Match Day Thread 2015/16 Premier League, Cups & Euro Watch

Unfortunately football didn't exist before 1992. Not in Sky's eyes anyway.

 

You guys sodding proper jealous. Yes forests achievements were better as a whole but what leicester have done get promoted nearly relegated in and when second season syndrome normally hits with a bunch of hardly great footballers and a journeyman manager have achieved something no one thought possible in this closed up shop of big boys who constantly outspend and talent strip the clubs below them.

Schmeichel sold from league club to league club
Morgan no one knew
Huth is probably there most recognisable premier league players
Simpson couldnt even hold a spot down at newcastle or qpr
Fuchs freebie cast off
Kante foreign tiny frenchman who played for caen who were promoted from french div2 or a couple of seasons ago
Mahrez bought from french div 2
Danny drinkwater just a standard english clogger
Albrighton left for free from villa
Vardy bought from a non league club
Okazaki hardly reputable name. Barely reached double figures in the german league
Ullloa bought from brighton

All these got together to win in a 38 league game season. Yes they have gone on about it but if liverpool ever win again i would imagine the media would go even more crazy

 

Jealous?



Bobby, we've just put things in the order that we feel justifies the title of "the greatest achievement in football", by the way unless you're old enough you won't know that Clough's first title winning team after promotion weren't all household names and were bought for very low fees at the time.

 

Couldn't give a **** about Leicester, I'm a Liverpool fan and only celebrate if we win something, Leicester winning the Prem means nothing to me, it means nothing to meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee !!

 

Ex -Pool players apart, I doubt that the media would go anywhere near as crazy if we won it. They don't like us, for a start (although JK is winning them over a bit), and we've been loitering for donkey's years so it hardly has the same shock value.
It would be nice if they did though, just to piss you lot off.

Anyway, we'll find out next year.

 

Football existed in 1979 in my eyes

 

No doubt about it, what they've done is phenomenon!

My point was about the reaction to it, not the achievement itself. As always, this country couldn't help but go over board. And why? It's not like it needed exaggerating!

 

That's 3 achievements............

What Forest did in winning the league in their first season up, was a great feat, but it was a completely different era.

The Oil Club Billions and the massive difference in spending power between the haves and the have nots was nowhere near what it is today.

Back then virtually every side in the league stood a chance of being among the front runners at the start of the season.

The fact that Leicester have won the league with the biggest odds in the entire history of World Sport makes you wrong, as it is the biggest sporting upset in history by definition.

 

not they'll hype it.. they will hype anything

the difference is the REAL fans won't be applauding and saying glad you won it to us. by the skys of this world would hype anything.

 

I don't have Sky so I'm spared most of their excesses fortunately.

 

well... not really... every well organised team with good players stood a chance but there were always teams who never did a thing.

however Leicester have done the biggest upset yes.

Judging from prior league tables( http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/matchday/league-table.html?season=1999-2000 )

Actually there only has been tow title races or merit in last 5.

Leicester- clear winners 80-83 points v spurs? 70/73 points
chelsea 87 points v city 79points
city 86 points v Liverpool 84 points
Utd 89 points v city 79 points
Man city 89 points utd 89 points
Man utd 80 points v cheslea 71points
chelsea 86 pointvs v utd 85 points

Leicester won it with a reasonable total... but the story really is the ZERO challenge. I'm looking back to 2010/11 for the last prem as bad.

Its interesting so see that for all the money just how poor city have been compared to what chelsea did with similar money. Leicester have done thier jobs well... fully deserved... Its a real pity they didn't have a proper rival to push them a bit more. yeah spurs sort of did but.. well not really the bottlers.

someone also asked the quesiton on spurs points totals.

from 2010/11
62 (5th)
69 (4th)
72 (5th)
69 (6th)
64 (5th)
70-73 (2nd?)

Very consistent are spurs.

but we have to see this season is par for the course for them... the final position is simply reflective of how poor the others have been

 

how on earth you you survive

 

I don't agree that it's been poor though.

It's been more competitive which has meant that the top clubs in the division have gained less points than in previous seasons when there was a gaping chasm between the 'Sky 4' and the rest.

We got 72 points 3 seasons ago and finished 5th, a better league that year, or a more uncompetitive one?

 

I only have a bowl of rice a day as well.

 

I've never had sky sports either....

Standard media reporting, anything they can hype they will hype. For once they have a newsworthy story worth hyping.

 

This league campaign has been very exciting but the quality of football is poor - you only have to look at the biggest clubs this season and how they fared against European counter parts.

As mentioned before - the points tally it took to win the league is low. Spurs have supposedly had a great season but they're on par with AVB's record, who was seen as a failure.

I do think the smaller clubs have strengthened but the big clubs have regressed massively.

Credit to Leicester - great achievement and they took advantage of the 'perfect storm'.

 

Forest won a double of League title and League Cup plus they reached the 6th round of the FA Cup in their first season after promotion playing 53 games in all.

Not bad for an easy season in an easy League during an easy era.

 

hmmmm...

Well... debateable.

does a competitive league mean 7/8 clubs doing really quite well and pushing each other but those at them bottom not competing at all or is it 2/3 in a title race and all the rest being all round 40 points.

that year I note that the bottom 3 were at 33 points down and up to 13th was 40 points... so the bottom teams really got hammered that year

but were there more good teams then?

Which is competitive.. all being able to beat each other but the quality is generally lacking?

 

Well the numbers don't lie. this could be thier best ever point haul by a whole 1 point. so... spurs are consistent. that means le arse and citeh and cheslea have imploded quite a lot. Ok so arsenal have been down around the 70point mark a few times as well but city have dropped right off and cheslea have not been this bad since 1995!

I think Leicester yes have taken good advantage but they could well have won it anyway even if one of the big clubs had been on their game.. the points tally show that.. their 80 would win a few prem races no question

 

You can argue about the level of quality, but the point was about the level of competitiveness.

Villa aside, the league has been very competitive this season. with the supposed lesser clubs giving the supposed big boys more bloody noses than ever before.

You can say Chelsea, City, Arsenal and United have failed, but that ignores the fact that the reason they failed is that the rest have bridged the gap, and they no longer have teams that can brush aside most of their competitors.