Dubstepforum.com

They may never get better without outside help to improve them and the richer developing countries can always pay for consultancy. It'd be a nightmare to police and smaller countries like the Swiss may never get the chance to be ranked 3rd in the world.

scspkr99 wrote:They may never get better without outside help to improve them and the richer developing countries can always pay for consultancy. It'd be a nightmare to police and smaller countries like the Swiss may never get the chance to be ranked 3rd in the world.

I'm sure FIFA are rich enough to help them out. Maybe pass on a little more of that sweet, sweet world cup advertising money to the developing nations. That will go some way to paying for training for the coaches, and they'll also save on the absurd amount of money they pay to foreign coaches. Not ideal, but that's just how sport works I guess. Some places are better than others.

garethom wrote: I do think that national football should be about representing the best of the nation at the given time, players, coaches, physios, managers, scouts. It's almost like, what's the point? If the guy in charge of the players is an Italian, what's the point? Where does it stop? If we can have a Spanish manager, why not get some Spanish players? Understand that probably nobody here will agree with me, but I think it devalues the whole affair.

Definitely agree with this. I think it should be a Fifa rule that this has to be the case.
Regardless of that I think it is embarrassing that one of the biggest footballing nations (England) should have to resort to a foreign manager anyway.

icanicant wrote:

garethom wrote: I do think that national football should be about representing the best of the nation at the given time, players, coaches, physios, managers, scouts. It's almost like, what's the point? If the guy in charge of the players is an Italian, what's the point? Where does it stop? If we can have a Spanish manager, why not get some Spanish players? Understand that probably nobody here will agree with me, but I think it devalues the whole affair.

Definitely agree with this. I think it should be a Fifa rule that this has to be the case.
Regardless of that I think it is embarrassing that one of the biggest footballing nations (England) should have to resort to a foreign manager anyway.

Forcing a country to have it's national side coached by someone of that nationality would create a chasm in terms of international experience for some footballing nations.

To everyone making the point that Hodgson does well with the weaker teams and that that suits England.
That make realistically be the case but I dont think you can get away with having that attitude regardless of whether it is true or not. The media and the fans wont accept it and it is vital to have both of these onside.
Harry is loved by the media and he is very good at handling them and criticism from the fans. Hodgson could not deal with it at Liverpool and the pressure on beig England manager will be far worse.

icanicant wrote: Harry is loved by the media and he is very good at handling them and criticism from the fans.

We'll see about that after Euro 2012.

Don't particularly care if the fans want him? Have you ever been to a match? Well over 90% of people that go are beyond mongoloided. They'll want whoever The Sun tells them they want.

garethom wrote: I do think that national football should be about representing the best of the nation at the given time, players, coaches, physios, managers, scouts. It's almost like, what's the point? If the guy in charge of the players is an Italian, what's the point? Where does it stop? If we can have a Spanish manager, why not get some Spanish players? Understand that probably nobody here will agree with me, but I think it devalues the whole affair.

Exactly. It's a National competition... that's the point of it.

During the 19th and 20th Centuries, International Sports overtook war as the preferred outlet for tribal browbeating and flag waving, especially in the developed world... it's not about Favourite Company Vs Favourite Company like the Premiership (where people are happy to support Companies from other towns/cities), it's Home Vs Home... the more elements you allow in that don't represent your Home against someone else's, the less point there is in the whole exercise.

Smaller nations manage to produce perfectly good players - why not managers? Most managers are ex players and almost all star players, no matter where they're from, get an entire career of top flight experience that they could take home and build on with the next generation... but no, a team like Cameroon is left with almost-noname French manager rather than a National talisman.

magma wrote:
Smaller nations manage to produce perfectly good players - why not managers? Most managers are ex players and almost all star players, no matter where they're from, get an entire career of top flight experience that they could take home and build on with the next generation... but no, a team like Cameroon is left with almost-noname French manager rather than a National talisman.

garethom wrote:

icanicant wrote: Harry is loved by the media and he is very good at handling them and criticism from the fans.

We'll see about that after Euro 2012.

Don't particularly care if the fans want him? Have you ever been to a match? Well over 90% of people that go are beyond mongoloided. They'll want whoever The Sun tells them they want.

Yeah a fair few. Mostly when they playing at Old Trafford for that time. Regardless of whether you are right about England not actually being that good the majority of the fans believe that England are and that is important because you have to have your fans behind you. Fans will quickly start booing if Roy has us playing the way West Brom have been this year. And then the media will add to this. Which would all have consequences on the players performances themselves.

wub wrote: Forcing a country to have it's national side coached by someone of that nationality would create a chasm in terms of international experience for some footballing nations.

I think possibly initially but then the long term benefits would be the smaller countries emphasizing the need for good coaches and then those coaches actually gaining international experience.

icanicant wrote: Fans will quickly start booing if Roy has us playing the way West Brom have been this year. And then the media will add to this. Which would all have consequences on the players performances themselves.

People can boo all they want, anyone who knows anything about football can see that playing boring, well organised football is the only way that this England team will progress beyond the group stages. They just dont have any players apart from Rooney who can keep hold of the ball..

southstar wrote:

jazzamataz wrote:KOLN website has just anounced Poldi as an Arsenal player

Unusual for Wenger to get business done so early, does he know something about Van Persie?

Might not be so much about RvP as Walcott. Both have been reluctant to sign new contracts.

RvP is 29 and despite his good run this season is fucking injury prone. Can't see anyone aside
Barca, Citeh and Madrid wanting RvP (or him wanting to go anywhere else). Barca have their eyes
on other pies and probably won't table a bid for him considering their financial difficulties.
Madrid on the other hand... They would love to see him with Ronaldo, Ozil, Alonso and Di Maria.
(In fact, so would I.)
Citeh would have to table a bid close to £45m just to entertain the idea of it coz there is no way in
hell Wenger or the board would sell the League's leading goal scorer to a local rival. It just wouldn't
be worth it for them.

Walcott however, is 23 and about to hit his peak years. He should be prime for most clubs in Europe
if he can't agree a new deal - It will be more than frustrating to lose him now. More than likely
he'll end up at Citeh with everyone else if he's unwilling to sign.

However, if we do lose him, I'd love to see us table a bid for Daniel Sturridge.

AND after the shambles of last summer, the board need to re-iterate to fans that Arsenal are a team
with title intentions, otherwise they risk losing a LOT of season tickets.

C'mon City

wub wrote:C'mon City

Fuckoff, that was fuckeries.

From a neutral point of view (and with a smug amount of self satisfaction that Saints are already up ) this is a cracking season.


And City have still got to beat Newcastle at The Ground Formerly Known As St James' Park™

What are the chances City throw away all their good work at Newcastle?

southstar wrote:What are the chances City throw away all their good work at Newcastle?

I hope so.

Citteh winning the league would be awful.

meanmrcustard wrote:

southstar wrote:What are the chances City throw away all their good work at Newcastle?

I hope so.

Citteh winning the league would be awful.

It just seems like such a hollow victory to me, they've done nothing to earn it. I guess i wouldnt complain if it was Arsenal in the same position...

To be fair to them, City probably do deserve to win. They have the best players and they've played some of the best football.

Thing is, they're classless fucks who have thrown piles of money at a bunch of mercenaries. Their fans are just the worst too. Anyone but City for me.

With the amount of money they've spent, it would be a travesty for them if they were beaten by a United side who are miles away from the team they were 4 or 5 years ago.

It was no different when Blackburn won it under jack Walker or Chelsea winning it under Abrhamovich.

Actually it was worse when Chelsea won it , they played dull defensive football