you'd bankrupt football in a year..... seriously though you would. they are all chasing every higher viewing and money so there has to be a loser somewhere her or elite teams get 50 players or something. If we look at the rugby worlds we have: 1. 6 nations 2. premiership 3. european cup. when the 6 nations takes players theres still games going on in the premiership or super 14 or whatever. when there's European cup fixtures theres games of some sort going on. If you in theory let fifa at this they'd do similar to whats going on in say wales or scotland in rugby. Wales = the real team Scarlets, cardiff or whoever are the teir 1 rubgy side and profession (theres 2 in scotland and 4 in wales.) clubs are below this and semi pro or amateur? So you could have england first call. then games are going on in a second tier premier league at the same time with reserves etc. IMo fifa would inflict that on us all if they could. Then lower league teams could go swivel i suppose. I would see this as a terrible outcome but in the end we have to wonder where is the line and was it crossed decades ago.
Only because there are too many grifters screwing the public as it is. Look, I know how the reality is, and we're talking hypotheticals mostly, but unless there's a will to change it never happens. If we keep saying this is how it is and accepting that, it can only get worse. The current trend of inventing more and bigger competitions is insanity, and can only end in tears. It's pushing players to their limit.
How many games do we play on average in the League Cup? We're out half the time after a couple of rounds, and in those a lot of fringe players get a run out so they're useful. Internationals are useless to us as clubs and we lose 2 or 3 game slots every month that has a break in it. Like I've said, there are people who like them so they're going to defend them, but for people like me who are indifferent to the whole circus they're poison. I still think my original suggestion works better - but I know it won't happen.
**** 'em. Yes, you're right - it might need a bit of nudging. We could start by making the qualifiers more streamlined - what's the point of putting San Marino and Andorra in with France and Germany? The idea that they might pull off something miraculous is pure fantasy. In the end though, my flawed suggestion just reflects the fact that I think the whole thing is a tribalistic waste of time. Internationals should just be a side salad to real football, not the full biriani. In my opinion.
obviously the big names should auto qualify so they can play more premium friendlies in Qatar. the great unwashed are all semi pro level so can play off for the right to even be named alongside them. it'd be like championship level disruption then ot to the top tier clubs.
Snd why do most clubs play kids/reserves in the league cup? Because don’t want to overdo the first team and surely that then makes it a pointless tournament. If the point of freeing up game time so can increase quality of games thrn surely you start with games where quality is lower because first team era aren’t playing anyway? that in theory means team don’t need as many squad players so teams don’t stack their squad meaning those Man City chelsea squad players end up playing first team at a slightly lower team improving their quality which increases the whole competition?
Btw I agree Saint, I’d have no issue with getting rid of all internationals. Would lose no sleep. But obviously won’t happen
Two things: Firstly, we don't all have squads the size City or the Chavs, but we have enough to find playing those fringe players in a competitive environment useful. Secondly, as I mentioned - we rarely play more than a few games in that competition so removing it doesn't really address the congestion problem much - it's scratching the surface. Linking the two points, playing fringe players takes some of the game pressure off the first team. Internationals just pile the pressure on those players.
ah making "lesser" pre qualify for the final round of qualifying really needs to be done if only to teachsome of them that the aim is to win games and not just keeping the losing score as low as possible
The very odd thing about this situation is that most of the other confederations have rounds of qualifying. Asia is like this: First round:20 teams (ranked 27–46) will play home-and-away over two legs. The ten winners advance to the second round. Second round: 36 teams (ranked 1–26 and ten first-round winners) are divided into nine groups of four teams. The teams will play against each other on a home-and-away basis. The nine group winners and group runners-up advance to the third round and automatically qualify for the AFC Asian Cup. Third round: 18 teams which advance from the second round are divided into three groups of six teams. The teams will play against each other on a home-and-away basis. The top two teams of each group qualify directly for the FIFA World Cup, the third and fourth-placed teams advance to the fourth round. Fourth round: Six third and fourth-placed teams from the third round are divided into two groups of three teams each. The teams will play against each other once in a neutral venue. The winners of each group qualify for the World Cup, and the runners-up of each group advance to the fifth round. Fifth round: The group runners-up in the fourth round will compete home-and-away over two legs to determine the Asian representation at the inter-confederation play-offs This is basically very convoluted route that offers a lot of fall back opportunities later on for losers. But the first and worst 20 teams play off home and away and ten are told to get stuffed right away. I don't really agree with the amount of games these sides then play each other 4 or 5 or 6 times to get there but they have 8 spots and share them out how they feel like i guess. Gibraltar and such are thrown in and hammered all the time. its just pointless.
I wonder how the players feel about the amount of games they are asked to play bearing in mind the reluctance of some to be substituted with impending game build ups. It always comes across as them feeling honoured and proud to represent their countries which they wouldn't want to give up any time soon. I was very surprised a few years ago (before we won the league) when Trent was being interviewed and asked which he would prefer, Liverpool to win the league or England, the World Cup. He said that was a really difficult choice. Unless he was only saying it for the cameras, it didn't strike me, on his behalf, to be a difficult choice at all. I suppose what I'm saying is that while a lot of us have got no time for internationals, they mean a great deal to the players. As mentioned, some of whom, don't seem to want to have their minutes managed. They want to play every minute of every game.
Don’t think that’s true. How many players pull out of England games (especially friendlies and qualifiers against poor teams). I’m sure some of it is pressure from the clubs but I think most would love it if they didn’t have to play those games and could just turn up for the actual tournament. Apart from Kane as he needs to play as many games against Gibraltar and Malta to bump up his goal scoring record.
When watching MOTD, I was reminded that one of the most joyous things in football is listening the West Han fans trying their best to make I'm Forever Blowing Bubbles sound intimidating before each home match.
Wishy washy England players maybe but how many international players are looking for excuses not to go? There are always those who are getting on who feel that they want to use their remaining playing days playing for their clubs but generally speaking, foreign players are really passionate about playing for their countries. They put England to shame in that regard.
Can’t say I pay much attention to who does/doesn’t play for foreign teams tbh so couldn’t comment on that. Will have to take your word for it
This stuff going on about the England women’s keeper kit is odd. Nike ****ed up by not making it available to buy at the time and isn’t great PR by them - whether it’s cos it’s a woman’s kit or whether someone just looked at numbers of women’s keeper kits sold in previous years and decided business decision wasn’t worth it but caused a lot of outrage and protests by people. But after many protests they’ve now made it available (after the World Cup?) and with no real announcements. But what I don’t quite get now is now they’ve released it, everyone rushed to buy to it to prove a point. But surely all you’ve done is give Nike a load of money? Surely a better option would be to boycott buying it to make a point that missed the boat etc?
