Barring the greatest miracle since the five fishes and three loaves, we ain't gonna win it!.So, apart from that, I couldn't give a flying toss who wins it....
We were invited into a different competition. As the first comment points out, Chelsea were voted in without having played a competitive game. Arsenal were promoted at the behest of two clubs who had been caught match-fixing. That was after you attempted to merge with Fulham and before your owner got banned forever.
"At least they are run sensibly. City and Chelsea are examples of all that is wrong with football." Let's give the Citeh "10 year plan" crowd their time (I guess this is year 5) before deciding whether to lump them in with Chelsky.
I don't buy the 10 year plan thing. Sure it would be fine if the 10 year plan involved spending this much money as long as they had made it, but the fact of the matter is that without a sugar daddy this spending they've done would have ended the club.
"I don't buy the 10 year plan thing." Chelsky allegedly had a similar plan in mind. But they failed to meet it big time and tis no longer spoken of (if it ever was) . If the sheikh gets to say within 100m of getting all his money back from Citeh, then fair enough and tis Chelsky who failed to operate as a going concern after all that cash injection. But if they similarly fail, then IMHO the argument about Sugga Daddy FCs is nailed forever.
i still don't buy (pun intended) it. If it was a viable option why isn't every chairman on the blower to the bank saying "if we spend £1bn then we'll win the league, get in the champs league and you'll get your money back and some". They've spent money, lots of money, that they otherwise literally didn't have access to. So even if he gets his money back after 10 years its still a massive advantage.
"If it was a viable option" In the UK we have judged one club on this basis, and they have failed big-time. This doesn't mean the next one will. "So even if he gets his money back after 10 years its still a massive advantage." That's business life. Those that have access to such investment always have the advantage over their market peers that do not. I suspect what you bemoan is the TYPE of investor. In UK football, institutional investment has only occurred in Man Utd for the same reason that the Glazers got funding for their take-over : a proven successful brand. For others, institutional interest in football is near zero (which is why ENIC converted THFC from PLC to plain Ltd status) .
No, i guess that what i actually bemoan is that football is now more a business than a sport with a level playing field.
"No, i guess that what i actually bemoan is that football is now more a business than a sport with a level playing field." What you actually bemoan that is that football is now a business sector with an uneven playing field. Which makes Spurs more commendable (in business terms they would be a market "disruptor" ) .
Sorry for the late reply, I started replying last night but was too tired. Chelsea's front 4 do work hard, as does the whole team. The difference yesterday is that the front 4 had less support as the other 6 were essentially defenders and this meant that those ahead of them had to be more effective in their attacking play. I saw at half time the Beeb's live text posted up some stats and I think they showed what I meant. City had 2/3rds of the possession in the first half but when you broke both sides possession down into "action thirds" it showed that the ball was in City's defensive third about as much as it was in Chelsea's. This was because Hazard and Willian, whilst working hard like Ramires and Eto'o were also able to take on City's defence and create chances, forcing them back. Having 6 defenders on the pitch makes the job of defending attacks easier but the weakness is that it means you invite more attacks onto yourselves. Hazard and Willian totally compensated for this which is why I think the deserve the most credit. Crystal Palace showed against Arsenal that you can defend in numbers and keep the opposition at bay but their problem was that whilst they had willing runners in attack they didn't have the quality to cause Arsenal many problems, because of this Arsenal got the ball back quickly and were on the attack again. When a quality side attacks you almost relentlessly you're going to have a tough time scoring and you're going to need some luck stopping the opposition from scoring. I don't see what Matic and Luiz did as anything more special than what the rest of their defence did, or what Palace did, but what Hazard and Willian did was.
Beat me to it. Wash your mouth out Spurm. I'd rather either WW3 broke out then the goons winning it. Citeh would be my preference out of those three.
I don't do real hate in football but I'd rather cheese grate my dick and soak it in vinegar than watch the ****ing nomads win the title
There's been rumours about various problems all season, including a big one with his agent, so I'm not massively surprised. I doubt he'll have any trouble getting another job, but it might be the best move for all parties that he leaves.
but 5 days before the S wales derby? While they are so close to the relegation zone? when the transfer window is shut?
I thought they were going to wait until the season was over or at least when they were safe from relegation...this could really take them backwards...I hope not cos I have a soft spot for them
I thought Laudrup and Swansea was a good fit but as it hasn't worked out you could sense problems, plus they have lost their way in terms of performance but a club like Swansea are never going to have consistently good back to back seasons in the top flight so even with Laudrup struggling there was every chance they would survive and then be OK next year. But panic sets in, it rarely works making a change so late in the season so good luck to the jacks!
That's them relegated then. Shame. I thought Wet Spam, Fulham and Cardiff had booked those 3 places but I can see Cardiff escaping now.
