Premier League 2010/11 general thread

[prinnysquad]

I thought the same about Arsenal when they came to our place and kicked lumps out of us

[vanpeebles]

I haven't seen Bruce's post match but who is he blaming for the defeat as usually he cites a free kick given in the 4th minute on the halfway line at 0-0 as a turning point in the match and the cause of everything bad that subsequently happened.

He's in my list of managers I never tire of seeing lose or in relegation trouble. I have no strong dislike of Sunderland as a club but they are in my list of parasite teams who the league could do without.

At least Bruce is watching the game, unlike that French pig

[prinnysquad]

I'd like to see merf's full list of Premier league teams, with 'parasite' typed next to the offenders, and we'll see how many of the ones that aren't were the already-rich top level incumbent teams in 1992.

[Flabio]

I think it's 'any team that doesn't let Arsenal play their tippy-tappy game'.

[BaronSqwelch]

being an arsenal fan must be hard tho.
since they were declared as 'BEST TEAM IN THE WORLD EVAR!!!!!111!!!' after they fluked that first leg win over Barcelona they have won 1 game. Against Leyton Orient. At home.

Is the quadruple still on??

[merf]

as requested chaps here is my parasite list, all teams with a ** I don't believe anybody other than their own fans cares less about whether they are in the league or not and they are fully interchangeable with championship teams, the 1* teams are those that do a little more than make up the numbers as try to play a bit but I'm still not too fussed about and the league as a whole wouldn't suffer one jot without them.

this would be repeated time and time again throughout top flights all over the world, there are too many teams and too much mediocrity. I'm all for a more controlled US style franchise system with associated wage caps and player limitations.

1 Man Utd
2 Arsenal
3 Man City
4 Chelsea
5 Tottenham
6 Liverpool
7 Everton *
8 Bolton **
9 Newcastle *
10 Fulham *
11 Stoke **
12 Sunderland **
13 West Brom **
14 Blackburn **
15 Birmingham **
16 Aston Villa *
17 Blackpool *
18 West Ham *
19 Wolverhampton **
20 Wigan **

[Flabio]

I doubt you intended it, but that makes you look like the most elitist fan ever to grace the forum.

You'd have Everton out? Who've qualified for the Champions League in recent years? Fulham, who've made a European final recently? Blackpool, who play the most kamikaze entertaining footy in the league? You're fine not lumping Tottenham in with that lot, despite the fact that until recently they've been mid-table at best?

To be honest, given the dissing you gave the championship the other day I don't know why I'm even reading your footy posts anymore anyway...

[EJG1980]

You're fine not lumping Tottenham in with that lot, despite the fact that until recently they've been mid-table at best?

How dare you sir? Mid-table at best? Do you forget that in 1995 we came a glorious SEVENTH? Wayyyyy above mid-table

Valid point of course, depending on when you make the list you could add or take away quite a few teams. Spurs from 1992 ish to 2005 ish? Definitely making up the numbers. If you made that list in about 1993 you wouldn't allow Chelsea near the elite. Man City were often in the lower reaches of the Prem and even getting relegated as low as the third tier until a sugar daddy transformed the club.

A closed shop would remove the chance of any former giants rediscovering their past glories, and stop the chance for a new giant to emerge (as unlikely as that would be in the modern game).

[abigsmurf]

Franchise systems have their own faults. You think the 0-0, 1-0 snorefests are bad now? Wait till you remove the threat of relegation.

Then there's the whole 'old boys club' type situation you end up with and the general murkiness of franchises. There's a lot of Cronyism in the premier league and media, you could easily end up with a board consisting almost entirely of people with links to Man U and Liverpool deciding who should get in.

[nakamura]

I doubt you intended it, but that makes you look like the most elitist fan ever to grace the forum.

You'd have Everton out? Who've qualified for the Champions League in recent years? Fulham, who've made a European final recently? Blackpool, who play the most kamikaze entertaining footy in the league? You're fine not lumping Tottenham in with that lot, despite the fact that until recently they've been mid-table at best?

To be honest, given the dissing you gave the championship the other day I don't know why I'm even reading your footy posts anymore anyway...

Yeah he does look rather elitist, bitter I think because same old soft Arsenal cannot control a game. Pity, as I really want them to win the league myself but I certainly don't blame anyone but them for not being on top of the pile.

Merfs argument reeks of nonsense. To include a highly defensive Man City in there and a Liverpool team that have not play really attractive football for long periods for many years seems a bit off. While I certainly don't think the success a team like Liverpool have had in recent years is a fluke, they certainly don't play the most pretty around.

Yes some teams play defensive and for 5 months Blackpool were refreshing. Now Blackpool have been found out and seems to be going close to being back in the championship.

Yes I personally like to see pretty football, as a neutral I hate a dour game. But this season have given us more entertaining games then ever. A lot of the small teams have really had a go at times. WBA, Wolves, Blackpool, West Ham and even Wigan have played some nice stuff and been involved in some excellent games.

Long live the crap teams.

[merf]

I'm many things but not bitter, Arsenal are punching above our weight, the league table is normally a direct reflection of the wage bill at a club so I never expected us to win, I'm quite happy with Wenger and what he achieves with our budget, our wage bill is I think the 4th largest in the league, maybe even the 5th now so to be in the top 2 is fine by me.

My problem is being asked to fork out ?100 for a pair of tix to see an event where one side turns up to ruin the whole thing, repeatedly. You don't pay to see Muse at Wembley whilst somebody hits Matt Bellamy and ruins the song, people don't throw things at actors to ruin plays, so why is it acceptable, in what is simply another entertainment industry, to have an orchestrated plan by multiple participants to kill an event off and make it as tedious as possible ?

If that makes me elitist then guilty as charged, its probably more the ramblings of somebody who's forked out well over a thousand quid this season following football and is beginning to question the value offered for that outlay.

If you are a lower league fan or a fan of lets say Stoke, and you're happy with what you watch and consider it good value then I'm more than happy for you and value your opinion, you're entitled to it. My view is based on my personal feelings towards the large amount of money I pay out to watch the game and the fact I am now questionning whether I will continue to do so with the game as flawed as it now is and not all participants holding up their end of the deal to enrich the sport they are more than happy to profit from. You never use your drinking water supply as a toilet, its not a sustainable long term plan.

[nakamura]

I can see what you are saying there, don't get me wrong. But Arsenal played the same way against Barcelona so even the top teams play defensive to try to score the win. I am sure had Arsenal gone through, you wouldn't have been complaining about the way they stuck 11 behind the ball at the Nou Camp. In fact, had RvP not been sent off I believe Arsenal would have done it that night.
Surely that is the same approach Blackburn etc will take against you? So which set of fans is correct?

Frankly, you issue is directed in the wrong place. The issue should be the cost of tickets. ?50 for 90 mins of action is a joke and it is high time that ticket prices were looked at. Of course clubs need the money to stay afloat in many cases so ticket prices need to be high. Catch 22.

[Flabio]

Changing the subject slightly, has anyone else seen that truly appaling statue of Michael Jackson that Al-Fayed has stuck outside Fulham's ground?

Deary me.

[prinnysquad]

A few things.

Presumably, boring boring dour defensive Arsenal of a number of years ago would have had at least a 1 star rating.

Franchise systems with wage caps are great as long as everybody is content with the fact that they'll only ever have short term success before they have to take a salary dump and ship a few people out. If this means good players look elsewhere to get more money, then so be it. You also have the problem of youth development - how would this work? In the NHL junior teams train youngsters before they're drafted (the best youngsters by the crappest teams), then AHL affiliate farm teams keep developing them until the NHL team is ready to call them up. There's no similar system here, meaning the current big clubs would poach the best youngsters. To combat this you'd have to have a system of poorer teams getting the first pick of young talent, but who would cultivate this beforehand?

Clearly it's the money factor that's killing the game. Teams don't care about entertainment when a run of ****e results could set in motion events that spell the end of the club's existence. Football is a business and clubs will grab survival however they set fit. Unfortunately, this leads to the circle of self-cuss that football is suffering. Vulnerable teams setting out not to lose provides a dire spectacle, and football could lose a ton of fans because of it. I abhor the way some teams play, including my own, but I totally 'get' why they do it, and there won't be a change until there's more parity in financial distribution.

[abigsmurf]

Dear god, I've just seen the statue. It's hideous.

He should've gone with a bronze Moonwalker one if he was going to do it at all.