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.

Options

Football Thread.

1181921232440

Comments

  • Options
    lucy4lucy4 Member Posts: 7,108
  • Options
    stokefcstokefc Member Posts: 7,654
    This was copied from the Daily Mash :D
    New Chelsea manager grudgingly agrees to earn £20m for half-arsed six months

    MAURICIO Pochettino will today reluctantly agree to earn eight figures for doing a **** job as Chelsea manager until November.

    The manager, who has already won nothing with Tottenham and the bare minimum at Paris Saint-Germain, has agreed to take over at Chelsea because he had nothing much on this year and the money will come in handy.

    He said: “Sometimes, when you’re asked to bank a mighty fee for an abortive and short stint in a money pit, you just have to sigh, bow your head and reluctantly accept it’s your turn.

    “God knows I don’t want to be Chelsea manager. Nobody does. ‘Give it to one of these young ones,’ I said. ‘Let Jaissle from Red Bull Salzburg have a go.’ But they thought I was playing hard to get, doubled the fee and added a huge dismissal package.

    “‘Come on,’ I said. ‘Surely there’s better than me out there.’ They showed me the next name on the shortlist and it was Brendan Rodgers.

    “So I’m in. I’m pretty confident I can keep them up. We’ll blow a few hundred million in the summer on players I’ve weakly argued against, hang around the top four until autumn and then I’ll be sacked after a run of **** results and be my own man again.

    “Nobody understands the pressure top managers are under. Still, at least it’s not Spurs.”
  • Options
    lucy4lucy4 Member Posts: 7,108
    Tottenham fans all over the country now... :D


  • Options
    stokefcstokefc Member Posts: 7,654
    Stoke fans in Stoke-on-Trent right now


  • Options
    TheEdge949TheEdge949 Member Posts: 5,273
    stokefc said:

    Stoke fans in Stoke-on-Trent right now


    I left with 15 minutes to go yesterday, first time I have done that, but they were that abysmal I didn't think they were worth shouting abuse at on the lap of appreciation.

    Seriously considering NOT renewing my season card. I don't mind losing, I don't even mind being outplayed but to have no passion, no pride and no guts is unforgivable.
  • Options
    EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,111
    I was enduring the commentary on Sky on the otherwise excellent game that was Liverpool v Spurs.

    Getting really tired of "pundits" who have either never managed a football club or were truly abysmal, spending half the game expounding on, and expanding upon, their 1 single solitary idea. Instead of commenting on the game.

    On and on about Spurs' supposed woes. You know, the 6th richest club finishing, er, 6th. Or why fans who spend between £0 and £1,000 this year lambast a Chairman for "only" spending £150 million.

    The usual stuff about Spurs failing to win trophies since 2008, as though this is a massive story. And gleefully mentioning that 4 teams from outside the current Prem (Birmingham, Swansea, Portsmouth and Wigan) have won trophies since 2008. Which got me thinking. Because I know that only 10 clubs in total have won a trophy since 2008.

    The current EPL has 20 teams. 6 have won a trophy (Europe/Prem/FA Cup/League Cup) since 2008. Arsenal, Chelsea, Leicester City, Liverpool, Man City and Man Utd.

    5 have never won a trophy. Bournemouth, Brentford, Brighton, Crystal Palace, Fulham.

    But it is the length of time that various other, traditionally sizeable, clubs have gone without a trophy that surprised me. I think it is surprising that Spurs have gone 15 years without a trophy. But as surprising as?

    Aston Villa-27 years
    Everton-28 years
    Leeds-31 years
    West Ham-43 years
    Newcastle-54 years.

    Why is it commentators seem to pretend Spurs are the only club to have too long a wait for a trophy?
  • Options
    stokefcstokefc Member Posts: 7,654
    Commentators and especially the media love a bad news story Phil they thrive on it , it's the same with chelsea atm too
  • Options
    EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,111
    stokefc said:

    Commentators and especially the media love a bad news story Phil they thrive on it , it's the same with chelsea atm too

    Commentators don't seem to appreciate they are there primarily to commentate on the game. Not their 1 idea ad nauseam.

    The fist time I remember this happening was the 91 FA Cup Final-Spurs v Forest.

    I get that Gazza was a big-name player at the time. But he injured himself making an appalling tackle, for which he should have been sent off. And the commentators spent the next 10 minutes talking about him, and cutting away to the ambulance etc. And ignoring the game.

    Sky have just terminated the contract of Graeme Souness. 1 of the few commentators/pundits who actually talks with a sense of proportion.
  • Options
    rabdenirorabdeniro Member Posts: 4,231
    Ah see John Motson gettin the racist card thrown at him this morning.
  • Options
    lucy4lucy4 Member Posts: 7,108
    'DISGRACEFUL' Sky Sports’ Martin Tyler, 77, slammed for ‘racist’ comment about Spurs star Son Heung-min as fans say ‘time he retired’.

    FOOTBALL fans have slammed Martin Tyler after he appeared to make a racist comment on live television.

    The Sky Sports commentator, 77, made the blunder as Liverpool took on Tottenham in the Premier League.

    As South Korean Spurs forward Son Heung-Min tackled an opponent Tyler was heard comparing his defence to “martial arts”.

    Viewers rushed to social media to slam the comment.

    One wrote: “Really pains me to say it but I think it’s time for Sky to retire Martin Tyler.”

    Another added: “Martin Tyler needs to apologise for that immediately after the game.”

    A third added: “I assume Sky Sports will be launching an investigation into Martin Tyler’s racist comments about Son in the Liverpool vs Tottenham match?”

    A fourth fumed: “Martin Tyler's 'martial arts' comment about Son's yellow card was disgusting, xenophobic and racist. Not happy."

    It comes after Tyler was forced to apologise for saying injured Ukraine keeper Heorhiy Bushchan would have to 'soldier on' last year.
  • Options
    Tikay10Tikay10 Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 161,245

    I'm not at all sure the comments was intended that way.

    However, it's long past the point when he should retire from commentary, he really is beyond awful.

    And as for his "catchphrase", "anddd it's Live" why can't Sky tell him to give it a rest?

    It's a bad do when we know what he's going to say even before he says it. So so cringe.
  • Options
    EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,111
    edited May 2023
    Tikay10 said:


    I'm not at all sure the comments was intended that way.

    However, it's long past the point when he should retire from commentary, he really is beyond awful.

    And as for his "catchphrase", "anddd it's Live" why can't Sky tell him to give it a rest?

    It's a bad do when we know what he's going to say even before he says it. So so cringe.

    Completely agree.

    Some of his comments are, shall we say, of their time. But that is not a reason to get rid of him.

    But he was once a decent commentator. Not Motty, or Brian Moore, but decent. Whereas now he is just a bit embarrassing. Time to go.

    While I am venting, as a footballer Jermaine Jenas was like Glenn Hoddle without the good bits. Same holds true as a pundit/commentator. Hoddle can, I'm sure, to non-Spurs fans, be a bit marmite. Whereas Jenas just grates. Carragher? Has his moments as a pundit. As a co-commentator? Poor.
  • Options
    rabdenirorabdeniro Member Posts: 4,231
    edited May 2023
    He's by his best but ah don't think he's racist, said to the wife whilst watchin the match we'll be readin it tomorrow.
  • Options
    EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,111
    Another odd fact about the way football is developing.

    Reckless studs up challenge, where your foot leaves the ground, and studs go into someone's leg? Intention irrelevant, if sufficiently dangerous-red card.

    Yet if you replace "leg" with "face", intention is supposedly the key indicator, not the danger?

    Before anyone thinks I'm wearing "Spursy spectacles" the tackle by Skipp was halfway between a yellow and a red. Touched the ball first, then contact with player's ankle. As opposed to 5 feet off the ground, and nearly having someone's eye out.

    Madness.
  • Options
    EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,111
    rabdeniro said:

    He's by his best but ah don't think he's racist, said to the wife whilst watchin the match we'll be readin it tomorrow.

    Intention is the most important thing in these sorts of things. Was he saying it to belittle someone's race, etc? Short answer, no.
  • Options
    Tikay10Tikay10 Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 161,245
    Essexphil said:

    rabdeniro said:

    He's by his best but ah don't think he's racist, said to the wife whilst watchin the match we'll be readin it tomorrow.

    Intention is the most important thing in these sorts of things. Was he saying it to belittle someone's race, etc? Short answer, no.
    @Essexphil


    Correct.

    In fact, those who are suggesting it was racist are maybe the ones who need to look at themselves.
  • Options
    lucy4lucy4 Member Posts: 7,108
    Essexphil said:

    Another odd fact about the way football is developing.

    Reckless studs up challenge, where your foot leaves the ground, and studs go into someone's leg? Intention irrelevant, if sufficiently dangerous-red card.

    Yet if you replace "leg" with "face", intention is supposedly the key indicator, not the danger?

    Before anyone thinks I'm wearing "Spursy spectacles" the tackle by Skipp was halfway between a yellow and a red. Touched the ball first, then contact with player's ankle. As opposed to 5 feet off the ground, and nearly having someone's eye out.

    Madness.

    As always it's the inconsistency in these situations that riles me, Player A does that Skipp challenge and he's off but Player B get's the benefit of doubt, same as the high foot challenge.
  • Options
    EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,111
    edited May 2023
    lucy4 said:

    Essexphil said:

    Another odd fact about the way football is developing.

    Reckless studs up challenge, where your foot leaves the ground, and studs go into someone's leg? Intention irrelevant, if sufficiently dangerous-red card.

    Yet if you replace "leg" with "face", intention is supposedly the key indicator, not the danger?

    Before anyone thinks I'm wearing "Spursy spectacles" the tackle by Skipp was halfway between a yellow and a red. Touched the ball first, then contact with player's ankle. As opposed to 5 feet off the ground, and nearly having someone's eye out.

    Madness.

    As always it's the inconsistency in these situations that riles me, Player A does that Skipp challenge and he's off but Player B get's the benefit of doubt, same as the high foot challenge.
    Agreed. If a Romero or a Xhaka does that self-same tackle (or the Jota one) they are off. Whereas a Skipp or an Odegaard is not. And don't even start me on "forward's challenge" :)
  • Options
    lucy4lucy4 Member Posts: 7,108
    Essexphil said:

    lucy4 said:

    Essexphil said:

    Another odd fact about the way football is developing.

    Reckless studs up challenge, where your foot leaves the ground, and studs go into someone's leg? Intention irrelevant, if sufficiently dangerous-red card.

    Yet if you replace "leg" with "face", intention is supposedly the key indicator, not the danger?

    Before anyone thinks I'm wearing "Spursy spectacles" the tackle by Skipp was halfway between a yellow and a red. Touched the ball first, then contact with player's ankle. As opposed to 5 feet off the ground, and nearly having someone's eye out.

    Madness.

    As always it's the inconsistency in these situations that riles me, Player A does that Skipp challenge and he's off but Player B get's the benefit of doubt, same as the high foot challenge.
    Agreed. If a Romero or a Xhaka does that self-same tackle (or the Jota one) they are off. Whereas a Skipp or an Odegaard is not. And don't even start me on "forward's challenge" :)


    They used to say that about Rooney and if you take that out of his game you change the player, why should some players benefit while others get punished, a foul is a foul is a foul no matter who you are.
Sign In or Register to comment.