| Forum Index > Sports |
|
sharkie
Austria18762 Posts
On July 17 2020 08:16 Wombat_NI wrote: Still think he’s overrated as a coach but well done Real, fans of them enjoy your league title! Overrated? I have never seen anyone call him best (or even one of the best coaches) in the world. Not even me a big Zidane fan would say that. But still: hes won now 2 La Liga titles and 3 CL titles, nothing to scoff at at all | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
Not sure what Messi is trying to say with all his politics, Barca seem pretty messed up right now from top to bottom with a lot of in house fighting. All seems to have started with the Nemyar saga. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7427 Posts
On July 17 2020 02:45 aseq wrote: 5 subs, but only 3 sub opportunities + 1 extra sub opportunity in overtime (no extra subs). Subs during half time, fulltime or overtime half time don't count as a sub opportunity. So essentially, as much stoppage as we have now. Didn't know that! Sounds reasonable Still, I would love for Footi to switch to stopping time sooner rather than never. There is only one downside I can think of and like 100's of upsides | ||
|
Greg_J
China4409 Posts
| ||
|
sharkie
Austria18762 Posts
On July 17 2020 21:00 Greg_J wrote: More subs is only a bad thing. It's bad everywhere. It's really bad in England and I hope it doesn't continue to happen after this year. But it is especially bad in La Liga where the League is already dominated to a ludicrous degree by 2 clubs making the vast majority of the World only watch two La Liga games a season. I don't even see why anyone would want more subs. It in no way improves football. It just makes it far, far easier for the teams with the most cash to dominate. More subs has had no negative impact in England... I dont watch La liga but in the Bundesliga EVERY club welcomed more subs. Where does this myth come from? | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8930 Posts
more money = better squad depth = better utilisation of subs | ||
|
haitike
Spain2744 Posts
On July 17 2020 19:29 Pandemona wrote: Gz to Real! Not sure what Messi is trying to say with all his politics, Barca seem pretty messed up right now from top to bottom with a lot of in house fighting. All seems to have started with the Nemyar saga. I think Messi wants the board to snap elections this summer instead of waiting to finish their term in 2021. | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18762 Posts
On July 17 2020 21:37 evilfatsh1t wrote: its not a myth, its logic. more money = better squad depth = better utilisation of subs its a myth because no small clubs are crying about more subs. It's just some fans who cry about it | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18473 Posts
On July 17 2020 21:00 Greg_J wrote: More subs is only a bad thing. It's bad everywhere. It's really bad in England and I hope it doesn't continue to happen after this year. But it is especially bad in La Liga where the League is already dominated to a ludicrous degree by 2 clubs making the vast majority of the World only watch two La Liga games a season. I don't even see why anyone would want more subs. It in no way improves football. It just makes it far, far easier for the teams with the most cash to dominate. In theory you're right. In practice I don't think that's true. If I look at the Eredivisie (which I am more familiar with than La Liga despite having lived here for ages), small teams don't necessarily have less players than big teams. It's just that their whole selection is generally of inferior quality. Being able to better rest a few more players benefits these teams just as much as the big teams. Their overall physical level is probably lower (due to having less optimized training regimes), but they also tend to play fewer games (no European football and generally knocked out of the cup sooner as well). Overall resting players better and being able to sub out underperformers and giving young players a chance seems like it'll benefit all teams. My gut says it has very little effect. In fact, I am not at all opposed to football moving to a basketball style sub system. It just seems all around healthier for the players. I think we need some cold hard data on this that shows that more subs leads to greater dominance of the richest teams. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27464 Posts
On July 17 2020 14:25 sharkie wrote: Overrated? I have never seen anyone call him best (or even one of the best coaches) in the world. Not even me a big Zidane fan would say that. But still: hes won now 2 La Liga titles and 3 CL titles, nothing to scoff at at all Perhaps I read too many comment threads on the internet. He has done a great job there but I can’t see him replicating it in any other environment. His job remit is basically keeping big egos happy and he’s a living legend of a player there. Suppose I could see him doing well with the French national side there as well, for similar reasons. He’s a great coach specifically for Real though. | ||
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
On July 17 2020 21:44 haitike wrote: I think Messi wants the board to snap elections this summer instead of waiting to finish their term in 2021. Seems so crazy from an outsider though, it just makes Messi look a bit too controlling for a player, but then the fans might see it as he cares i dont know, just all seems to stem from the Neymar saga. | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18762 Posts
On July 17 2020 22:52 Wombat_NI wrote: Perhaps I read too many comment threads on the internet. He has done a great job there but I can’t see him replicating it in any other environment. His job remit is basically keeping big egos happy and he’s a living legend of a player there. Suppose I could see him doing well with the French national side there as well, for similar reasons. He’s a great coach specifically for Real though. This season he's made Real the best side defensively (in all of Europe) though which is more than just keeping big egos happy.  | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27464 Posts
On July 17 2020 22:47 Acrofales wrote: In theory you're right. In practice I don't think that's true. If I look at the Eredivisie (which I am more familiar with than La Liga despite having lived here for ages), small teams don't necessarily have less players than big teams. It's just that their whole selection is generally of inferior quality. Being able to better rest a few more players benefits these teams just as much as the big teams. Their overall physical level is probably lower (due to having less optimized training regimes), but they also tend to play fewer games (no European football and generally knocked out of the cup sooner as well). Overall resting players better and being able to sub out underperformers and giving young players a chance seems like it'll benefit all teams. My gut says it has very little effect. In fact, I am not at all opposed to football moving to a basketball style sub system. It just seems all around healthier for the players. I think we need some cold hard data on this that shows that more subs leads to greater dominance of the richest teams. We’ll see how it plays out. Rich teams are more dominant in general across many European leagues as it is, I feel this would accelerate that even further. One factor being overlooked is enabling even more bloated squads. Wages aside, a club like Real can largely freeze out Gareth Bale and have James Rodriguez out on perpetual loan. Or Coutinho at Barca. At Chelsea they’ve made good business this summer in terms of signing, the main question mark being ‘how do you fit all these guys in?’ If you have 5 subs you can rotate even more freely and give these players game time. Game time that if they didn’t have they may seek pastures new. I think that could be a bigger barrier to competition than the actual ability to have more substitutions within a game I think it is squad depth that’s a big impediment to wider competition than actual first elevens, because smaller teams are denied access to quality talent that’s stockpiled elsewhere. It’s not that James Rodriguez might actually get on the pitch in a game with 5 substitutions, but that a player who other clubs could build a team around (and have) is surplus to Real’s need despite a pretty hefty price tag. Heftier again with Coutinho. As for teams actually benefitting from 5 substitutions on the field, in terms of quality rather than tactical adjustments. I can’t think of too many. Man City have a lot of riches in their technical midfielder/wide in the front three department. But Silva and Sane are out of that equation next season. Dortmund tend to rescue points with their bench a fair bit in that same area. Reyna looks a quality talent, Sancho, Reus, Brandt et al. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27464 Posts
On July 17 2020 22:52 Pandemona wrote: Seems so crazy from an outsider though, it just makes Messi look a bit too controlling for a player, but then the fans might see it as he cares i dont know, just all seems to stem from the Neymar saga. He’s kinda right to be pissed from what I’ve heard. From social media campaigns against the players where the board’s hand was in it, Messi being accused of running the club and deciding transfers and all sorts. It sounds like the board’s strategy is to deflect blame on to Messi for their own shoddy handling of the club and this is why Messi is particularly pissed off. Despite him being a bit of a prat, Neymar was very good at Barcelona, Messi, Suarez and many others within the squad wanted him back in. I think it would have been a good move tbh. Messi’s old enough that Neymar can have his shot at being the main man. Now what the board did was apparently sign off on being ok with this and say they’d go for it. But they’d already basically sealed the Griezman deal. Then they lack the funds to properly go for the Neymar one. Then stories come out that Messi and Suarez weren’t helping Griezman adapt because they were pissed off which aren’t really true. The problem is a purely footballing one where Griezman’s best position happens to be you know, Lionel Messi’s. So Messi is pissed off that he’s being scapegoated for the board’s terrible record in making linked up decisions. Which I think is fair enough. Also guy’s getting old and wants to win another CL and the squad composition isn’t exactly helping. | ||
|
Greg_J
China4409 Posts
I haven't been paying attention to the La Liga Messi business so I'll keep my nose out of the other story. | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8930 Posts
On July 17 2020 22:20 sharkie wrote: its a myth because no small clubs are crying about more subs. It's just some fans who cry about it what? just because small clubs arent crying about it doesnt make it untrue. whats wrong with your brain small clubs benefit a little: your players have better health and fitness but your team performance is still impacted by the lesser quality of subs you can bring on. bigger clubs benefit a lot: your players have better health and fitness but your team performance ISNT impacted as much because you get to hold on to much better quality subs because you can not only afford to pay these players, but these players have less incentive to leave the club in search of game time elsewhere. just like wombat said; a higher concentration of elite players staying within the top clubs due to more chances of game time rather than having to leave to smaller clubs because theyre not getting games from the bench. if leicester winning the league back when they first won it was 1:5000 now the odds are gonna be like 1:10000. realistically smaller clubs benefit immensely from big clubs having injuries or lesser quality substitutions and this benefit is taken away from them when big clubs now are able to have bench players that are just as competitive as their first eleven | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28911 Posts
While there are examples of this being true, I'm not sure it's true across the board. If anything, I'm inclined to think it hurts the 'smaller top teams' (say leicester, wolves, tottenham), who have some top players but struggle with squad depth more than it hurts the bottom half teams. I do see the potential for it being harmful through top teams being able to 'hoard' more top players because fewer top players will be frustrated with lack of playtime, though. But I also see the potential for it giving more opportunities to younger talent. I'm also not sure swapping 5 players is always a good idea even if you have near equally good players to substitute them with, you might lose some flow and rhythm and cohesion which can be as valuable as the extra energy. If you look at City's previous 4 games, they swapped 5 players in the three games they won (being up 2-0 or 3-0 by halftime in all of them), but they only utilized two of five substitutes in their 0-1 loss to Southampton. (Which to me indicates that Pep didn't consider substituting players an advantage in terms of making them play better, rather that he did it to rest players and give some additional playtime. ) | ||
|
Greg_J
China4409 Posts
On July 18 2020 00:36 Liquid`Drone wrote: I mean the question is whether there's a bigger disparity between the bench and first team on manchester city than it is for burnley or brighton. Obviously manchester city has a much better bench - but they also have a much better first team. More subs is only advantageous for the bigger clubs if their bench is better than the bench of smaller clubs by a bigger margin than what is the case for the starting 11. While there are examples of this being true, I'm not sure it's true across the board. If anything, I'm inclined to think it hurts the 'smaller top teams' (say leicester, wolves, tottenham), who have some top players but struggle with squad depth more than it hurts the bottom half teams. I do see the potential for it being harmful through top teams being able to 'hoard' more top players because fewer top players will be frustrated with lack of playtime, though. But I also see the potential for it giving more opportunities to younger talent. I'm also not sure swapping 5 players is always a good idea even if you have near equally good players to substitute them with, you might lose some flow and rhythm and cohesion which can be as valuable as the extra energy. If you look at City's previous 4 games, they swapped 5 players in the three games they won (being up 2-0 or 3-0 by halftime in all of them), but they only utilized two of five substitutes in their 0-1 loss to Southampton. (Which to me indicates that Pep didn't consider substituting players an advantage in terms of making them play better, rather that he did it to rest players and give some additional playtime. ) I can see what you are saying someone like Spurs who have a pretty decent first team and not a good squad depth don't benefit from having more subs. But Spurs are financially not in the same league as Man City who have ridiculous bench. Man City B team would qualify for Europe. Also Man City are in a weird position of having literally nothing to play for in the Premier League right now but needing to keep players in good condition ready for the Champions League. Things are a bit weird for multiple reasons right now. This doesn't completely invalidate your point Drone, but current form is not as meaningful when the club has nothing to play for. | ||
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
On July 17 2020 23:24 Wombat_NI wrote: He’s kinda right to be pissed from what I’ve heard. From social media campaigns against the players where the board’s hand was in it, Messi being accused of running the club and deciding transfers and all sorts. It sounds like the board’s strategy is to deflect blame on to Messi for their own shoddy handling of the club and this is why Messi is particularly pissed off. Despite him being a bit of a prat, Neymar was very good at Barcelona, Messi, Suarez and many others within the squad wanted him back in. I think it would have been a good move tbh. Messi’s old enough that Neymar can have his shot at being the main man. Now what the board did was apparently sign off on being ok with this and say they’d go for it. But they’d already basically sealed the Griezman deal. Then they lack the funds to properly go for the Neymar one. Then stories come out that Messi and Suarez weren’t helping Griezman adapt because they were pissed off which aren’t really true. The problem is a purely footballing one where Griezman’s best position happens to be you know, Lionel Messi’s. So Messi is pissed off that he’s being scapegoated for the board’s terrible record in making linked up decisions. Which I think is fair enough. Also guy’s getting old and wants to win another CL and the squad composition isn’t exactly helping. Ahh true the other way is that you suggest that the board are playing him off as the problem which seems to work as that is what it was perceived to be looking like to me.... Crazy ran club i agree and i also think its down to the Neymar situation | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Afreeca Starleague
Rush vs Soulkey
CranKy Ducklings
WardiTV Invitational
AI Arena Tournament
BSL Open Qualifier
Sparkling Tuna Cup
OSC
IPSL
BSL Open Qualifier
WardiTV Weekly
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
