Football

On 7/3/2017 at 1:26 PM, Frederick said:

So much for being a stalking horse  Bruce'll talk about the leadership he brings, how he'll teach the other lads, how he's a born winner but the reality is a very old, very expensive player is coming here for one last payday and not for the first time. Even looking past his utterly odious antics throughout the ages it's a hard one to reconcile. Footballing wise, for all the trouble we had last season, we didn't ship many goals and to me, he's looked a shell of his old self for a good long while. I can also easily imagine him getting crocked early on and simply disappearing from view and all of this being forgotten very quickly. Who knows, maybe he'll do well and even score some goals (even bloody Schmeichel scored one for us, one more than Joe Cole). And hey, we 'trolled' Birmingham City, which'll play well to the 'bantz on soshull meedya' contingent.

The best case scenario is that JT answers his critics by marshaling a solid backline and uses his experience to help the younger lads around him, perhaps then transitioning into a coaching role of some sort. The worst case is that he keeps missing games because he's too busy watching Chelsea play on Sky, then starts whinging about not being offered the chance to take over from Antonio Conte at the Bridge.

1 hour ago, Michael* said:

 

The best case scenario is that JT answers his critics by marshaling a solid backline and uses his experience to help the younger lads around him, perhaps then transitioning into a coaching role of some sort. The worst case is that he keeps missing games because he's too busy watching Chelsea play on Sky, then starts whinging about not being offered the chance to take over from Antonio Conte at the Bridge.

We're nailed on to play Chelsea in one of the cups, which means enduring a lot mawkish pre-game/in-game/post-game pantomime. And they'll whoop us, obviously.

I know it's 9 years away, but any thoughts on the 48-team World Cup format?

I'm not looking forward to it, and I think it will be hard to get used to (both the qualification and the final tournament).

13 hours ago, jkjk said:

I know it's 9 years away, but any thoughts on the 48-team World Cup format?

 

I'm not looking forward to it, and I think it will be hard to get used to (both the qualification and the final tournament).

It's going to make for some bulky Panini sticker albums, that's for sure.

The biggest issue for me is less about the number of teams, more the fact that it's so much harder to have a sensible group stage when it doesn't convert smoothly into a 16-team knockout round. We had a similar situation recently at Euro 2016, where it was possible to advance by drawing three games and finishing third. It can't be right, when you're at such an early point in a tournament, to have so many scenarios where neither side is that fussed about winning.

1 hour ago, Michael* said:

The biggest issue for me is less about the number of teams, more the fact that it's so much harder to have a sensible group stage when it doesn't convert smoothly into a 16-team knockout round. We had a similar situation recently at Euro 2016, where it was possible to advance by drawing three games and finishing third. It can't be right, when you're at such an early point in a tournament, to have so many scenarios where neither side is that fussed about winning.

3-team groups with 2 advancing is not a format that's used much, so it's hard to say exactly how it will go. I would imagine many of the final games will have no impact on which teams advance. It doesn't seem appealing.

21 hours ago, jkjk said:

3-team groups with 2 advancing is not a format that's used much, so it's hard to say exactly how it will go. I would imagine many of the final games will have no impact on which teams advance. It doesn't seem appealing.

I think if two of the three teams are going to advance, it's going to be easier to qualify than to be eliminated, because you'll only need the one win. So I would perhaps anticipate that the overall standard of play might take a dip. Most of the teams will aim not to be best team in the group, just not to be the worst.

A lot will depend too on whether the proposed penalty shootouts to decide group games, which I believe is the plan, will be preceded by the tedium of extra time.

Young Master Wayne back for another spell at Everton, then. I have to say, it surprises me that Koeman would go for this, Rooney's main attribute back in the day was always sheer talent, which of course isn't transferable, and his development from his late teens and early twenties onwards was about as poor as I've seen from any player. He'd be the last guy I'd want my younger pros taking pointers from.

On 7/10/2017 at 1:46 PM, Michael* said:

Young Master Wayne back for another spell at Everton, then. I have to say, it surprises me that Koeman would go for this, Rooney's main attribute back in the day was always sheer talent, which of course isn't transferable, and his development from his late teens and early twenties onwards was about as poor as I've seen from any player. He'd be the last guy I'd want my younger pros taking pointers from.

Everton aren't nursing the petty cash box these days, that's for sure. Paying fifty big ones for Sigurdsson would certainly be an overblown way to secure 7th for another year. As for the Wayning talents of Rooney, like many a Brazilian, he flew too close to the sun one too many times. The body, if not the hair transplant, cannot tell a lie. I'm not sure the role of impact sub is necessarily going to work in the autumn of his career but for Ref Hounding and Linesman Cajoling I still believe the spud faced veteran can deliver the goods.

5 hours ago, Frederick said:

Everton aren't nursing the petty cash box these days, that's for sure. Paying fifty big ones for Sigurdsson would certainly be an overblown way to secure 7th for another year. As for the Wayning talents of Rooney, like many a Brazilian, he flew too close to the sun one too many times. The body, if not the hair transplant, cannot tell a lie. I'm not sure the role of impact sub is necessarily going to work in the autumn of his career but for Ref Hounding and Linesman Cajoling I still believe the spud faced veteran can deliver the goods.

For all the talk of pushing on at Everton, selling a 24-year-old who notched 25 last season and replacing him with Rooney, who at 31, has looked a spent force for some time, doesn't exactly scream 'next level' stuff. Even assuming their forward line is made up of Rooney, Giroud, Sigurdsson and Klaassen, that's a quartet of attacking players who'll struggle to match Lukaku's tally. There's only so many set pieces they can take and, crucially, there's not a yard of pace between them.

On 7/7/2017 at 7:25 AM, Michael* said:

 

I think if two of the three teams are going to advance, it's going to be easier to qualify than to be eliminated, because you'll only need the one win. So I would perhaps anticipate that the overall standard of play might take a dip. Most of the teams will aim not to be best team in the group, just not to be the worst.

I forgot to mention the allocation changes which will add to that dip in standard of play you mentioned.

- UEFA is getting 3 more teams and CONMEBOL 1.5 (really 1), those teams will likely be competitive.

- OFC is going to have one spot, which should mean New Zealand unless something goes wrong.

- AFC is gaining 3.5, CAF 4 and CONCACAF 2.5. Based on World Cup history, these should mostly be weak teams. This is where the drop in quality should come from. Some of these teams could be really poor quality.

Man City thought they were getting Dani Alves. When PSG decides to pay essentially double, you know where the player is going.

On Dani Alves, I'm not sure he is still worth that much, but I'm not paying. 

15 hours ago, jkjk said:

I forgot to mention the allocation changes which will add to that dip in standard of play you mentioned.

 

- UEFA is getting 3 more teams and CONMEBOL 1.5 (really 1), those teams will likely be competitive.

- OFC is going to have one spot, which should mean New Zealand unless something goes wrong.

- AFC is gaining 3.5, CAF 4 and CONCACAF 2.5. Based on World Cup history, these should mostly be weak teams. This is where the drop in quality should come from. Some of these teams could be really poor quality.

Friday 12th June 2026 will be the day to mark in our diaries - England 1 Panama 2.

For all the talk of African regression over the last few years, you could certainly still make the argument that extra spaces for them would be a good call. Since 1990 about a dozen different African sides have qualified and in that same time frame, only six different CONCACAF teams and eight from Asia, which suggests that the strength in depth of those confederations doesn't quite stack up.

I would say South America has the most quality overall, all ten teams are in the top 50 of FIFA's rankings.

On 7/13/2017 at 2:03 AM, jkjk said:

Man City thought they were getting Dani Alves. When PSG decides to pay essentially double, you know where the player is going.

 

On Dani Alves, I'm not sure he is still worth that much, but I'm not paying. 

His form during Juve's Champions League campaign did seem to suggest that he's still got more than most, even at 34. If, as expected, Guardiola now has to settle for getting Kyle Walker instead, PSG's securing of Alves could start looking more and more like a bargain as the season progresses. Not that City will be bothered about the money of course, they make such purchases with the same deliberation that most of us apply when buying a loaf of bread.

On 7/13/2017 at 3:29 PM, Michael* said:

His form during Juve's Champions League campaign did seem to suggest that he's still got more than most, even at 34. If, as expected, Guardiola now has to settle for getting Kyle Walker instead, PSG's securing of Alves could start looking more and more like a bargain as the season progresses. Not that City will be bothered about the money of course, they make such purchases with the same deliberation that most of us apply when buying a loaf of bread.

PSG can definitely afford it, so they will be okay no matter how well he plays.

PSG was the CSL before the CSL was the CSL.

On 7/13/2017 at 9:50 AM, Michael* said:

For all the talk of African regression over the last few years, you could certainly still make the argument that extra spaces for them would be a good call. Since 1990 about a dozen different African sides have qualified and in that same time frame, only six different CONCACAF teams and eight from Asia, which suggests that the strength in depth of those confederations doesn't quite stack up.

In saying more CAF, AFC, and CONCACAF teams will lower the quality, I was thinking more about how those confederations perform during the World Cup than which teams qualify. Now that I think about it, it's possible that's just my assumptions. I certainly can't say I have looked thoroughly as the last few results in World Cup's and compared results.

Ultimately, it's probably better for world football if those three confederations get more additional spots over the top two confederations. It gives teams in those regions more opportunities to play against quality competition. If you look at UEFA: between the World Cup, the European Championship, and the new Nations League, teams have many more opportunities to play quality competition than anywhere else in the world.

Really, when you add 16 teams, the quality has to drop no matter where they come from.

This post is too long. 

In the 48 team World Cup you get matches like Angola x Saudi Arabia..... no thank you.

If FIFA was giving away tickets for the Confederation's Cup to make the stadium look full, I imagine no one would want to go to that match in the sentence above other then those countries' fans. I'd be majorly pissed if I got allocated those matches from the ticket lottery.

Also they can give those type of matches to Mexico.

17 hours ago, jkjk said:

In saying more CAF, AFC, and CONCACAF teams will lower the quality, I was thinking more about how those confederations perform during the World Cup than which teams qualify. Now that I think about it, it's possible that's just my assumptions. I certainly can't say I have looked thoroughly as the last few results in World Cup's and compared results.

 

Ultimately, it's probably better for world football if those three confederations get more additional spots over the top two confederations. It gives teams in those regions more opportunities to play against quality competition. If you look at UEFA: between the World Cup, the European Championship, and the new Nations League, teams have many more opportunities to play quality competition than anywhere else in the world.

Absolutely, and that's an equally valid point because there's qualifying for a major tournament and there's what you do when you get there. As things stand, while Africa has more competitive nations, it's probably as difficult to imagine them producing a potential World Cup winning side as it is for AFC or CONCACAF, although there's still a chance of course that some of them could step up their game significantly before the new format is implemented.

The scope for growth in Asia is going to be staggering though and with China pouring billions into the game, they may be a factor by 2026 or dare I say even a major power in the future. India could be dragged along too and the likes of Iran could continue to progress.

I still don't see China as being a threat...... I guess time will tell.

1 hour ago, Stromboli1 said:

I still don't see China as being a threat...... I guess time will tell.

Yeah, there's no option except to settle for conjecture at this point, but a lot will depend on whether there's a long term vision in place for their domestic league. The money they're ploughing into it at the moment seems to be going mainly on marketing and raising the standard at club level, which is only going to benefit the national team if there's similar investment in infrastructure and producing young talent. If that were to happen, it would probably only be a matter of time until they became a real force.