|
On February 19 2015 13:05 Rebs wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2015 23:25 Ysellian wrote:On February 18 2015 01:53 Salteador Neo wrote:
I honestly can't see the cause-consequence relation between the Bosman ruling and Milan/Ajax having no chance in CL. I could see it for small teams, but these two are not.
Milan have been awful because some of their biggest signings made no sense and were hella overpriced. First of all the bosman ruling is two things. One it allowed foreign players to move around freely without restriction and secondly players could leave the club at the end of their contract, signing a pre-contract with another club 6 months before the end. Secondly Ajax are considered a big team because of their youth academy, however because of the Bosman ruling it has become a constant struggle for Ajax to retain their youth players who not only can leave for free when their contract is up but there is no limit to how many can join a starting eleven abroad. Edgar Davids for example was one of the first players high profile players to leave for free, the type of player ajax would never let go without a significant monetary incentive. Nowadays Ajax sells the likes of Eriksen for just 15mil euro, when inferior players between the rich clubs go for double that (if not more). What if Ajax had retained Eriksen, Suarez, Blind, Vertonghen over the years instead of having them all leave for less than what Madrid payed for James Rodiquez? Thats still more a fact that Ajax cant compete financially than the Bosman ruling. Sure it does lower market and the fact the rich poor gap has somewhat increased. But at the end of the day, a contract is a contract and if its running out or its over then that should be that. A player may spoiler](which doesnt matter for squat) if not contractually obligated should be allowed to leave if the contract is up or is going to be up soon. Bosman or no Bosman the rich poor gap would still have turned out the way it did and you would have lost all those players. James's value has nothing to do with the Bosman ruling. He was just a hot commodity. He couldve left for similar amounts of money if clubs wanted to wait and time their pursuit of him like they did with the rest of the players you mentioned. Additionally the players you mentioned were cheaper because thats how top performers in the dutch league tend to be rated these days. Its really a league quality perception, and a market issue. I dont think you can blame the Bosman ruling for it. Maybe some parts of it could use a tweaking but for the most part its worked out pretty well. Why would you want to hold onto players if their contracts have expired and they want to leave ? Thats good for like no one. [/spoiler]
Rebs don't refer to me as you when talking about ajax lol  I'm a feyenoord fan.
I'm not arguing right or wrong here and the financial situation is the way it is because of the power of the TV, however I'm really unsure how you can argue the fact that the bosman ruling did not massively impact a club that got most of their greatest players through their youth academy. If the bosman ruling was in place in the 70's, ajax would never have become the team it is today. I don't think you realize just how inferior ajax have been financially to even teams in their own league. Feyenoord were the richest team in Europe in the mid 60's and 70's, PSV the richest in the Netherlands in the 80's. However if your competition is restricted to 3 foreign players and you have the best youth academy, that's that really. Nowadays we wouldn't have waited for Cruijff to come back from Barcelona to offer him a ridiculous contract, we would have snapped him up like Madrid did Figo and added a multitude of foreign stars to the mix.
Funnily enough (bitter really), with the construction of the arena ajax have become the richest team in the Netherlands when they most needed to be, to continue winning. While we have the best youth academy and can't compete, having to watch psv win the league with some of our finest youth products.
|
On February 19 2015 15:43 Ysellian wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2015 13:05 Rebs wrote:On February 18 2015 23:25 Ysellian wrote:On February 18 2015 01:53 Salteador Neo wrote:
I honestly can't see the cause-consequence relation between the Bosman ruling and Milan/Ajax having no chance in CL. I could see it for small teams, but these two are not.
Milan have been awful because some of their biggest signings made no sense and were hella overpriced. First of all the bosman ruling is two things. One it allowed foreign players to move around freely without restriction and secondly players could leave the club at the end of their contract, signing a pre-contract with another club 6 months before the end. Secondly Ajax are considered a big team because of their youth academy, however because of the Bosman ruling it has become a constant struggle for Ajax to retain their youth players who not only can leave for free when their contract is up but there is no limit to how many can join a starting eleven abroad. Edgar Davids for example was one of the first players high profile players to leave for free, the type of player ajax would never let go without a significant monetary incentive. Nowadays Ajax sells the likes of Eriksen for just 15mil euro, when inferior players between the rich clubs go for double that (if not more). What if Ajax had retained Eriksen, Suarez, Blind, Vertonghen over the years instead of having them all leave for less than what Madrid payed for James Rodiquez? Thats still more a fact that Ajax cant compete financially than the Bosman ruling. Sure it does lower market and the fact the rich poor gap has somewhat increased. But at the end of the day, a contract is a contract and if its running out or its over then that should be that. A player may spoiler](which doesnt matter for squat) if not contractually obligated should be allowed to leave if the contract is up or is going to be up soon. Bosman or no Bosman the rich poor gap would still have turned out the way it did and you would have lost all those players. James's value has nothing to do with the Bosman ruling. He was just a hot commodity. He couldve left for similar amounts of money if clubs wanted to wait and time their pursuit of him like they did with the rest of the players you mentioned. Additionally the players you mentioned were cheaper because thats how top performers in the dutch league tend to be rated these days. Its really a league quality perception, and a market issue. I dont think you can blame the Bosman ruling for it. Maybe some parts of it could use a tweaking but for the most part its worked out pretty well. Why would you want to hold onto players if their contracts have expired and they want to leave ? Thats good for like no one. Rebs don't refer to me as you when talking about ajax lol I'm a feyenoord fan. I'm not arguing right or wrong here and the financial situation is the way it is because of the power of the TV, however I'm really unsure how you can argue the fact that the bosman ruling did not massively impact a club that got most of their greatest players through their youth academy. If the bosman ruling was in place in the 70's, ajax would never have become the team it is today. I don't think you realize just how inferior ajax have been financially to even teams in their own league. Feyenoord were the richest team in Europe in the mid 60's and 70's, PSV the richest in the Netherlands in the 80's. However if your competition is restricted to 3 foreign players and you have the best youth academy, that's that really. Nowadays we wouldn't have waited for Cruijff to come back from Barcelona to offer him a ridiculous contract, we would have snapped him up like Madrid did Figo and added a multitude of foreign stars to the mix. Funnily enough (bitter really), with the construction of the arena ajax have become the richest team in the Netherlands when they most needed to be, to continue winning. While we have the best youth academy and can't compete, having to watch psv win the league with some of our finest youth products. [/spoiler]
Yeah but the Bosman ruling doesnt have anything to do with barriers to entry for foreign players to other leagues. Those were league policies. If you have rules in place that limit the influx of foreign players then teams will be able to keep their best players. I dont see what Bosman has to do with it.
Also yeah about the you, that was just lazy wording on my part. I didnt mean to refer to anyone as a fan of anything specifically. It was more of a "you would see those players go" sorta comment but it sounded more obvious in my head.
Edit: Never mind, didnt know Bosman makes it illegal for quota's to be implemented. But I dont think that makes much of a difference. Quota's arent something big leagues are interested in anyway. If they have Money they will work around it.
Point being Clubs will not want their ability to purchase the best international players restricted. League’s
will not want restrictions which lessen the attractiveness of the league product for marketing and television broadcasting sales if only second rate national players can be used because each clubs ‘foreign’ quota has been reached.
TL:DR it enforces a ban on quota's no one wants anyway.
|
Yeah the bosman is essentially two rules that blew things wide open. But you are right in the sense that the big teams would have found a way to work it around anyway and I can be honest and say the bosman ruling was pretty much something waiting to happen, still I wish there was at least some limit to the way things are going now.
|
On February 19 2015 13:05 Rebs wrote:On another topic there was talk of Chelsea building a dynasty and all that good stuff, and I felt that thought is quite premeditated, because the strategy being followed isnt something familiar when it comes to successful teams over long periods in the past. One of my concerns was Show nested quote +On February 12 2015 21:18 Rebs wrote:
That having been said I also think his current squad lacks depth in key areas. Defensive cover is a bit short for me. And most importantly if Matic is out or he has a bad game all of a sudden Chelsea start looking like Arsenal.
And then after yesterdays game it felt a bit more like Uncle Mou's method of cutting off loose ends that he doesnt needs is more power than panache when it comes to team building (energy drink), It seems Marcotti feels the same way and I feel it a bit hard to disagree. Especially when they talk about quadruples and trebles.. http://www.espnfc.com/club/chelsea/363/blog/post/2305123/jose-mourinhos-chelsea-squad-may-be-showing-signs-of-wear-and-tear-at-wrong-time
I have to agree. Terry has made 34 appearances so far and has played 3,090 of a possible 3,540 minutes this season. He's played every minute in the Premier League; 4 of the 5 games he missed were cup games, with the other being the final group stage fixture in the CL. In his case at least, he gets a rest during international breaks, something Nemanja Matic isn't so fortunate to have.
Matic is even worse, he has 36 appearances and has played 3,102 minutes. The only times he hasn't played were the 2 FA Cup games and 1 Premier League game when he was suspended due to yellow card accumulation. I find it mind boggling that a player has to play almost every minute for a club like Chelsea.
You know you have problems when Arsenal have a deeper squad than you do and Wenger rotates more than you do.
I think a parallel can be drawn to Real Madrid; they also got rid of a few players in the summer and have featured a thin squad and a lack of rotation, and I think that (coupled with their injuries) is why we are seeing a recent dip in form from them.
|
Is there any Porto fan here willing to share some insight on the player Danilo? He is a very talked-about player for the coming summer transfer window. Is there any close similarity out there is terms of style of play? How good is he in defending, attacking, combining with other players during a normal game?
A compilation video does not quite show the truth most of the times...
|
|
|
On February 19 2015 14:23 nitram wrote:
70k fine and 3 years in jail? Anti-racism/fair play laws are beyond retarded for many reasons. If those fans were part of a smaller Euro team, that team would get punished by Fifa and have to pay a fine and play in an empty stadium. Not Chelsea though. They have money.
i somewhat agree. racism is disgusting and should be punished hard. but 3 years in jail for pushing somebody out of the subway is just nuts, no matter how despicable the motivation was.
but why should chelsea be punished for something that happens outside of their stadium? I mean... if clubs had to pay fines for what their apparent fans are doing elsewhere - an arsenal fan could dress up in a chelsea jersey, go to town and act like the biggest douchebag on the planet, just so chelsea has to pay hefty fines.
|
On February 21 2015 00:32 Black Gun wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2015 14:23 nitram wrote:
70k fine and 3 years in jail? Anti-racism/fair play laws are beyond retarded for many reasons. If those fans were part of a smaller Euro team, that team would get punished by Fifa and have to pay a fine and play in an empty stadium. Not Chelsea though. They have money. i somewhat agree. racism is disgusting and should be punished hard. but 3 years in jail for pushing somebody out of the subway is just nuts, no matter how despicable the motivation was. but why should chelsea be punished for something that happens outside of their stadium? I mean... if clubs had to pay fines for what their apparent fans are doing elsewhere - an arsenal fan could dress up in a chelsea jersey, go to town and act like the biggest douchebag on the planet, just so chelsea has to pay hefty fines.
Crime has context. The reason for the push is what matters, not how much the physicality of it effects the victim. I mean not allowing a black person on public transport because of their skin colour is probably up there as one of the worst symbiotic racist thing you could do. Not that these idiots would even know who Rosa Parks ect was anyways.
|
Dortmund scores. 1-0. Feels like the first time in a year that we've opened the scoring. AUBAMEYANG
|
just so goddamned depressing...
gif: 1:0 Aubameyang
edit: penalty and no red card o.O ... 1:1
|
|
|
|
|
On February 21 2015 05:05 sneirac wrote:
Edit 2: 2:1 BVB, ridiculous defending
Looking at the defensive skills of those 2 teams we might see another 4-4 : )
|
Kagawa instrumental in both goals.
|
On February 21 2015 05:12 smr wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2015 05:05 sneirac wrote:
Edit 2: 2:1 BVB, ridiculous defending Looking at the defensive skills of those 2 teams we might see another 4-4 : )
You should be happy that you're at least rooting for the one team that is just playing bad instead of just being utterly terrible :/
1:2 halftime
|
Mikhi stays in and Kagawa out? wtf
|
Mkhi came in during halftime. Would be surprising if Klopp took him out again.
Dortmund's nightmare Vedad Ibisevic now in play for Stuttgart. I'm worried.
|
On February 21 2015 06:01 smr wrote:
Mkhi came in during halftime. Would be surprising if Klopp took him out again.
Dortmund's nightmare Vedad Ibisevic now in play for Stuttgart. I'm worried.
Worried about Stuttgart in the last 15 minutes? BVB isn't that bad. Though those offsides are.
|
On February 21 2015 06:09 sneirac wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2015 06:01 smr wrote:
Mkhi came in during halftime. Would be surprising if Klopp took him out again.
Dortmund's nightmare Vedad Ibisevic now in play for Stuttgart. I'm worried. Worried about Stuttgart in the last 15 minutes? BVB isn't that bad. Though those offsides are.
Not worried about Stuttgart. Worried about Dortmund. Concentration is not our strength. Holding a lead is something we could rarely do when we played our best.
I'd love to see Mkhi play with Zlatan's confidence once.
|
rofl, no one cares about the random dude on the field
edit: finally, 1:3 Reus
edit2:and Dortmund doesn't want to win... 2:3 Niedermayer
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
