General Premier League Thread 2020-21 - Mod Notes in 1st post. [Updated 17/12/20]

CSF · 28-12-2020 08:34PM

yourdeadwright wrote: »

There was a tackle and Grealish clearly kicked out with his left foot?

Just because you said ‘clearly’ twice doesn’t make what you said anymore accurate.

There was no foul from Grealish. Refs made the correct decision.

28-12-2020 08:39PM

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Everton not happy at all.

They should ask hard questions.

Man City had a player who visitors sex workers during the lockdown, broke it at least twice after that, contracted the virus, and they are now having games cancelled. If it's down to indiscipline and their failure to deal with a player - and it may not be - then they should be in trouble and Everton should not be obliged to facilitate their negligence.

giveitholly · 28-12-2020 08:47PM

Wonder what the threshold is now for getting a premier league match off,city had two players test positive for the previous match but had to play. Wonder if a club were missing say 3 key players would they look for their match to be postponed,the precedent has been set now

Shanotheslayer · 28-12-2020 08:50PM

giveitholly wrote: »

Wonder what the threshold is now for getting a premier league match off,city had two players test positive for the previous match but had to play. Wonder if a club were missing say 3 key players would they look for their match to be postponed,the precedent has been set now

It was set in the Newcastle game though tho?

Was it not 6 players?

giveitholly · 28-12-2020 08:52PM

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

It was set in the Newcastle game though tho?

Was it not 6 players?

Ok didn't know that,could it be abused though,say a couple of players test positive but haven't a snowballs chance of starting,could a club use it to get a game postponed if 2-3 key players are missing?

Shanotheslayer · 28-12-2020 08:54PM

giveitholly wrote: »

Ok didn't know that,could it be abused though,say a couple of players test positive but haven't a snowballs chance of starting,could a club use it to get a game postponed if 2-3 key players are missing?

I could be wrong on that but I think it was 6 they had.

Absolutely It could be abused

pjohnson · 28-12-2020 08:56PM

City should forfeit the game. Its their fault at least and its now adding/creating congestion for Everton.

Agent Coulson · 28-12-2020 08:59PM

When did City decide they weren't going to travel to Liverpool for the game and when did they notify the Premier League and Everton as it sounds like Everton were match day ready and at the stadium ready to go from that statement.

adaminho · 28-12-2020 08:59PM

giveitholly wrote: »

Wonder what the threshold is now for getting a premier league match off,city had two players test positive for the previous match but had to play. Wonder if a club were missing say 3 key players would they look for their match to be postponed,the precedent has been set now

I think it's a combination of a few things. For one the fact that there would be 2,000 fans in attendance it could be classed as a public health risk. Secondly City's training ground is closed and Afaik all teams (First, 23's, underage) all use the same complex and as such would be classed as close contacts. I see Lampard is demanding their game goes ahead even if City only have 14!!

Fitz* · 28-12-2020 08:59PM

giveitholly wrote: »

Ok didn't know that,could it be abused though,say a couple of players test positive but haven't a snowballs chance of starting,could a club use it to get a game postponed if 2-3 key players are missing?

Liverpool had a few key players missing with covid for the game against Villa but still played the game. Personally I'm convinced that another player played while having the virus (he obviously had passed the test
to say he could play but he tested positive a few days later).

The 14 player guideline was in place in September but seems to have changed for the Newcastle game and this game is now following that precedent. I'm sure Man City have 14 players they can use. Very big squad.

Potential Underachiever · 28-12-2020 08:59PM

rob316 wrote: »

1 win in 5 for Chelsea, lampard seriously testing Romans patience. He's got a few games to turn it around if it's not already too late as he committed the cardinal sin of thrashing the players in the media. Dressing room could be gone already.

Missed that, who was Lampard thrashing?

GoldFour4 · 28-12-2020 09:04PM

Potential Underachiever wrote: »

Missed that, who was Lampard thrashing?

After the Arsenal game I think. Fairly went to town on players and took no personal responsibility which you don’t see happen often in the modern game. Even if the performance was crap the manager will usually put in a comment about preparations and tactics as a whole not working alongside subdued performances.

Lampard doesn’t seem to have the ability to think he might be partially at fault for the results on the field.

28-12-2020 09:15PM

Lampard is extremely thin skinned. He is pampered by the British media which seems to give him a free pass on his laughing at Americans after 9/11, filming a girl giving him oral sex, having a s**t on the floor of the Leeds dressing room last year after Derby's play off win...

Shanotheslayer · 28-12-2020 09:17PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Lampard is extremely thin skinned. He is pampered by the British media which seems to give him a free pass on his laughing at Americans after 9/11,

link?

28-12-2020 09:20PM

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

link?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1341356/Chelsea-four-fined-for-drunken-abuse.html

28-12-2020 09:23PM

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

link?

https://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/other-soccer/frank-lampard-apologises-over-911-behaviour-30458960.html

Shanotheslayer · 28-12-2020 09:23PM

Deleted User wrote: »

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1341356/Chelsea-four-fined-for-drunken-abuse.html

Couldn't read that due to needing a login but I found a BBC one http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/eng_prem/1558855.stm and none of that even hints that they laughed at Americans over 9/11

But anyway, long time ago, I just don't remember ever hearing that and that's probably because it didn't happen

CSF · 28-12-2020 09:43PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Lampard is extremely thin skinned. He is pampered by the British media which seems to give him a free pass on his laughing at Americans after 9/11, filming a girl giving him oral sex, having a s**t on the floor of the Leeds dressing room last year after Derby's play off win...

That last one probably isn’t true to be honest.

28-12-2020 09:48PM

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

Couldn't read that due to needing a login but I found a BBC one http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/eng_prem/1558855.stm and none of that even hints that they laughed at Americans over 9/11

But anyway, long time ago, I just don't remember ever hearing that and that's probably because it didn't happen

Well if you didn't hear it and you defend his behaviour on the basis that while he stripped in front of Americans and swore at them within 24 hours of 9/11 but he didn't laugh, fair enough.

I really didn't think the difference between his laughing at someone and waving his penis and swearing at them at them would prompt such a spirited defence...:D

28-12-2020 09:51PM

CSF wrote: »

That last one probably isn’t true to be honest.

In fairness, it is possible it was a Derby player and he simply watched. The allegation that it was actually him was really only carried on Leeds forums.

Shanotheslayer · 28-12-2020 10:04PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Well if you didn't hear it and you defend his behaviour on the basis that while he stripped in front of Americans and swore at them within 24 hours of 9/11 but he didn't laugh, fair enough.

I really didn't think the difference between his laughing at someone and waving his penis and swearing at them at them would prompt such a spirited defence...:D

I'm not defending anything, I'm just saying it's irrelevant weather it's after 9/11 or before 9/11.It's only mentioned to ignite further fuel to the fire rather than what he actually did.

You claimed ''laughing at Americans after 9/11'' meaning that there was some relevance to 9/11, there's none.

The incident happened just 24 hours after the attacks and included stripping, swearing and vomiting at the hotel near Heathrow airport, which was full with Americans stranded by flight cancellations, according to the News of the World'' There's also zero mention of penis waving at anybody either it just says stripping. I'm not sure why you're trying to hype up what happend as opposed to just saying what actually was reported. Unless there's a separate source that claims that was what happend.

To me it just reads Footballers act the absolute arse (is that cardable? IDK) and getting drunk. Which they would have been fined for anyway.

CSF · 28-12-2020 10:05PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

In fairness, it is possible it was a Derby player and he simply watched. The allegation that it was actually him was really only carried on Leeds forums.

It is also possible he has no involvement whatsoever. Crazy to suggest otherwise without any evidence to the contrary.

28-12-2020 10:16PM

Lampard was fined for that alleged American thing. It was for being drunk though wasn't it rather than actually mocking Americans about 9/11?

No doubt it was one of the rags that was the original source for the "scoop".

Regarding management, I expected Lampard to be found out by the end of the season. Still expect that to happen.

doc_17 · 28-12-2020 10:36PM

6 wrote: »

Lampard was fined for that alleged American thing. It was for being drunk though wasn't it rather than actually mocking Americans about 9/11?

No doubt it was one of the rags that was the original source for the "scoop".

Regarding management, I expected Lampard to be found out by the end of the season. Still expect that to happen.

I don’t think he had any sort of vision for how he wants his team to play. Going from Werner to Giroud is going from crosses into the box to fast, pressing football. And I know it’s a cliche, but I really don’t think he knows what his best team is. Either that, or he doesn’t know how to fit them into a coherent structure.

28-12-2020 10:47PM

6 wrote: »

Lampard was fined for that alleged American thing. It was for being drunk though wasn't it rather than actually mocking Americans about 9/11?.

20 years ago, groups of players were not fined 100k for "being drunk". I'm not sure they are even now.

The story carried by the media at the time was that they stripped and swore at Americans within 24 hours of 9/11. I appreciate people may say their behaviour wasn't as bad as I made out because they may never have laughed and it may have been a very serious and sombre stripping. Or the 9/11 was irrelevant because they were just stripping and swearing like we all do, it was mere coincidence it was in front of Americans. We can agree to disagree.

But come on, do you really think he and Morris and Terry were merely over the limit?

osarusan · 28-12-2020 10:59PM

Fitz* wrote: »

The Premier League said earlier in the season that unless a club has less than 14 available players in their senior & u21 squad, then the games should go ahead as planned.

TitianGerm wrote: »

No the PL gave reasons as to when a game can be called off because of Covid before the season and I'm nearly sure it was stated that games would be called off when teams have less than 14 players.

Edit: beaten to it.

Fair enough, was way off the mark on that, thought it was a long-standing rule rather than something that was in relation to Covid-19.

Thanx 4 The Fish · 28-12-2020 11:06PM

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

Couldn't read that due to needing a login but I found a BBC one http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/eng_prem/1558855.stm and none of that even hints that they laughed at Americans over 9/11

But anyway, long time ago, I just don't remember ever hearing that and that's probably because it didn't happen

"The players involved, including the England Under-21 stars Frank Lampard, Jody Morris and John Terry, were said to have sneered and laughed at grieving relatives in the Posthouse hotel. Eidur Gudjohnsen, the 23-year-old Iceland international, was also involved in the drinking session and has been fined."

"They were read the riot act and told in no uncertain terms what was expected of them," he said. "They were fined two weeks' wages and their wages have been donated to the American victims' fund."

"A manager at Heathrow's Post House hotel said: "They were utterly disgusting. They just didn't seem to care about what had happened. He added: "We had a lot of Americans here and were simply trying to comfort them in their hour of need. Meanwhile these men were laughing and joking, taking off their clothes and abusing our guests."

"One witness said: "One of them was walking around laughing with everything hanging out out while on TV there were crying firemen searching for bodies. It was sick."

Just press view source and you can read the story if you are stuck. That he had to subsequently apologise for it suggests that he knows he was in the wrong.

theoneeyedman · 28-12-2020 11:07PM

doc_17 wrote: »

I don’t think he had any sort of vision for how he wants his team to play. Going from Werner to Giroud is going from crosses into the box to fast, pressing football. And I know it’s a cliche, but I really don’t think he knows what his best team is. Either that, or he doesn’t know how to fit them into a coherent structure.

He clearly doesn't. Doesn't know his best team, and by the looks of it, himself, Morris and Co don't know how 4l set up a team to operate at the top end of the EPL either.

I'm no fan of Frank, but his private and off field behaviours, especially those from around 20 years ago, are of little interest to me personally.

If he loses his job, and stories from Germany earlier suggest Tuchel might be ready to throw his hat into the Chelsea ring if Roman fancies a change, let it be for his inability to set up and coach the team rather than the News of the World carrying a story him being a bit of a dick (or not) off the field.

CSF · 28-12-2020 11:08PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

20 years ago, groups of players were not fined 100k for "being drunk". I'm not sure they are even now.

The story carried by the media at the time was that they stripped and swore at Americans within 24 hours of 9/11. I appreciate people may say their behaviour wasn't as bad as I made out because they may never have laughed and it may have been a very serious and sombre stripping. Or the 9/11 was irrelevant because they were just stripping and swearing like we all do, it was mere coincidence it was in front of Americans. We can agree to disagree.

But come on, do you really think he and Morris and Terry were merely over the limit?

To be fair, you’re not someone I’d want on jury duty if I was ever accused of anything.

Its one thing to feel people don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt based on their prior conduct, it’s another thing entirely to speak of it as fact that they’ve done the worst case scenario for the situation they’ve been involved in.

doc_17 · 28-12-2020 11:14PM

theoneeyedman wrote: »

He clearly doesn't. Doesn't know his best team, and by the looks of it, himself, Morris and Co don't know how 4l set up a team to operate at the top end of the EPL either.

I'm no fan of Frank, but his private and off field behaviours, especially those from around 20 years ago, are of little interest to me personally.

If he loses his job, and stories from Germany earlier suggest Tuchel might be ready to throw his hat into the Chelsea ring if Roman fancies a change, let it be for his inability to set up and coach the team rather than the News of the World carrying a story him being a bit of a dick (or not) off the field.

Like yourself, I couldn’t care less what Lampard did or didn’t do in 2001.

General Premier League Thread 2020-21 - Mod Notes in 1st post. [Updated 17/12/20]

Comments