clubs finances is a much tougher task and there has been some implementations to help it already (admittedly they haven't been very successful). 

4 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

 

 Thinking about it I think that’s bad wording to my thought process. I’m thinking more it’s going to favour the more direct teams who launch the balls (from free kicks, corners, throw in etc) into the box, as the possibility of getting a penalty increases with VAR

There's no evidence of this happening but I guess we'll see. 

4 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

 I think it’s easier to say that you can rethink what’s a penalty than define in a rulebook. I think penalties have generally worked ok because officials have been allowed to use their common sense to not call fouls as fouls in the penalty box, Im not sure how you define common sense in a rulebook.

They have not worked well at all before VAR. Way too many penalties given by mistakes. Refs can still use common sense when using VAR, not sure why you think this disappears. 

People hate change and football fans/players are no different. Lots of people moaned about the pass back rule when it came in but once they got used to it they realised its importance. The same will happen with VAR. One thing VAR will substantially help stop is diving and I think we'll both agree this needs to be stamped out of the game.