"Love" and "hate" don't enter into my thinking with regard to football. These and other emotions are inappropriate in the context, and give rise to a great many of the sport's ills. There are many sports, with big followings, whose fans support and follow particular teams, with local rivalries etc. etc., yet which are largely free of the nastiness which blights football as a result of these emotions. As for something being wrong with me, if everybody was like me they would be able to take their youngsters to matches anywhere in the country without fear of foul language, loathesome chants, or violence, as indeed one can if one enjoys e.g. cricket.
ok, that makes sense. i suppose its different if you've got more than one team - i love norwich city because there is nobody else. i admire plenty of other teams and enjoy watching them, but nothing comes close to norwich. i love cricket by the way... hang on, does that contradict what i just said??? its a love minefield!
she loves football... and me... probably... and despite what 10cc may suggest, she does NOT love cricket.
Although winning the Champions League is obviously good to have on your CV, it has been devalued by the amount of teams who participate in it since its evoluion from the old European Cup. As has the Europa League, I mean, for goodness sake who on earth are that team Liverpool are playing Thursday? A measure of a teams success to me is winning their own league and in which way they did it. Arsenal haven't won the title in the last few years andhave been overshadowed by Chelsea in the capital. But the media would have you believe that qualification for the CL is the main priority for the super rich clubs. So in that sense Arsenal have had a measure of success despite the cost.
How I look at the European competitions, redruth, is that they only start with the knock-out stages. The teams left in may not all be Champions or runners up of their respective leagues, but they do have a genuine claim to be, at that point, among the best 16 in Europe (Champions League) or best 32 (Europa League). Accepting that, surely a club which (a) qualifies via position in its home league and (b) gets through to the knockout stages, has proved itself. To do that in the Champions League for 15 years on the trot requires a consistency of performance and quality which shouldn't be downplayed. Yes, progressing through the knock-out rounds, and actually winning the competition, are preferable. But to pooh pooh Arsenal's record, and Wenger's achievement, as many do, seems somewhat harsh to me.
Back to the point. Wenger only got some of his players back on Thursday - would it have been fair to those players and their families to get them to sleep, wash and change to then travel to Norwich? No! It has been officially confirmed that rail travel last weekend was a nightmare with buses replacing trains etc. Was that acceptable preparation - No! Are you guaranteed only a 2 hour journey from London to Norwich? No! I came up the A11 last Monday ( not renowned as a busy day ) and joined the queue for the Elvedon traffic lights at the Barton Mills roundabout. Normally no Club would have made such a flight but these were not normal circumstances and the decision to fly was reasonable in those circumstances.
Interesting take on how to think about the champions league, I'd never thought of it that way, and the reasoning is logical, still seems devlaued to me though as it is no longer the champions of champions, it seemed so much more exotic in the 1970s but that may just be age talking. Surely it should be called top four from each league, league, doesn't qute have the same ring
As I said, I travelled from Cambridge to Norwich and back with no problem. The 50 minute trains from London to Cambridge were also working fine so I can't see why they couldn't take those trains!
I have to say, what a load of old bollocks this is, tired footballers, give me a ****ing break. So a journey from Arsenal by coach I presume to Luton, then a flight to Norwich, 20mins as quoted, then I presume a coach to Carrow Road, all that was better than a coach or train ride in one hit?? NO IT WASN'T!! Travelling is tiring especially if you have to make a lot of stops/changes. I spent much of my life travelling the world, and frequently arrived a Heathrow from America in the late afternoon, then faced a taxi ride to Liverpool street, then a 2 hour journey to Norwich on the train, then a taxi ride home, generally arriving between 10/11 O'Clock in the evening. All this after being away for anything up to 4 weeks doing my job, I was always in work the next day at normal starting time. Was I tired? Yes of course I was. Would I rather have had a day off to recover? Yes I would. But I had a duty to my employer, the people who payed my wages, and I wouldn't let them down, it's strange in this day and age but it's called commitment. I can't see how anyone can defend the stupidity of Arsenals actions!!
ILD, I'm guessing here, but I assume in your job you weren't being paid to be in your physical prime. Sure, mentally you had to be there, but your ability to run 50 yards after a ball probably wasn't being tested. You aren't comparing like with like. You could argue [I'm not saying I would, I think the flight was unnecessary] that financially it makes sense for Arsenal to do it. The cost of missing out on Champions League qualification by dropping points there's a chance all your rivals will get, is far greater than the cost of a flight. Having your players closer to 100% fit can make the difference, even in this case it didn't. It might not be environmentally friendly, but if that was a serious concern to them they could offset the carbon emissions.
I wasn't sitting on my arse all day that's for sure. I worked a minimum of 10 hours and sometimes a lot more than that, every day, hardly ever took 2 day weekends off. My job was installation/commissioning engineer for large plant and equipment. I had to be pretty fit to do that job, it didn't involve running a lot, but it was hard pysicial work. I wasn't away for just the one night like the footballers, but weeks at a time, away from my wife and kids, also I had to look after myself, no one to pamper me, organise my travel, clean my eqipment, rush over to me when I had genuinely hurt myself, I worked on one occasion with 3 broken toes for 2 weeks, and one time I was working in Alaska in temperatures of minus 15c. I don't think you have the right to tell me I wasn't fit! So I don't accept that running 50 yards after a ball a few times, at most twice a week, comes even close. Fitness like anything else is Mental as well as Physical, if you keep pampering them and telling them they need to rest then they will believe it!
As an aside regarding running about. I am intrigued to see the stas of players who get substituted, and I think its just in European games, and how much ground they have covered. Lampard covered 11KM. Parker 11.7KM That has to be so over inflated. As a fit 60+ I can run a 10K in about 45 minutes. Thats non stop running at about 7.30 minute miling which isn't hanging about believe me. But these guys are stood about for a good 20% of the game. Why they have to make out they have done so much is beyond me.
