Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
davieG

Premier League 2021/22 Thread

By davieG, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

MarriedaLeicesterGirl

MarriedaLeicesterGirl

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, Sly said:

Ronaldo, Maguire, Pogba, Fernandes will all need to go, if they want to adapt and press like top teams.
 

I’m not sure that’s what the fans want but it’s the reality. 
 

 

Pogba wants out; Ronaldo didn't join for this shtshow (he'll want out, but I'm not sure he'll get it.) Maguire is in dreamland, and they'll never, ever move him until the end of his contract; Bruno the same.

 

I can't see Ole going this year, barring absolute disaster, because thr board will not want to see a repeat of what happened with Spurs: A string of top managers turning them down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest StevieLynex

Guest StevieLynex

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, MarriedaLeicesterGirl said:

Pogba wants out; Ronaldo didn't join for this shtshow (he'll want out, but I'm not sure he'll get it.) Maguire is in dreamland, and they'll never, ever move him until the end of his contract; Bruno the same.

 

I can't see Ole going this year, barring absolute disaster, because thr board will not want to see a repeat of what happened with Spurs: A string of top managers turning them down.

Damn, I thought that Dyche would be one of those approached

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest StevieLynex

Guest StevieLynex

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, ceredigion said:

Would anyone take Maguire back on a free transfer? 

So long as we were allowed to loan him out to all of the other Premier League teams when we played them

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aus Fox

Aus Fox

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

Sadly the BBC reporting on this is doing its best to make the racism case still:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/59042671

The "man dressed in traditional Arabic clothing" line appears a couple of times despite it being a far better likeness of Mohammed bin Salman than the Richard Masters depiction which they have no problem putting a name to.  But I suppose we can't have the government's mouthpiece upsetting our good friends and allies.

The racism as I see it here is with the journalist who has written this. It’s actually shocking, he’s pretty much saying all Arabic people look the same. From a cartoon we can easily tell who the white man is here, but that generic Arabic looking man not a clue, they all look the same to me.

I can not believe no one has pulled them up on it in this day and age.

It is clear who both people are supposed to be in that picture, why does the report have trouble working out who the Arabic man is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Carl the Llama

Carl the Llama

Posted
Posted
Just now, Aus Fox said:

The racism as I see it here is with the journalist who has written this. It’s actually shocking, he’s pretty much saying all Arabic people look the same. From a cartoon we can easily tell who the white man is here, but that generic Arabic looking man not a clue, they all look the same to me.

I can not believe no one has pulled them up on it in this day and age.

It is clear who both people are supposed to be in that picture, why does the report have trouble working out who the Arabic man is?

I'm sure they know exactly who it is, but won't say for political reasons

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CloudFox

CloudFox

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 24/10/2021 at 20:41, Finnegan said:

 

They've never had one. 

 

Parking the bus and using the individual brilliance of Rashford on the counter or hoping Fernandes wins a penalty isn't a system. 

 

Ronaldo is probably an excellent signing long term but they're going to have model their game tactically to create chances for him. I mean, for whatever flaws he has, he's still one of the best finishers in world football. If not the best. 

 

But they're going to need a coach that can actually drill a dream to both create goals and defend with organisation. Ole isn't capable of doing any of that. He's absolutely useless. 

You're right, system isn't quite the right word. However I can't call it a tactic or style, so that's as close as we can get to describing it!

 

If they had signed a proper defensive midfielder instead of a semi-static Ronaldo, the approach could have worked. But they didn't, and it's a shambles, because they're not a team, they're a brand, and Ole's not remotely a good enough coach to glue all the ill-fitting parts together.

 

What seems weirder still to me is he has plenty of coaches around him. What on earth are they doing that so many of the basics just...aren't even there? Are Carrick and Phelan also completely useless...? Would seem to suggest so.

 

I'm curious why you think signing Ronaldo is an excellent signing long term by the way. What makes you say that?

Edited by CloudFox
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BenTheFox

BenTheFox

Posted
Posted

It's obvious that Solskjaer isn't getting the best out of that team and should go. I do have to say however that there isn't an obvious candidate to replace him. I know people mention Conte but I think he would be completely the wrong fit for them. That's not a reflection on his capability as a football manager but he generally likes older players and doesn't stick around for long. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Jobyfox

Jobyfox

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
14 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

So do we prefer United to Chelsea and Man City? I’ve been asking myself this a lot. I grew up to hate United. But at least United earned their success. 

What exactly is that supposed to mean?  

 

Manchester United were the first club to really become a global corporation rather than a football club and to cynically manipulate any commercial advantage they had to buy success. It's probably because of Manchester United that the only way to compete was through takeovers by billionaire owners. 

 

They were one of the driving forces for the creation of the Premier League and the ring  fencing of commercial revenue. As Martin Edwards, their former CE, was quoted as saying: "The smaller clubs are bleeding the game dry. For the sake of the game, they should be put to sleep" 

 

 

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mickyblueeyes

Mickyblueeyes

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

 

 

This made me chuckle as did the comments below

 

This video just emphasises the bias of English pundits. These are the same guys who questioned whether 4 time CL winner Raphael Varane could cut it against Norwich away. Maguire deserved the chance of the move at the time. However, anyone being completely honest will admit that £80 million was a rip off then and even more so now. He doesn’t have the leadership, composure, position nor pace of Van Dijk and Dias.
 

VDV’s response was hilarious.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Koke

Koke

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Foxxed said:

So do we prefer United to Chelsea and Man City? I’ve been asking myself this a lot. I grew up to hate United. But at least United earned their success. 

 

A lot of my in laws are Chelsea fans. So of all the big clubs, I prefer them. I'm aware of how they became this huge club, but when I'm watching a title race that we aren't involved in I root for Chelsea. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stuntman_Mike

Stuntman_Mike

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Jobyfox said:

What exactly is that supposed to mean?  

 

Manchester United were the first club to really become a global corporation rather than a football club and to cynically manipulate any commercial advantage they had to buy success. It's probably because of Manchester United that the only way to compete was through takeovers by billionaire owners. 

 

They were one of the driving forces for the creation of the Premier League and the ring  fencing of commercial revenue. As Martin Edwards, their former CE, was quoted as saying: "The smaller clubs are bleeding the game dry. For the sake of the game, they should be put to sleep" 

 

 

A lot of their success was built through their academy though. 

Of course they spent, but they spent because of the competition they had created. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vlad the Fox

Vlad the Fox

Posted
Posted
On 24/10/2021 at 20:41, Sly said:

Cavani wasn’t a long term option realistically either. They’re now stuck with Ronaldo though, as no one is going to join them and be a back up. Haaland won’t go to United with him there. 

I do wonder if man city troll man u in the transfer market sometimes. Happened with sanchez from arsenal, man city make out they’re interested, man u jump in thinking they’ve gazumped man city who probably sat laughing at the fact they’d rushed man u into wasting money and tying up a position. Similar with maguire. Then their play for ronaldo in the summer panicked man u into going for him meaning that with lakaku at chelsea now and ron at man u it leaves a clearer run for them to sign haaland in the summer. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jobyfox

Jobyfox

Posted
Posted
57 minutes ago, Stuntman_Mike said:

A lot of their success was built through their academy though. 

Of course they spent, but they spent because of the competition they had created. 

Yes. They used their status to hoover up all the best talent and hoarded it in their academy. That’s help create the environment we have now where big clubs stockpile players and sign up 5 year olds. 
 

To be honest I just get annoyed with this mindset that the success of teams like Man Utd and Liverpool is somehow clean and that of Chelsea and Man City is dirty.  Like the former two just woke up one day and found themselves to be amongst the biggest clubs in the world.

 

This mentality that you’re not allowed to buy your way in is exactly why we had six clubs try and break away and shut everyone else out. “Liverpool and Man Utd are the big clubs the others have just bought it”. Now it’s: “the top six are the big clubs…… ” just give them all the revenue and the best players. 
 

We, ourselves, were bought by a Thai billionaire whose empire was built upon forming the right contacts with political influence and establishing a duty free monopoly. I’ve no love for Chelsea and Man City or how they’re funded - but if the alternative had been Liverpool and Man Utd sharing the Premier League trophy between them for the rest of eternity - I’ll take it. Better still let’s break up the monopoly of the big six completely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahnsouff

Dahnsouff

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Foxxed said:

So do we prefer United to Chelsea and Man City? I’ve been asking myself this a lot. I grew up to hate United. But at least United earned their success. 

They did not earn it, they were merely first to the well. This is why I have some sympathy with the approach taken by Manchester City, Chelsea, etc, as new clubs are always playing catch up due to Manchester United, Arsenal, Liverpool, etc benefitting from pre Premier League success.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...