The 2022-2023 Football Thread

[Lord Blackadder]

The thing is, Leicester City is the club that has caused managers of other clubs huge amount of problems when it comes to investment of players because every time a manger goes to the chairman asking for more funds to buy players to help the club win things, the chairman can just reply back with 'Leicester City 2015-16'. No premier league manager will be able to have a comeback with that.

Leicester was a 5,000-to-1 shot, a season in which Ranieri's side massively overperformed at the exact moment all the usual contenders were having remarkably flat seasons. And on top of that Arsenal and Spurs still had to choke when either should have won the title.

That's no dig against Leicester, it was a tremendous effort and wonderful story. But any chairman that sees that as a 'strategy' is even thicker than we think chairmen are.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Leicester was a 5,000-to-1 shot, a season in which Ranieri's side massively overperformed at the exact moment all the usual contenders were having remarkably flat seasons. And on top of that Arsenal and Spurs still had to choke when either should have won the title.

That's no dig against Leicester, it was a tremendous effort and wonderful story. But any chairman that sees that as a 'strategy' is even thicker than we think chairmen are.

Plus, while everyone recalls Vardy's influence (and it was significant), the fact that Leicester were not able to hold the team together - both N'Gole Kanté, who was an incredibly important part of the team that won the title, and Riyad Mahrez, whose role supplemented that of the better known Vardy, were subsequently sold (as better resoucred teams came knocking at the door, eyeing what Leicester had to offer) - meant that they were unable to evn think of replicating their extraordinary achievement.

 

[laptech]

Leicester was a 5,000-to-1 shot, a season in which Ranieri's side massively overperformed at the exact moment all the usual contenders were having remarkably flat seasons. And on top of that Arsenal and Spurs still had to choke when either should have won the title.

That's no dig against Leicester, it was a tremendous effort and wonderful story. But any chairman that sees that as a 'strategy' is even thicker than we think chairmen are.

Even if you think the odds were long, the issue is it can be done and thus owners and chairman's will be looking to do the same. If one can do it, so can others. Everything came together at once, the right manager, the right player and team mentality. For years Manchester United were the team that clubs owners and chairman's used as a benchmark for what is/was required to win the premier league because United have won it 13 times. Then comes along Leicester City, running on a shoe string budget when compared to the 'bigger' clubs and with no star stellar named players on mega wages and yet when a new manager was introduced, those same players with the new manager turned things around and made them a winning team. I bet nearly every manager in the premier league would love to cut their wage bill down to the size that Leicester City had and still be able to win the league. Manchester United are no longer the benchmark for achieving league success because in my opinion Leicester City now are. Yes the odds were extremely long but they did it so why cant another team with the same resources?.

@Scepticalscribe what you write is what happens, it is part and parcel of the game. A smaller club has promising talented players which the bigger clubs notices and comes calling. As fan's do we admire a player who wants to leave to better themselves or do we only admire them when they want to stay with their club so they can achieve more success? This is why I do not respect Kante or Mahrez because at the first sign of success both wanted to jump ship as soon as the offers started coming in rather than stay to achieve more success at Leicester.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Even if you think the odds were long, the issue is it can be done and thus owners and chairman's will be looking to do the same. If one can do it, so can others.

Of course it can be done...but the absolutely crucial and inescapable reality is that it takes luck against tremendously long odds. It's a pure gamble with a very low chance of success and potentially stern financial consequences. 4,999 times out of 5,000 it will fail. And has failed.

Moreover, Leicester themselves did not set out to win the league that year. They were as surprised as anyone. So even they didn't do it intentionally as an explicit strategy for winning the league - because no sane person would.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

@Scepticalscribe what you write is what happens, it is part and parcel of the game. A smaller club has promising talented players which the bigger clubs notices and comes calling. As fan's do we admire a player who wants to leave to better themselves or do we only admire them when they want to stay with their club so they can achieve more success? This is why I do not respect Kante or Mahrez because at the first sign of success both wanted to jump ship as soon as the offers started coming in rather than stay to achieve more success at Leicester.

I know that this happens, and that it is both a dismally predictable and horribly inevitable part of the game.

However, my point was that - to my mind - both Kanté and Mahrez were as essential to Leicester's success in 2016 (and their absence in subsequent seasons almost guaranteed that it could not be repeated) as were Vardy, Kasper Schmeichel, and, for that matter Claudio Ranieri himself.

 

[Apple fanboy]

I know that this happens, and that it is both a dismally predictable and horribly inevitable part of the game.

However, my point was that - to my mind - both Kanté and Mahrez were as essential to Leicester's success in 2016 (and their absence in subsequent seasons almost guaranteed that it could not be repeated) as were Vardy, Kasper Schmeichel, and, for that matter Claudio Ranieri himself.

Didn’t Arsenal try to buy Vardy the following summer? At least that’s how I remember it being reported.

 

[Apple fanboy]

Of course it can be done...but the absolutely crucial and inescapable reality is that it takes luck against tremendously long odds. It's a pure gamble with a very low chance of success and potentially stern financial consequences. 4,999 times out of 5,000 it will fail. And has failed.

Moreover, Leicester themselves did not set out to win the league that year. They were as surprised as anyone. So even they didn't do it intentionally as an explicit strategy for winning the league - because no sane person would.

That’s what I love about football. Any team can win on their day. If it’s happened once it can (and will) happen again.
But as I like to remind a Liverpool supporter I know, Liverpool and Leicester both have the same number of PL titles. Makes me chuckle. Makes him annoyed!

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Didn’t Arsenal try to buy Vardy the following summer? At least that’s how I remember it being reported.

I'm not so sure that that was what Vardy himself had in mind; in fact, I had always assumed that those stories were not serious (as in that a transfer elsewhere was not seriously on the cards) and that Vardy merely sought to use outside interest as a negotiating tactic when negotiating a fresh contract with Leicester.

 

[Apple fanboy]

I'm not so sure that that was what Vardy himself had in mind; in fact, I had always assumed that those stories were not serious (as in that a transfer elsewhere was not seriously on the cards) and that Vardy merely sought to use outside interest as a negotiating tactic when negotiating a fresh contract with Leicester.

Hard to know these days if what we read is true or not. But nether the less it’s unusual for a player to see out his days at a smaller club these days sadly.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Hard to know these days if what we read is true or not. But nether the less it’s unusual for a player to see out his days at a smaller club these days sadly.

Vardy is a legend in Leicester, in a way that he wouldn't be (and couldn't be) anywhere else.

However, in general, I would be in agreement with you; I also liked to see a gifted player seeing out his days - or, much of his career - at smaller clubs. Such players are a lot more rare nowadays.

This is one reason why - for example - I wouldn't begrudge Harry Kane a transfer, should he wish to quit Spurs; he gave years of his life to Spurs, not to mention ambition, drive, energy, and endless and genuine commitment.

 

[laptech]

Vardy is a legend in Leicester, in a way that he wouldn't be (and couldn't be) anywhere else.

However, in general, I would be in agreement with you; I also liked to see a gifted player seeing out his days - or, much of his career - at smaller clubs. Such players are a lot more rare nowadays.

This is one reason why - for example - I wouldn't begrudge Harry Kane a transfer, should he wish to quit Spurs; he gave years of his life to Spurs, not to mention ambition, drive, energy, and endless and genuine commitment.

As far as many football fans are concerned, there are two types of players, those with integrity and those without. This is why fans from over clubs have so much respect for players such as Steve Bull (Wolves), Matt Le Tisser and Alan Shearer (Newcastle). All 3 had immense talent and were persistently approached by top teams and each time they refused to leave their club because they wanted to help their club to win things. I remember the amount of times Manchester United kept trying to tempt Shearer away from Newcastle and each time he turned them down. I remember seeing him in an interview where it was put to him that one of the years United came calling it was the year they won the league and it was asked does he not regret leaving Newcastle to have possibly been able to win a league medal and his response was no because he wanted to achieve it with his club Newcastle. Both Steve Bull and Matt Le Tisser have said the same thing over the years that they stayed with the clubs so they can win things with them.

Does Kane need to have a league medal to prove that he is a good footballer? no he doesn't therefore there is no reason to move.

 

[daneoni]

He doesn't need it to prove it but it'll be a nice sign off. Just like Messi didn't need the WC but now has the record.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Playing devil's advocate here:

Why are players crucified for not showing sufficient 'loyalty' when nobody else in the game does? Managers are fired at the drop of a hat, along with their staff. Owners and chairmen never fire themselves even when they are incompetent, and 'loyalty' isn't in their vocab...they generally have no issue asset-stripping a club or using it as a pawn in bigger business/geopolitical projects. Moreover, owners and managers can manipulate the 'loyalty' narrative to try and pressure a player to stay at a club even if it is not in their own best interest to do so. Or to blame a player who leaves even if they were driven out.

Fans alone are 'loyal,' sometimes blindly so.

While I appreciate the relationship a 'one-club man' can build with the fans, I think it's unfair to see it as a purely 'good' thing, and to criticize other players who act like, well, professionals.

 

[Apple fanboy]

Playing devil's advocate here:

Why are players crucified for not showing sufficient 'loyalty' when nobody else in the game does? Managers are fired at the drop of a hat, along with their staff. Owners and chairmen never fire themselves even when they are incompetent, and 'loyalty' isn't in their vocab...they generally have no issue asset-stripping a club or using it as a pawn in bigger business/geopolitical projects. Moreover, owners and managers can manipulate the 'loyalty' narrative to try and pressure a player to stay at a club even if it is not in their own best interest to do so. Or to blame a player who leaves even if they were driven out.

Fans alone are 'loyal,' sometimes blindly so.

While I appreciate the relationship a 'one-club man' can build with the fans, I think it's unfair to see it as a purely 'good' thing, and to criticize other players who act like, well, professionals.

Agree only fans are loyal. But when managers get the sack, they usually get a very healthy pay off!

Chairman can sometimes get death threats and all sorts because the club isn't winning the league. Your average fan might not appreciate that even though your owner is a millionaire they didn't get that way by sinking millions into a company that isn't turning a profit.

The days of a Jack Walker buying the league are pretty much done.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Playing devil's advocate here:

Why are players crucified for not showing sufficient 'loyalty' when nobody else in the game does? Managers are fired at the drop of a hat, along with their staff. Owners and chairmen never fire themselves even when they are incompetent, and 'loyalty' isn't in their vocab...they generally have no issue asset-stripping a club or using it as a pawn in bigger business/geopolitical projects. Moreover, owners and managers can manipulate the 'loyalty' narrative to try and pressure a player to stay at a club even if it is not in their own best interest to do so. Or to blame a player who leaves even if they were driven out.

Fans alone are 'loyal,' sometimes blindly so.

While I appreciate the relationship a 'one-club man' can build with the fans, I think it's unfair to see it as a purely 'good' thing, and to criticize other players who act like, well, professionals.

Very fair post, and you make a fair point.

For my part, I'm not criticising the players who move - their careers are short enough, and are frequently truncated even further by serious injury - it is just that (yes, the romanticism of some of the old values, and yes, I accept that football is jettisoning them at warp speed, and that - historically and traditionally - those who have owned clubs, and owned the game, have rarely demonstrated the virtues they expect - and used to demand - from players and coaches) I do have a soft spot for good players who choose to remain with a single club for the majority of their playing career.

And, sometimes, the loyalty of fans can go too far, into a sort of wilful myopia.

 

[laptech]

Playing devil's advocate here:

Why are players crucified for not showing sufficient 'loyalty' when nobody else in the game does? Managers are fired at the drop of a hat, along with their staff. Owners and chairmen never fire themselves even when they are incompetent, and 'loyalty' isn't in their vocab...they generally have no issue asset-stripping a club or using it as a pawn in bigger business/geopolitical projects. Moreover, owners and managers can manipulate the 'loyalty' narrative to try and pressure a player to stay at a club even if it is not in their own best interest to do so. Or to blame a player who leaves even if they were driven out.

Fans alone are 'loyal,' sometimes blindly so.

While I appreciate the relationship a 'one-club man' can build with the fans, I think it's unfair to see it as a purely 'good' thing, and to criticize other players who act like, well, professionals.

A players loyalty get crucified when then spends years going on about how they love the club and play for the shirt and are seen kissing the club badge on their shirt and then when the right opportunity comes along they drop the club like a dead weight. Loyalty?? my a$$. Loyalty is when someone believes and lives the words that they say and the actions they do. NEVER EVER kiss the club badge unless you truly and deeply mean it otherwise they can pee off to another club. Wayne Rooney is a classic example. He talk about loving the club, being their for the players and the club and yes at times kissed the club badge and so what does he do to engineer a massive pay rise, he goes public about his concerns about the direction the club was going in terms of wanting to win things. Ferguson was so incensed by this that he immediately went to the club owners telling them he wanted Rooney gone for his disrespectful public outburst. Ferguson is told Rooney is going nowhere, the club give him a massive pay rise and he decides to stay at the club. Loyalty at the club, what a piss take. All he wanted was more money so he worked an angle to get it.

I have far more respect for players who are honest and say they are at the club for the money rather than hear their rubbish about how much they love the club blah blah blah. If the words that have come out of Kane's mouth about his love of the club are true then he should stay and try to help the club to win things but if he goes then he's just another mercenary looking to get out of his talent as much as he can.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Agree only fans are loyal. But when managers get the sack, they usually get a very healthy pay off!

Chairman can sometimes get death threats and all sorts because the club isn't winning the league. Your average fan might not appreciate that even though your owner is a millionaire they didn't get that way by sinking millions into a company that isn't turning a profit.

The days of a Jack Walker buying the league are pretty much done.

To be fair, the people who send those death threats are also usually 'fans.'

That's another oddity of football - you can't publicly criticize 'the fans', even though a not-insignificant minority of them are some combination of dumb, violent, reactionary, drunk, criminal hate-mongers out to make trouble. Who know little to nothing of the game.

A players loyalty get crucified when then spends years going on about how they love the club and play for the shirt and are seen kissing the club badge on their shirt and then when the right opportunity comes along they drop the club like a dead weight. Loyalty?? my a$$.

Badge-kissing is incredibly silly, anyone who does that has made a rod for their own back and I have no sympathy for them.

I have far more respect for players who are honest and say they are at the club for the money rather than hear their rubbish about how much they love the club blah blah blah. If the words that have come out of Kane's mouth about his love of the club are true then he should stay and try to help the club to win things but if he goes then he's just another mercenary looking to get out of his talent as much as he can.

That's why Winston Bogarde is the most honest footballer ever...how many footballers really want to say what he said but can never summon the courage?:

“This world is about money, so when you are offered those millions you take them, few people will ever earn so much. I am one of the few fortunates who do. I may be one of the worst buys in the history of the Premiership but I don’t care.”

 

[fanboy-ish]

Has anyone watched something from Gerard Piqué's Kings League?

Apparently it was a great success, what are your thoughts about it?

It may be a nice way to see older players in a less stressful and demanding setting, allowing them to showcase their skills, I believe Aguero, Bernat and Ronaldinho took part in the league. As far as I know, people like it because it's faster, shorter and more spectacular than regular football, it may keep attracting viewers because the Premier League is the only league that can deliver excitement on almost a weekly basis, around Europe there's not much going on, except for a very few matches in Spain and Germany.

(I'm posting this here because technically it's still related to football, and I don't think it's big enough to deserve a separate topic)

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Has anyone watched something from Gerard Piqué's Kings League?

Apparently it was a great success, what are your thoughts about it?

It may be a nice way to see older players in a less stressful and demanding setting, allowing them to showcase their skills, I believe Aguero, Bernat and Ronaldinho took part in the league. As far as I know, people like it because it's faster, shorter and more spectacular than regular football, it may keep attracting viewers because the Premier League is the only league that can deliver excitement on almost a weekly basis, around Europe there's not much going on, except for a very few matches in Spain and Germany.

(I'm posting this here because technically it's still related to football, and I don't think it's big enough to deserve a separate topic)

No, not only have I not watched this, I have to confess that I had never heard of it.

To be quite candid, it is not something that would interest me.

In football, it is the fact that the games, (or competitions) are competitive, that something is riding on the outcome, is what interests me, and engages my emotions and interest.

This is why I will never watch a friendly match, for example, or, for that matter, a testimonial, let alone settings that are less stressful and demanding. While I applaud the concept, I have to admit that I have no interest in watching how it is executed.

 

[Silencio]

Footballers have short careers that can be severely degraded or even ended completely without warning due to injury. I don't blame any footballer for having objectives they want to achieve in the time they're tenuously allotted, whether it's making as much money as possible or winning as many trophies as possible. The players are the one we're all paying to watch, so they deserve their fair share of the proceeds.

If people think owners and investors should take all the profits, maybe they should set up a pay-per-view network so people can pay to watch them count their money or whatever.

 

[laptech]

I do not begrudge players getting the millions they do, they have a talent and is using that talent to get what they can BUT what I cannot stand is when players go on about being a fan of the club, wanting to do well at the club, that they are there to help the club be successful and all that BS and then when things are not going their way off they go the first opportunity they get. That just proves everything they said is BS and it was said just to keep the fans happy.

If a player joins a club because the club is paying them better than any other club then fine, great but don't go on this BS talk of how much they are a fan of the club blah blah blah. Just be honest, say your there for the wages and be done with it. At least that way fan's know where they stand with players.

Go read some of the many biographies from the old boys of the game from the 60's and 70's and you will see that they did what they did because they loved to play football. They did not care about money or fame, they did what they did for the love of the game. Yes they were happy they got paid for playing the game but their motivation was not to get as much as they could out of it, constantly complaining about the club and the manager and the players to try and get better wages, no they did it because they loved to play football and getting paid for it was just a bonus to them. That passion has sadly gone with the majority of today's players. They tell the fans what we think we want to hear because it's all driven by PR now. A player who earns nearly a million a month telling fans they play football because they love the game is utter BS in my opinion.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

@laptech: Two points by way of partial answer to what you have written:

One concerns Alex Ferguson.

Yes, he was a terrific manager, but his ("incandescent") style of management would not be remotely tolerated (such as, throwing a boot at David Beckham, so that the latter required stiches above his eye-brow) or deemed acceptable nowadays. An assault charge would not be inconceivable.

Actually, in his own way, - brilliant though he was - in some ways, he is as much a dinosaur as is Mourinho.

The second concerns the PR stuff: This is often a condition of the bloated salaries players receive, to ensure continued fan engagement, especially if the club has an international profile and fan base (as Manchester United most certainly does); it comes with the package. These days, players have to have a social media profile.

Moreover, nobody would want a return to the days of players playing purely for passion, - a time when they were paid a standard working class salary, which left many of them physical and psychological wrecks - not to mention financially constrained, or stressed, battered legends living on straitened means - once their playing days were over and they had retired - while the club owners of the time still made vast profits.

Historically, successful footballers were often working class lads with a talent for the game, frequently lacking either the education or the training that would have equipped them for something else, (Jack Charlton famously eschewed a life down the pits as a coal miner, and decided to forego a chance to join the police force, choosing to become a footballer instead, and his was a football family, several of his mother's brothers, the Milburns, were successful footballers - who supported such a career move) and football (once the salary cap - a maximum wage set by the Football League was lifted as a result of Jimmy Hill's successful campaign in 1961 when he chaired the Professional Footballers' Association) was one of the few means available to them of achieving some degree of social mobility and financial security.

Actually, while I do think that the game is in danger of devouring itself, and losing sight of larger issues (such as issues of identity and being rooted in a community and sharing its values) by allowing clubs to be bought by oligarchs the origins of whose fortunes do not bear close examination or inspection, or nation states with questionable ethics and deplorable attitudes to human rights, I also think that it is all too easy to simply attack the players, - most of whom are working class lads made good - and without whom none of this could ever take place.

 

[laptech]

@laptech: Two points by way of partial answer to what you have written:

One concerns Alex Ferguson.

Yes, he was a terrific manager, but his ("incandescent") style of management would not be remotely tolerated (such as, throwing a boot at David Beckham, so that the latter required stiches above his eye-brow) or deemed acceptable nowadays. An assault charge would not be inconceivable.

Actually, in his own way, - brilliant though he was - in some ways, he is as much a dinosaur as is Mourinho.

The second concerns the PR stuff: This is often a condition of the bloated salaries players receive, to ensure continued fan engagement, especially if the club has an international profile and fan base (as Manchester United most certainly does); it comes with the package.

Moreover, nobody would want a return to the days of players playing purely for passion, - a time when they were paid a standard working class salary, which left many of them physical and psychological wrecks - not to mention financially constrained - once their playing days were over and they had retired - while the club owners of the time still made profits.

Historically, successful footballers were often working class lads with a talent for the game, frequently lacking either the education or raining that would have equipped them for something else, and football (once the salary cap - a maximum wage set by the Football League was lifted as a result of Jimmy Hill's successful campaign in 1961 when he chaired the Professional Footballers' Association) was one of the few means available to them of achieving some degree of social mobility and financial security.

Actually, while I do think that the game is in danger of devouring itself, and losing sight of larger issues (such as issues of identity and being rooted in a community and sharing its values) by allowing clubs to be bought by oligarchs the origins of whose fortunes do not bear close examination or inspection, or nation states with questionable ethics and deplorable attitudes to human rights, I also think that it is all too easy to simply attack the players, - most of whom are working class lads made good - and without whom none of this could ever take place.

Why can't we attack the players? they are the ones demanding outrageous wage demands and increases via their agents and you cannot blame the agents because whilst they are paid to put the interests of their client first, the player is the one still in control and can tell the agent to stop what they are doing. Managers no longer have the power because it has all transferred to the players. All a player(s) have to do is throw their toys out the pram with the end results the manager getting sacked whilst the players get wage increases. Football lost it's identity the day the premier league came into existence. the players were seeing how much clubs were getting in sponsorship deals and advertising and they wanted a piece of it.

I have talent and experience in an industry where I can earn 3-4 times what I do now but do i? no because I love what I do and and am very happy where I am. I am not one of these people who look to use my talents for the purpose of milking out the system as much money as a I can. I am happy to earn what I earn because of the love and enjoyment of what I do. Football players used to have that mentality but not anymore, now it's a case of lets see how much money I can squeeze out of everybody, the club, the sponsors, the fans, everyone and yes there will be a point when the game will implode. It won't be a case of 'if' it happens it will be a case of 'when' it happens.

 

[daneoni]

Woy returns to Palace (again) for the rest of the season.

Viera might end up in Leeds eventually

Meanwhile Aguero has a mini arrhythmia live on stream but is ok

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Why can't we attack the players? they are the ones demanding outrageous wage demands and increases via their agents and you cannot blame the agents because whilst they are paid to put the interests of their client first, the player is the one still in control and can tell the agent to stop what they are doing.

I disagree. Some agents - especially the so-called 'super agents' - are parasites, pure and simple, and the inflation of wealth in the game comes from the financial doping tactics adopted by owners, and permissiveness of the governing bodies who let them do it. 'Player power' is a real phenomenon, and grew after Bosman, but the excesses we see in that arena are again largely the fault of club owners and the Galactico model. With agents egging players on in terms of causing trouble. Look at it another way...who is around longest, the agents, players, or owners? The idea that Lukaku has a bigger impact than Roman Abramovich on how money in the game is spent just doesn't wash.

Are some players spoiled brats? Absolutely. But the fault lies in the system....because almost ALL owners are even more spoiled, and have much more money.

Further, managers are as powerful as their owners permit them to be. Klopp and Guardiola are hardly doormats, and Arsenal chose to back Arteta when players stonewalled him. The age of the autocratic manager who runs everything is long gone, and good riddance, that's too much to put in one person's lap anyway. But that doesn't mean mangers are powerless. The overarching problem is interfering owners who undermine their own managers (see, for example, Everton).

EDIT: In other news, Premier League, those champions of justice, have now bravely ruled that owners guilty of human rights abuses are disqualified from owning a club. The words 'the least they can do' are marching rapidly in the direction of the conversation here...and of course this immediately, necessarily, makes them hypocrites in at least the spirit if not the letter of the law, since some of the clubs in the league are effectively owned by states that are unquestionably guilty of human rights abuses. But will never be punished.