|
Post by Seanybhoy1888 on Sept 15, 2010 22:11:57 GMT
I take your point Jim but, to be fair, this is 2010 not the pre second world war years mate. Benitez was a great proponent of the squad system if memory serves. Sorry but I really do go with having a core to the team that only changes if it has to. I'm not including the league cup or whatever, but for the league and Europe the starting core of the team should be there if available. Kidding aside Jim I do agree with that mate.
|
|
|
Post by gerry on Sept 15, 2010 22:15:10 GMT
There are ideas which just didn't work. Zonal marking at free kicks is one, the squad rotation system is another. It is only done to keep highly paid players happy. I believe in players having to compete to get a place in the first team. They do that by shining in training, and taking any chance they are given. That stops complacency and makes players keep putting the effort in.
|
|
|
Post by deerin1916 on Sept 15, 2010 22:15:59 GMT
if a team scores against them and they have to chase the game, then they are there for the takin but you have to break them down first, smith is playin to their strengths, nothin wrong with that, hope they have the cl blues comin the w/end hail hail
|
|
|
Post by clydebankcelt on Sept 15, 2010 22:16:21 GMT
Apart from Rooney and Fletcher it was a team of fringe players.. Wasn't the England national team captain playing also? 1st game after injury, do you think they would have risked him if it was Valencia they were playing?, it was a stroll in the park for him. As i said it was a team of mainly fringe players that cost a fortune to assemble.
|
|
|
Post by Seanybhoy1888 on Sept 15, 2010 22:21:03 GMT
Wasn't the England national team captain playing also? 1st game after injury, do you think they would have risked him if it was Valencia they were playing?, it was a stroll in the park for him. As i said it was a team of mainly fringe players that cost a fortune to assemble. Yes I do actually as he is a great defender and could play against any opposition.
|
|
|
Post by gerry on Sept 15, 2010 22:22:31 GMT
if a team scores against them and they have to chase the game, then they are there for the takin but you have to break them down first, smith is playin to their strengths, nothin wrong with that, hope they have the cl blues comin the w/end hail hail I realise you think that was a good result and that they were quite right to play two banks of 5. I just think that the team that was put out gave them a chance to actually win the game. However Lord Walter of Dignity would not take his chance and allow the slightest modicum of risk. That could have been a great night for them, they could have won at Old Trafford and maybe even contemplated qualifying from the group. He stuck to the no risk policy and got a draw, sorry but that was a decent result, at best. It was also a sign of rank cowardice on the part of a manager who would rather be seen as someone who could stifle opponents rather than try to beat them. Pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by gerry on Sept 15, 2010 22:23:29 GMT
1st game after injury, do you think they would have risked him if it was Valencia they were playing?, it was a stroll in the park for him. As i said it was a team of mainly fringe players that cost a fortune to assemble. Yes I do actually as he is a great defender and could play against any opposition. He didn't have much to do last night with the way the hun set their stall out.
|
|
|
Post by Seanybhoy1888 on Sept 15, 2010 22:25:10 GMT
Yes I do actually as he is a great defender and could play against any opposition. He didn't have much to do last night with the way the hun set their stall out. Either way it was the perfect game to bed him back in then.
|
|
|
Post by gerry on Sept 15, 2010 22:26:17 GMT
He didn't have much to do last night with the way the hun set their stall out. Either way it was the perfect game to bed him back in then. Yup, like I said earlier, a nothing game.
|
|
|
Post by clydebankcelt on Sept 15, 2010 22:26:26 GMT
[quote author=gerry board
He didn't have much to do last night with the way the hun set their stall out.[/quote]Thats what i said ..a stroll, he would not have got a game if Valencia were the opposition, he's not fit yet.
|
|
|
Post by gerry on Sept 15, 2010 22:28:22 GMT
He didn't have much to do last night with the way the hun set their stall out. Thats what i said ..a stroll, he would not have got a game if Valencia were the opposition, he's not fit yet. We are in agreement, see my last.
|
|
|
Post by clydebankcelt on Sept 15, 2010 22:32:58 GMT
Meanwhile all the big money teams won tonight..proving that money talks in europe.
|
|
|
Post by gerry on Sept 15, 2010 22:54:36 GMT
Meanwhile all the big money teams won tonight..proving that money talks in europe. Money attracts the best players, the best management, the best coaches, and provides the best facilities. It's only natural it would also buy success.
|
|
|
Post by carson67 on Sept 15, 2010 22:57:51 GMT
Yeah back to the topic,money rules European football like it or not.Sad imo
|
|
|
Post by tictoc on Sept 16, 2010 12:00:30 GMT
I was not going off topic.What I was saying is if we had done what we should have done,ie,defend properly,we would have won the last 2 SPLs,taken in £30 million,would have put the opposition out of the picture,and been nearly guaranteed another £15 million for next year.We would not be sitting saying,money is ruining the game.Money only ruins the game when you dont have it.As for Man U,having plenty of money,the last I heard they were over £100 million in the red.We have missed out on our biggest windfall ever because of continuous neglect.Money is the life blood of the game,to say otherwise in the times we live in,well,enough.
|
|
|
Post by clydebankcelt on Sept 16, 2010 12:08:24 GMT
I was not going off topic.What I was saying is if we had done what we should have done,ie,defend properly,we would have won the last 2 SPLs,taken in £30 million,would have put the opposition out of the picture,and been nearly guaranteed another £15 million for next year.We would not be sitting saying,money is ruining the game.Money only ruins the game when you dont have it.As for Man U,having plenty of money,the last I heard they were over £100 million in the red.We have missed out on our biggest windfall ever because of continuous neglect.Money is the life blood of the game,to say otherwise in the times we live in,well,enough. Winning another £30m would not have guaranteed us success, players dont want to play in the SPL and would rather play elsewhere, We tried to sign players recently and offered them top dollar but they decided to go elsewhere.We would have to pay OTT wages for players who simply are not worth it, so in my opinion money has ruined football because players are far too greedy.
|
|
|
Post by tictoc on Sept 16, 2010 12:43:48 GMT
Clydebank,it would have guaranteed us success in the SPL,thats the main thing,and put them to the point of oblivion,giving us a free run at the CL and the money that goes with it.Saying players are too greedy,which I totally agree with,is not an arguement now.If you want to play with the big boys,you have to pay the going rate.If you dont,then the SPL slog is all we will have.I know the arguement,but its the times we now live in.The other arguement about Smiths tactics,I find hard to believe.In O"Neils time,1 point away from home,would have qualified us twice.If we had played the way the huns had,and got it,I would have been doing cartwheels.History doesnt remember how you played,just what you won.
|
|
|
Post by clydebankcelt on Sept 16, 2010 12:54:06 GMT
Clydebank,it would have guaranteed us success in the SPL,thats the main thing,and put them to the point of oblivion,giving us a free run at the CL and the money that goes with it.Saying players are too greedy,which I totally agree with,is not an arguement now.If you want to play with the big boys,you have to pay the going rate.If you dont,then the SPL slog is all we will have.I know the arguement,but its the times we now live in.The other arguement about Smiths tactics,I find hard to believe.In O"Neils time,1 point away from home,would have qualified us twice.If we had played the way the huns had,and got it,I would have been doing cartwheels.History doesnt remember how you played,just what you won. If you win the league you have no option but to play with the big boys,Why are they big boys? easy because the C.L has made them what they are,we got into our 1st C.L in season 2001/2 and the huns had a start on us financialy back then, now we are better off than them we are making signings that should hopefully win the league here, as for the C.L?, we will be lucky to qualify for the group stages from now on unless a billionaire who wants to spent all of his money on us buys us, The C.L. is now a 8 team tournament and the rest are searching for scraps.
|
|
|
Post by gerry on Sept 16, 2010 13:16:25 GMT
I love the way people say that spending money makes success inevitable. It's simply not true. There have been plenty of times when teams spent an absolute fortune and didn't win anything. The current classic example is Man City, spending fortunes and who will predict them winning the league this year, or even that they will be ahead of say Man Utd, or Arsenal.
We are going into a season when we were a net gainer in the transfer window. We brought more in than went out, we sspent less than nothing. I'm optimistic about this season. It has nothing to do with how much the players cost and everything to do with the way they play. I know it's early in the season but I really am very optimistic.
|
|