The imaginatively titled Premier League 21/22 Thread
- Thread starter lejackal
- Start date
I still do not see a £100m player in Grealish. I don't even see a player worth half that. He is no more than a "good" PL player who played in a club that built it's entire team round him.
I also don't see what problem he solves for City. They need a striker and a LB, he is neither.
Agreed
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2014
- Messages
- 8,779
I'm not surprised that City have payed that for Grealish, FFP doesn't really exist does it! They can spend what they want and fiddle the books. I do think Grealish is a top player, most fouled player in the PL last two seasons and second only to Bruno Fernandes for chances created in open play last season in the PL. Thats playing for Villa, imagine what he will do in the City team. I can see City swapping a player and some money for Kane, that said he's back training, Spurs may have won that battle.
Grealish is a great buy for any team, the number of free kicks in dangerous areas he wins, the work rate, passing and vision will go down a storm at City
Kane, jury is out for me, if he gets in a team with outstanding players around him, he will shine, just think in the end he will stay put, unless Levy does a swap and can for Messi ha ha you never know, Trump got the presidency, Bafoon Boris got the prime minister spot …who knows!
Kane, jury is out for me, if he gets in a team with outstanding players around him, he will shine, just think in the end he will stay put, unless Levy does a swap and can for Messi ha ha you never know, Trump got the presidency, Bafoon Boris got the prime minister spot …who knows!
Grealish may be the most fouled player but how many of them where cos he dives like a little girl!? He's worse than Ashley Young FFS.
Also, I'm not sure City will want him going to ground every time he gets the ball. It's not very often they are under the cosh and need to buy a free. They tend to dominate and pass teams to death. They'll want him to stay on his feet and pass.
Signing him over a striker just seems very strange to me. Strengthen your strongest area and ignore your weakest. Logic in there somewhere.
I do agree FFP is a joke/farce, I have never seen it as anything but the big boys trying to protect themselves while selling it as looking out for everyone else, and that City cheat. There is an on going court case involing them and the PL. If they lose there could be some serious questions to be asked. If they lose, a judge has basically confirmed they broke the rules and cheated. Should there be penalties for them? Financial fines seem pointless when the Club has a bottomless pit of money. I'm not sure I want to see any club retrospectively docked points (and to see my club awarded a title years later would be the definition of hollow) but teams who break financial rules in the lower leagues get docked points, and, assuming they lose, City will have cheated, so……..
It would send one hell of a message, and require the FA to grow a set. So watch City get fined £2m if they lose.
Also, I'm not sure City will want him going to ground every time he gets the ball. It's not very often they are under the cosh and need to buy a free. They tend to dominate and pass teams to death. They'll want him to stay on his feet and pass.
Signing him over a striker just seems very strange to me. Strengthen your strongest area and ignore your weakest. Logic in there somewhere.
I do agree FFP is a joke/farce, I have never seen it as anything but the big boys trying to protect themselves while selling it as looking out for everyone else, and that City cheat. There is an on going court case involing them and the PL. If they lose there could be some serious questions to be asked. If they lose, a judge has basically confirmed they broke the rules and cheated. Should there be penalties for them? Financial fines seem pointless when the Club has a bottomless pit of money. I'm not sure I want to see any club retrospectively docked points (and to see my club awarded a title years later would be the definition of hollow) but teams who break financial rules in the lower leagues get docked points, and, assuming they lose, City will have cheated, so……..
It would send one hell of a message, and require the FA to grow a set. So watch City get fined £2m if they lose.
lejackal
Grand Master
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2015
- Messages
- 8,518
on the most fouled front (and I may be a bit behind the times) when did it change from "being fouled/brought down" to "winning a foul/free kick/penalty" ?
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2014
- Messages
- 8,779
I don't think City are finished in the transfer market yet, they will get a striker, may not be Kane but they will get one. They still have two teams that can win the league IMO, well one that can win the league and one that can finish in the top 4. Pep probably will want him to stay on his feet more, but City also love to break up the play and slow things down when its good for them, tactical fouls, buying free kicks and keeping the ball while not actually doing much with it.
You've lost me there, sorry.
lejackal
Grand Master
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2015
- Messages
- 8,518
The way it's worded has changed in punditry and reporting.
It used to be:
"the striker has been fouled/kicked/brought down"
now it's:
"the striker has drawn a foul"
or
"won a free kick/penalty"
The narrative has changed from the defending player being at fault to the attacking player has been good for getting a set piece awarded
Ahhh ok, with you now.
I assume that cos we see so much diving now*. And it's not new Ronalod, Stevie G, Fat Frank, all fond of going to ground easily. Not quite as easily as some players now but we seem dangerously close to "there's contact that must be a penalty/foul."
It is a contact sport. Contact is allowed. The clue is in the name FFS.
* Possibly also cos the auld GBH tackles of the early 90's are outlawed, so defenders have had to learn to be cuter (or to tackle). Watch any PL game from the 90's and I will be amazed if you get past 10 minutes before someone puts in a tackle that would be a straight red now. And all that happens is the game continues and no one bats an eyelid.
I assume that cos we see so much diving now*. And it's not new Ronalod, Stevie G, Fat Frank, all fond of going to ground easily. Not quite as easily as some players now but we seem dangerously close to "there's contact that must be a penalty/foul."
It is a contact sport. Contact is allowed. The clue is in the name FFS.
* Possibly also cos the auld GBH tackles of the early 90's are outlawed, so defenders have had to learn to be cuter (or to tackle). Watch any PL game from the 90's and I will be amazed if you get past 10 minutes before someone puts in a tackle that would be a straight red now. And all that happens is the game continues and no one bats an eyelid.
lejackal
Grand Master
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2015
- Messages
- 8,518
Oh I know, Pires may once or twice have fallen on the well trimmed grass of Highbury before
I was watching Arsenal from 03-04 last night and if the same match was played today there'd be at least 6 or 7 yellows dishes out
I watched the original Liverpool Newcastle 4-3 from 96/97 ish season. That game now would have to be abandoned cos there weren't enough players left on the pitch. There were dozens of, what would now be, red card tackles.
lejackal
Grand Master
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2015
- Messages
- 8,518
I'm amazed there weren't more leg breaks looking back at the challenges that were the norm to be honest
lejackal
Grand Master
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2015
- Messages
- 8,518
There was definitely less rolling around, that's for sure. You only really stayed down if you'd been cut in half by Keane or Vieira and that was only because the afters were likely to be worse than the challenge
That said Chelsea had a few feisty buggers, even spuds had a bit of a nuisance in midfield
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2014
- Messages
- 8,779
There was they just played on. lol
You joke. Stuart Pearce did try and run off a broken leg when he was at WH. He was jogging up and down the touch line as the Physio waved "no" in front of him. From memory he came back on, but quickly realised it's hard to run on a broken leg, and harder still to kick a ball with one.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2014
- Messages
- 8,779
Yeah think I remember that, he would pretty much carry on playing if you chopped his head off.
Looks like City are lining up £150 million bid for Kane, surely they will have to move a player out if that happens. Lukaku will get 25 - 30 goals in the league for Chelsea, they are crying out for a striker. Again what's £97 million to them, it could be double that and they would pay it if they were aloud and needed to. I've said it before, City and Chelsea have pretty much ruined football for me, they have torn up 150 years of history in the last 15 years by spending, spending and spending. Usually spending well, but still its still bollocks.
Last edited:
