You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Derby Days
Is Roy Keane right,personally I think he is.What has happened to the animosity before games against your rivals,the fans still have it but the players don't.They seem more concerned posting on their social media accounts than the game ahead of them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLZhSB26nyI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLZhSB26nyI
Comments
All the players at the top level know each other, and some really will be really good friends especially if they are international team mates.
As long as my team give their all out on the pitch, I don't really care if they embrace the opposition before or after a game, or constantly update their social media profiles.
If I had a friend on the opposing team in my day, I think we both tried that much harder to make life difficult on the pitch.
I’m surprised they didn’t get booked pre match for touching each other.
I don’t begrudge them making good money,but it wasn’t how much merchandise a player could sell for a team as a leading reason to buying a player.
Foreign owners,players, managers? Football in this country has been hijacked.
Every game shown live is made out to be a cup final.Zzzzzzz.
Most players are of a standard,average, with few stand outs.
Mind you, most things are over the top these days, it’s a trend.
love a bit of footy
no punching the Ref or tackling the Goalie, throwing coins at the linesman. Skill the order of the day. Bit of shirt pulling, pushing in the box part of the game.
Yet the presenters and other pundits can waffle on for hours , talking complete xxxxxxxx.
You only need ten minutes before a game, to see who’s in the teams. Then a quick summary after the game.
Plough the pundits contract money into kids football.
It would be far more appreciated there.
Then get Roy Keene to tour the schools to show them how to tackle.
And now we have to rely on foreign investment to build stadiums, buy players etc.
When we are supposed to be the fifth richest country in the world.How much foreign investment was in English football when we won the World Cup?
Most of the so called top managers inherit good teams. They’re overrated.
Why don’t these so called top managers have long runs at one club?
Wenger being an exception,but should have gone years earlier.
The moneygoround has attracted foreign owners, players and coaches.
It hasn’t advanced English football at all.
Most supporters don’t give a monkeys about the structure of their clubs, as long as there team wins.
English football doing reasonable well in Europe is an illusion, as they are mostly made up of foreign players.
I’d have thought you could have had a good guess at my views, and saved my time explaining.
If there was a 1% chance you thought I was being racist, then as I’ve been out with three females of mixed race, have one brothers-in-law who is Scottish, another who is half Scottish half Jamaican,and a great niece who is half English half Pakistani, I’d have thought I’d noticed by now if I was.
I’m sure you weren’t though, but just in case.
I found it to be a rather bizarre comment.
Foreign money/players/coaches have been amazing for football in England.
The Premier League is an incredibly popular and marketable sport worldwide, so it's only natural that people and companies from all over the globe would want to get involved in one way or another.
And having some of the best foreign players and coaches in the world plying their trade in England should surely be something to be celebrated no? Unless you're a xenophobic idiot of course.
The Premier League would be utterly dull if you only had the likes of Pardew, Moyes, Bruce, Hodgson etc coaching only those players who were born here. What a shambles of a national sport that would be.
Curse those talented pesky foreigners, coming over here and stealing our game.
Sounds like you're stuck in the 70s pal, time to move on.
I know you must be sensitive, being a supporter of Abu Dhabi City. But that is no reason to dismantle a totally different argument than that raised by @chilling
Let's take Man City as an example. There is absolutely no doubt that they are a far better side than 40 (or indeed 15) years ago. Similarly, there is no doubt that football has been enriched by some of the marvellous players money has bought. De Bruyne, 2 Silvas, Aguero and several more.
But at the same time, nearly all other major footballing nations try to strike a balance between national as well as international players. City have a grand total of 4 English players who get anywhere near the first team.
Sterling? Marvellous. Walker? Keeps a £60 million player on the bench, but I'd love to know why he doesn't get in the England squad. Stones? Confidence shot to pieces. Foden? Probably the best natural young talent, getting no game time. Watching less talented English players overtaking him.
Is it so unreasonable to insist on a minimum number of English players in each 18-man squad?
If so, what is the excuse for England's lack of any post '66 success up until around the '94 mark when we started to see more foreign imports? The top division had barely any of them pesky foreigners in those years so I assume England hoovered up trophy after trophy in that period.....
Again, your lack of City knowledge is embarrassing and you really shouldn't comment on something you clearly know very little about.
No sensitivity here at all. I find it amusing watching dinosaur football fans lament foreign owners/investment/players etc
And to answer the question, yes of course its unreasonable. How would 'Player X' getting selected into an 18 man squad simply because he's English and not due to his ability or form be of any benefit for the national team?
Edit; Foden starts tonight in the CL, Pep is absolutely ruining him.
You really should be a politician. Love the way you seek to demolish arguments no-one is making.
The world has changed. In the 1960s most teams in the world were made up of locals. Not now.
There's a simple reason for our lack of success. We weren't good enough. The only times we even came close were 1970, 1990 and 2018.
My lack of City knowledge? If you say so. There's always been a club with more money than is legal.
Player X? Let's call him Jaden Sancho. Think if he'd stayed and Foden had left they'd be at the same stage? Think Sancho, or Mount, or Winks (none of which have Foden's ability IMO) would be England players if at City? People learn, and improve, playing in meaningful games with better international players.
Foreign owners/investment is great for the game. But it could be even better.
What about your average 'player X'; how will that player getting on a Premier League bench due to his nationality rather than his ability/form be of any benefit for the England team?
Players should always be picked on merit, not on nationality. If English players aren't good enough then so be it. Picking them to sit on a bench every week due to legislation isn't gonna help them or make them any better.
As you say, the national team hasn't been good enough for 5 decades, and it's nothing to do with foreign players/owners/investment (who have, if anything, improved the game dramatically in the last 25 years)
Perhaps we should just accept that as a footballing nation we're simply not as good as some of our European and worldwide rivals. We can strive to improve, but it needs to come from the grassroots level. Until that changes we won't catch up.
England are like Spurs; in theory should be pretty good but in reality we ain't.
Oh, and Sancho wanted to leave and Pep didn't stand in his way.
So hopefully it should pan out.
You bet .....