Greedy big PL bastards at it again | Page 2 | Vital Football

Greedy big PL bastards at it again

Hypothetical question for you. If the premier league said to us " You have won the European Cup twice and for cosmetic reasons we are giving you a bye so you can join us. Would you take it?
 
Then you aren’t putting your point across well enough because I still just plain disagree with what you seem to be saying.

Look at the league tables and tell me there’s much difference. There isn’t apart from the fact that in recent years our top two, three or four have scored more points than the Spanish league implying that their league is as competitive if not more so.

Telling me that Real and Barca haven’t had to work as hard in a season where Liverpool finished a dozen points better off is just plain wrong.

The points earned and winning margins are a direct result of the effect of the rest of the league. Or are they not playing these teams week in, week out?
What I'm putting across is actually the argument of Kuper and Syzmanski in Soccernomics. Part of the book is entitled "why England lose" and aside from the tactical and grassroots arguments, the suggest what I have been arguing above.

If I'm not explaining it very well, but you have even a modicum of interest in the opinion (agree or not) I would highly recommend the book anyway. It's chapter on why new signings sometimes fail is especially illuminating.
 
Hypothetical question for you. If the premier league said to us " You have won the European Cup twice and for cosmetic reasons we are giving you a bye so you can join us. Would you take it?
Great question.

I personally wouldn't, no. After all these years, I want more than anything the sense of having "earned" a way back. The chagrin at this proposal is that it is designed to make that even harder.

But it wouldn't be down to me, and the owners would undoubtedly go for it. Even if the decision was put in my personal hands, how could you take that without taking some sort of vote of fans?
 
But this is my argument. How many games to they have to put in a proper shift for? How many really difficult games do they have? How many where they can stroll through in second gear?

It would be interesting to compare the stats on distance covered of players in top leagues as well.

And a competitive league has not had a particularly negative effect on english teams in European competition has it?

England clubs must be second behind Spain this century. But three different clubs have won the trophy with only the best Barcelona side in history and Madrid represented for Spain. Sevilla's dominance of the Sevilla cup is one of those abberations of football; not that they aren't a very good side, but it is unusual and I suspect is down more to confidence and belief now than anything

Its the difficult games that make the difference.

Even with training regimes, the sessions get more intense prior to a big game not easier.

You cannot play against the best when you are under cooked fitness wise
 
Hypothetical question for you. If the premier league said to us " You have won the European Cup twice and for cosmetic reasons we are giving you a bye so you can join us. Would you take it?
I wouldn’t because I like the idea of proper competition etc but I don’t have the slightest doubt that our owners would rip their arms off.
 
What I'm putting across is actually the argument of Kuper and Syzmanski in Soccernomics. Part of the book is entitled "why England lose" and aside from the tactical and grassroots arguments, the suggest what I have been arguing above.

If I'm not explaining it very well, but you have even a modicum of interest in the opinion (agree or not) I would highly recommend the book anyway. It's chapter on why new signings sometimes fail is especially illuminating.
I will certainly have a look but may also post a copy to our owners with the bit about new signings highlighted.
 
why are clubs like Suthampton on the list? They were in Championship 6 or 7 seasons ago.
 
What I'm putting across is actually the argument of Kuper and Syzmanski in Soccernomics. Part of the book is entitled "why England lose" and aside from the tactical and grassroots arguments, the suggest what I have been arguing above.

If I'm not explaining it very well, but you have even a modicum of interest in the opinion (agree or not) I would highly recommend the book anyway. It's chapter on why new signings sometimes fail is especially illuminating.

it must be debateble, that we lose anyway, weve won as many world cups as Spain and the other main 3 have all won as hosts so its not like we're 10 behind everybody and to be fair we've been unlucky at times. Italy were the dominant nation for decades so it's really Germany that over achieve
 
Hypothetical question for you. If the premier league said to us " You have won the European Cup twice and for cosmetic reasons we are giving you a bye so you can join us. Would you take it?
No because we'd get knocked out by someone like Shamrock Rovers nowadays.
 
why are clubs like Suthampton on the list? They were in Championship 6 or 7 seasons ago.

The big clubs won't say "We want the power" , which is what they want, so I believe they have disguised it as "the nine teams with the longest PL runs". Shows how long the average PL experience lasts if Southampton are one of the longest serving clubs !

The government should introduce a sport tv income tax ,even if it's only a one off, to help the poorer clubs. Why should the taxpayer bail out an industry paying people £400k a week. Great teams like Blackpool, Bolton , Wolves etc have kept it at the top for upwards of a hundred years.

I'm old enough to remember Liverpool and Man U being in division two. The big clubs are now riding the crest of a wave created by these other clubs over the years.
 
why are clubs like Suthampton on the list? They were in Championship 6 or 7 seasons ago.

I think I read somewhere that Southampton Everton & West Ham were the next 3 longest serving PL teams. My understanding is that if one them gets relegated they will be replaced by the next longest serving team.

It is all bollox anyway - they only need 6 teams to be in agreement to pass any changes
 
Interesting timing:

Man U and Liverpool both suffer heavy defeats, almost as if they're not guaranteed top spots and deference from the rest of English football...

...so they unveil a scheme to cement their power, sugar-coating it with the promise of some cash handed out to the EFL. Hmm...
 
Interesting timing:

Man U and Liverpool both suffer heavy defeats, almost as if they're not guaranteed top spots and deference from the rest of English football...

...so they unveil a scheme to cement their power, sugar-coating it with the promise of some cash handed out to the EFL. Hmm...

It's not a conspiracy if they really are trying to fuck you over...
 
Interesting timing:

Man U and Liverpool both suffer heavy defeats, almost as if they're not guaranteed top spots and deference from the rest of English football...

...so they unveil a scheme to cement their power, sugar-coating it with the promise of some cash handed out to the EFL. Hmm...

Do you honestly think this has been drawn up on the back of a fag packet after two of the top six got hammered?

The planning of this farce has been in the offing for quite some while.

It is more than a coincidence that three of the so called top six have owners who are accustomed to the American franchise system where money flies their way regardless of results on the pitch; this is nothing more than an opening pitch to turn the PL into something similar.

The fact that Rick Parry has come out in favour of the proposal means he is not fit for his role and should be asked to relinquish his post; we can then move on to Greg Clark and see what his position is, and if he is in favour, he can fuck off too.

There is a very easy way to stop all of this before it gets out of hand; cancel your fucking Sky and BT subscriptions and let them know why.

You cannot seriously complain about this if you insist on funding it.
 
Do you honestly think this has been drawn up on the back of a fag packet after two of the top six got hammered?

The planning of this farce has been in the offing for quite some while.

It is more than a coincidence that three of the so called top six have owners who are accustomed to the American franchise system where money flies their way regardless of results on the pitch; this is nothing more than an opening pitch to turn the PL into something similar.

The fact that Rick Parry has come out in favour of the proposal means he is not fit for his role and should be asked to relinquish his post; we can then move on to Greg Clark and see what his position is, and if he is in favour, he can fuck off too.

There is a very easy way to stop all of this before it gets out of hand; cancel your fucking Sky and BT subscriptions and let them know why.

You cannot seriously complain about this if you insist on funding it.

No, I don't for a minute think they only just dreamed this up - just that the timing is ironic.

Coming so soon after the 6-1 and 7-2 hammerings these clubs just suffered, they deserve all the flak they get for being the prime movers behind this plan.

It emphasises why the rest of the football league should resist any effort by the Big Few to pull the drawbridge up and keep the serfs out.
 
No, I don't for a minute think they only just dreamed this up - just that the timing is ironic.

Coming so soon after the 6-1 and 7-2 hammerings these clubs just suffered, they deserve all the flak they get for being the prime movers behind this plan.

It emphasises why the rest of the football league should resist any effort by the Big Few to pull the drawbridge up and keep the serfs out.

The Football League have absolutely no say in the matter; if the PL vote for a closed shop, that is exactly what will happen.

The only things stopping that is the adverse publicity and, ironically, the Government who are threatening to impose regulation.