The Footie Thread

[Swango1980]

This post I don’t understand at all.
Barca had a team that dominated football under Pep. They did it with a team that had a core from their famous Academy.
Relate that to Utd, they dominated football esp in the prem league with a team that “ you cant win anything with kids”. Basically from there academy. To say Barca at times were boring then surely Utd were, and I don’t for one minute think they were. Yes at times they were outstanding but I lost count the amount of times I prayed as a City fan we could keep the score down to a respectable level. Am Sure fans of other clubs felt the same. World class club teams will never play to a high standard every week as they are playing 2-3 games a week. So rotation is paramount. City played with 7 academy players in the win over Brentford.

You only don't understand it because you have a different opinion, and you struggle to grasp the idea that people can think differently on the same things.

I perfectly understand why anybody would feel that Pep football is brilliant to watch. I'm not here to prove their own thoughts wrong. It is how they feel. Yet you cannot understand why I feel the way I feel, and so have to continue to challenge it. I've already explained in decent detail why I feel the way I do.

I love football, I get really excited about watching football. Most in this thread love football. Yet, other people in the world despise football. Just like I despise rugby, yet others love it. Rugby, American Football, Ice Hockey, etc bore me to death. But, I'm perfectly happy that others feel the complete opposite, for logical reasons. Once I accept that different people can have directly opposing views on the same thing, for perfectly logical reasons, then I no longer have to struggle my way through life being confused as to why others don't feel the same way as me.

As I said before. No point in me comparing to Man Utd of the past. I'm a Man Utd fan, if my team is winning, I'll be happy. I'm in no position to judge how entertaining Utd were, all I know is that I was entertained. I've no doubt you are entertained and happy when City are dominating. It is for others to judge how much they enjoy watching a top side as a neutral.

 

[Swango1980]

Of course it is exciting. I watched it and enjoyed it.
Which brings me to an idea, may not be new, but in light of the awful pitta patta crap around the defenders penalty area which we see now, may I ask what chaps think of changing the way the winners of the Premier league, and others ,are decided.

Simply , Forget points. - the side which scores most goals in a season wins the league.
If a tie, then goal difference.

What do you think?

I had the exact same thought a couple of days ago. Slightly different, in that Tables are decided by goal difference, then number of goals if a tie.

I'm sure it would have some positive outcomes. But perhaps negatives as well, given the tension teams have when a win can become a draw and a draw can become a loss. There is a lot of stress on getting the points, or losing the points. Whereas if it was goal difference, then you may well get to a stage where it a single goal doesn't really have a huge difference. You could win 1-0 or lose 1-0, it only has a 2 goal swing, and you might be well behind or well ahead anyway. Whereas there can be much more stress fighting for the points. Also, if goal difference and a team has a lead over another team, when they play each other the leading team may just massively park the bus, knowing that they can withstand a narrow loss, just don't get hammered.

 

[PaulMdj]

Yeah he had a great attitude and loved to attack

The 4-3 was one of the best games I have seen

Wasn’t a very succesful manager though and his England record is one of the lowest win ratios for permanent managers.

 

[Lucifer MorningStar]

Wasn’t a very succesful manager though and his England record is one of the lowest win ratios for permanent managers.

For all his desire to attack I think Keegan ultimately was tactically inept at the highest level. He knew how to create and score goals but team cohesion and getting wins when they mattered weren’t his forte. Hoddle was tactically a good manager played decent football just shame he went a bit weird

 

[PaulMdj]

For all his desire to attack I think Keegan ultimately was tactically inept at the highest level. He knew how to create and score goals but team cohesion and getting wins when they mattered weren’t his forte. Hoddle was tactically a good manager played decent football just shame he went a bit weird

Totally agree, should of stuck with Big Sam and his 100% success rate.

 

[Lucifer MorningStar]

Totally agree, should of stuck with Big Sam and his 100% success rate.

England’s most successful ever manager nobody will ever boast that win rate except big Sam

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Wasn’t a very succesful manager though and his England record is one of the lowest win ratios for permanent managers.

He wasn’t successful but he played a brand of football that his clubs fans loved to watch