The Football.....

[dellzeqq]

I don't think Standard Chartered were overjoyed by the way Dalglish handled the Suarez thing. That may be just or unjust, but, either way, it's a big deal for the owners

 

[martint235]

No, no, no, no, no, no ,no, you are getting it all wrong with this analytical bollocks. Put all that behind you and get swept up in the ludicrous and completely unjustifiable optimism.

Yeah but then I'll feel really disappointed like in .. hang on a minute it'll come back to me.... was it 1990 we actually did well?

And if I get disappointed I'll have to go to the pub and drink yellow beer and we all know how badly that ends!

 

[Haitch]

if you were to pull together a team of 11 plus subs from the qualified countries, just how many of the England team would be involved? Rooney, possibly, Gerrard possibly, Young outside chance. And yet the media will have us believe these are world beaters by the time they leave for the Ukraine.

I misread this to mean how many England players would be picked as subs for the other qualifying teams. My mistake, but I still came to the same conclusion.

 

[dellzeqq]

to be fair to the press I've not seen any optimism. For my money we'll be doing well to get out of the group stage.

 

[Aperitif]

How about a playground approach to the whole thing, so:

All players assemble en masse - best two players choose in turn who they want on their team.
Whoever brought the ball gets special dispensation, despite ability, so they don't take it home.
Last 2 to be chosen are goalies unless there's anyone really tall.
No offside.
Goal goes all the way up into the sky.
If one team is streets ahead the 'last goal wins rule' can be brought in, only by suggestion of the losing team and only if they think they could win a fight.

You idiot!
You'll go far as a manager...Nebraska maybe?

 

[threebikesmcginty]

You idiot!
You'll go far as a manager...Nebraska maybe?

Teef, someone's got to start making sense in this thread.

 

[Aperitif]

Let's stamp out the swallow dive as well while we are there.

I agree - totally unnecessary, except when going across the line for a potential touchdown, and it is being curtailed.
This is unlike the swallow dive in soccer, where the player pretending to be said bird, gets mysteriously felled by some force field cum elephant gun, in order to gain unfair advantage. Cheating is a word that some might use.

 

[Aperitif]

Teef, someone's got to start making sense in this thread.

Quite. So kindly stop reading this thread if you think it is such rubbish. And don't talk to me about making sense - I've made more sense than you've had hot dinners lad, so until you have got something really instructive about how we can possibly bring this arcane sport into the < TV anchorman with hairy hands: "Well, we are ging to go to a break now, but we'll continue this debate right after the 'eadlines, read for you today by..." >

 

[Inertia]

Let's stamp out the swallow dive as well while we are there.

<Grumpy old man mode on> am I alone at finding the baby cradle, swing your pants, pointing up at the air celebrations...nauseating?

or have I gone too far </Grumpy old man mode off>

 

[thom]

I don't want to deflect the thrust of this debate about soccer, but the things that you mention about rugby football are precisely the things that are very closely scrutinised and accordingly dealt with. From Elite level through to 'grass roots', any behaviour prejudicial to the sport is taken very seriously. And sanctioned. This might be deliberately trying to blind someone, or acting recklessly while drunk on a rugby tour and sliding down an escalator belt, upsetting people along the way. Yes it matters in rugby - in football, the typical tosser-like behaviour is idolised and often copied. 'Role models' - my butt.
Don't get me started on journalistic propogation either - or the "celebrations" that involve sliding along the ground on the knees. Or somersaults and all that other obscene nonsense that is tolerated.

But the saddest thing about it is that these guys are paid so much and the fans put up with these low standards of professionalism.
I guess the average fan just does't really care enough and that is why I think PL football has a naff side to it.

 

[Aperitif]

<Grumpy old man mode on> am I alone at finding the baby cradle, swing your pants, pointing up at the air celebrations...nauseating?

or have I gone too far </Grumpy old man mode off>

Yes - it's an insult to the Arsenal shirt...and the Liverpool one come to that. Everyone involved in professional sport should learn the 'Sprinkler'

 

[thom]

OK sin bin the offender and one other to be chosen at random.

Offender + captain. If offender is captain, red card him !

 

[martint235]

The managers would then appoint the most dispensable player as captain.

Chelsea are well prepared for this rule then!

 

[Inertia]

The managers would then appoint the most dispensable player as captain.

In this new format the Captain would wear a red shirt

 

[thom]

The managers would then appoint the most dispensable player as captain.

Captain has responsibility, eg. talking to ref priviledge. The point being you make the position meaningful. If you're saying that isn't possible, just get rid of it altogether and then noone would get upset about who it happens to be.

Edit : it would be interesting to know who the manager thought was the teams crappest player though.
And you know, I'm not entirely serious about this particular rule but I do think it would be good to make the captain's position more responsible and to hold them accountable for that.