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.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?
Great question.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?
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
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.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 will certainly have a look but may also post a copy to our owners with the bit about new signings highlighted.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.
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.
No because we'd get knocked out by someone like Shamrock Rovers nowadays.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?
Subset of the mid tier teams who they think tend to vote the "right" way. Notice Leicester City aren't on the list, despite winning the whole competition 4 year ago. Also notice Leicester City were the only team to vote against the £14.95 pay per view plan.why are clubs like Suthampton on the list? They were in Championship 6 or 7 seasons ago.
why are clubs like Suthampton on the list? They were in Championship 6 or 7 seasons ago.
why are clubs like Suthampton on the list? They were in Championship 6 or 7 seasons ago.
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...
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.