Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

General Premier League Thread 2022-23 - mod note in OP 12/03/23

16667697172344

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,079 ✭✭✭irelandrover


    Women's football is very watchable. But I'd still prefer to watch mens football.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,341 ✭✭✭✭Fitz*


    I like seeing graphs & data like this one. Sometimes it just confirms what you see yourself, or can open your eyes to other things you may have missed.

    This is after 7 league games, so may be fixture influenced. I would like to see it again in 12-15 games and see has it changed much?

    Man United have the deepest defensive line & Man City have the highest.

    Bournemouth press the least, while Leeds press the most.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 49,266 ✭✭✭✭Mitch Connor


    Remember seeing something on the united defensive line last season and it was high/middle of the pack (miles behind Liverpool and City).

    Not disputing this - we were deep and countering vs Liverpool and despite the scoreline Arsenal dominated the possession at OT and forced United back.

    Would expect that the line was higher vs Brighton and Brentford, and then freaking anchored following those horror shows. I have no belief that the shape/positioning of the side now is what EtH wants it to be, but after the Brentford game he had to go into firefighting mode.

    If Casemiro can get up to speed, and we can get Martial into the CF position (better at linking and holding up than ROnaldo is.... sigh) I think we could see the line move further up the pitch. though with DDG in goals and his aversion to leaving the 6 yard box maybe not. United probably need to replace the keeper before we can really push the defensive up, as it is there will be too big a gap between the defense and the GK.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,955 ✭✭✭✭yourdeadwright


    That's exactly what will make or break Ten Hagg at United ,

    Ole had them decent when they defended deep and counter , then failed miserable when he tried to get them to progress into a better side on the ball,

    Ten Hag tried at the start and failed and has gone back to the Ole plan of sitting deep and countering, (obvious with some tweaks) , He will be expected to get them to come out and play more and that is what will make or break him,



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 658 ✭✭✭Avon8


    He'll be at one of Europe's biggest clubs within 5 years. I remember a lot of discussion when Brighton sacked Houghton who had kept them up and signed a midtable championship manager in Potter.

    What the media ignored then and continue to ignore is Tony Bloom statistical modelling machine (media ignored by Blooms design). Bloom is one of the greatest minds to have ever lived, never mind great in a football sense. He's playing on a completely different sphere to most other football admins. You can imagine that De Zerbi has been performing off the charts on said metrics, just as Potter was back then and the likes of Pep has since he started in management. You can be fairly sure he'll be a success and Brighton will be going nowhere for as long as Bloom keeps his interest



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 61,272 ✭✭✭✭Agent Coulson


    Red Bull have refused to let Christoph Freund leave the club to join Chelsea as there DOF.




  • Posts: 19,923 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Yeah. Nothing like Ole outside of them playing on the counter. The control of the game against Arsenal is overlooked. Allowing the opposition the ball and being well organised is not the same as defending deep and getting it forward quickly. The players knew what they were doing with the ball and used it quickly. But sure "Ole ball". Which was just get it to Rashford as soon as possible.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,713 ✭✭✭theoneeyedman


    I don't know why City bother with all the cloak and dagger stuff TBH.

    Their own fans don't care (bought and paid for in a sense).

    UEFA and the EPL have proven toothless, and have been cowed by the deeper pockets of the UAE that have promised to drag them through every legal wormhole possible to avoid any punishment.

    Opposition fans in the main don't care either reply at this stage, they've seen what City are doing and what is bound to happen at Newcastle, and are largely resigned to playing in a different league to the oil guys.

    I honestly don't know why they even bother covering it up.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,400 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    It's a pain though if you are a fan of one of the clubs that has been hit with ffp sanctions which the likes of City and Barca can do what they like.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,649 ✭✭✭BenK


    'Bloom is one of the greatest minds to have ever lived'. I had to Google his background after reading that statement. I feel you might be giving him a bit too much credit!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 35,825 ✭✭✭✭~Rebel~


    Barca at least did actually gain financing through legitimate means. Absolutely insane means, selling off their future, but legitimate means none the less.

    Subscribe to save Boards.ie from closing down: The Bad News

    https://subscriptions.boards.ie/



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,463 ✭✭✭✭rob316


    When a club like man city claim to make greater commercial revenue than the likes of United and Liverpool you know it's all bull.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 658 ✭✭✭Avon8


    He's built himself from zero into a billionaire through his ability to read past football performance and predict future results better than anyone else. I'm possibly biased because I've always been involved in the gambling world but it's an exceptionally fascinating way to make your fortune, and he's the all time leader. Brentfords owner has a similar background and his methods have crossed over in successful ownership also



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,884 ✭✭✭Pogue eile


    With Avon on this one Bloom is one of the greatest entrepreneurs of his generation.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,400 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    It's completely unsustainable and if a smaller club proposed it they would rightly be called out on the fact it will bankrupt them down the road.

    For the likes of City there needs to be tighter rules on conflict of interest between sponsors and owners. But the problem then is does it effect some local club who's generous owner wants a bit of reward with the "Johnny Car dealer" stand. Maybe allow it to a certain price or something.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,955 ✭✭✭✭yourdeadwright


    Ten Haggs United actually play deeper tan Ole's ( deepest average line in the league this season) but as you rightly point out they look for the extra pass or two before getting a striker away,

    Ten Hagg has done well , he has done what he had to do , many mangers fail because they try to stick to there " philosophy " He noticed after the first two games it wasn't working as it was to early for the player he had available so went back to basic's that is good management ,

    So nobody is criticising him all we saying is the make or break of his job will come when he has to try to transition them to a front foot possession orientated side,



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,079 ✭✭✭irelandrover


    Why should an owners other businesses not be allowed be a sponsor. If the entire purpose of FFP is to ensure a club has a good enough revenue then as long as there are proper guarantees and contracts in place with sponsors then why stop it?

    If the goal of FFP is to keep the big clubs the big clubs then I can see why you'd want to stop it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,955 ✭✭✭✭yourdeadwright


    De Zerbi is a very interesting appointment ,

    it'll be very interesting to see who ends up in there jobs longer between himself & Potter,

    I love Potter he is a brilliant coach but i think Chelsea was the wrong top 6 club for him,



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,400 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Because an owner can just say "I think my name on the Bristol kit is worth €500m" which is exactly what is happening at City.

    They are literally making up companies just to backdoor sugar daddy the club.

    Out of curiosity why would I want "to keep the big clubs the big clubs" ?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,540 ✭✭✭IncognitoMan


    What are the knock-on effects of these dodgy deals though? When 1 or 2 clubs are getting money for sponsorship they could never have gained on the open market?

    What does that do to the clubs that are trying to compete with them? Do they go bankrupt trying to compete or do they just accept that they cannot make up a deal for 500m - 1B out of nowhere and are now a 2nd rate team?

    FFP should not be about stopping a club from eventually challenging the top clubs but it needs to make sure they are not inflating the whole market beyond repair, causing issues for other clubs. It is very clear that is what Man City are doing, sure they were caught but got off because the evidence was time-barred. But the evidence was still there and everyone knows they cheated before and are at it again now.

    Have no issue with clubs growing over time to challenge but have every issue with making up bogus deals to artificially inflate income to skip over other clubs so you can clean the image of your country to the western world. It is a very very bad road to go down.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 216 ✭✭BobDole22


    Some would argue that is the exact purpose of FFP it is to preserve the status quo and keep the likes of West Ham Newcastle Leicester Everton Villa down or at least impose a ceiling on them so they can't challenge the elite. The PL are also trying to impose more rules to keep these teams down its shameful and pretty close to corruption really.

    Man City are blatantly cheating with their commercial revenue yet nothing happens Chelsea are losing money hand over fist every year yet they are still spending 200 million plus every year on their team. Spurs, Arsenal Man Utd and Liverpool are spending absolute fortunes every season there seems to be no limit to it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,079 ✭✭✭irelandrover


    I didnt mean you specifically want to keep the big clubs big. And again, so what if an owner does that? As long as that company commits to keep paying what difference does it make? The club is protected as they are guaranteed the sponsor money that covers their bills.

    If you think these deals distort the market then it should be a budget limit rather than a % of revenue. FFP doesn't stop United spending 200million on a player but it does stop Newcastle.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 8,631 ✭✭✭El Gato De Negocios


    Chelsea were propped up by Roman to the tune of £1.5b over the course of his tenure.

    City are propped up by an oil state for the last 14 years.

    Newcastle will be propped up by an oil state for the foreseeable.

    Spurs, Arse, United and LFC have spent money but its all within their means, they are spending what the club generates either via legitimate sponsorships, player sales or prize money.

    In the 10 years prior to RA buying Chelsea, their average league finish was 7th. In the 10 years after, their average league finish was 2nd.

    For the 10 PL seasons when City were involved and prior to being bought out their average league finish was 14th. In the 10 years after, their average league finish was 3rd.

    The reality is that if those clubs had not been bought out then they likely would have had little onfield success.

    Including them in the same pot as Spurs, Arse, United and LFC is frankly ridiculous.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,955 ✭✭✭✭yourdeadwright


    Spurs (826 M), United (600 M) , Arsenal ( 201M) , Liverpool (208m) are all also in debt ,

    From last May there was only 4 clubs reported in Europe in zero depth are PSG, City, Chelsea & Leister

    Running football clubs is no easy task ,



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,400 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Im not pro ffp. But seeing as we are stuck with it for now I think everyone should be treated the same.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,315 ✭✭✭✭machiavellianme


    Debt doesn't mean that it is not within means. Especially capital debt against an asset (stadium).

    We're all in some sort of debt or other (mortgages, loans, etc) but that doesn't mean we can't afford to go out and buy a loaf of bread.

    The other 4 are teams that you listed are just hobbies for the mega rich. They're exactly why FFP was brought in, to stop monopolies and promote competition. Though you could argue that the design and implementation doesn't match the spirit of the intention.

    Save boards.ie by subscribing: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 216 ✭✭BobDole22


    Exactly spot on! The % of revenue rules are specifically designed to protect the elite why should a club who were lucky enough to be successful at start of PL era(when the big money started rolling in) have that advantage in perpetuity?

    It takes an absolutely massive amount of money for the middle teams in the PL to break into the top 6 and really challenge the elite, by limiting what they can spend you are massively disadvantaging them and therefore protecting the elite IMO this is deliberate FFP and the proposed new PL rules are specifically designed to protect the top 6.The top 6 can spend what they like on whatever they like whereas the rest are being limited in what they can spend and also limited in what they can earn which is outrageous and border line corrupt.

    For example a company could say they want to put 100 million into West Ham and the PL could turn around and say no that's not what a sponsorship deal for West Ham is worth you can only put 25 mil in. It's disgraceful it limits West Ham and is wildly anti competitive.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,955 ✭✭✭✭yourdeadwright


    Oh ye I'm 100 % aware of all of that

    Its like most things in life that are set out with the idea of fairness but end up being corrupted



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 8,631 ✭✭✭El Gato De Negocios


    Its also worth pointing out that pretty much every business across the world operates with some form of debt on its balance sheets.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement