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
jonthefox

The "do they mean us?" thread

Recommended Posts

The venerable Philippe Auclair abou Mahrez on Eurosport: http://www.eurosport.fr/football/premier-league/2015-2016/pourquoi-voulez-vous-que-mahrez-parte-dans-un-grand-club_sto5307938/story.shtml

If what's left of my French is still of any use... Headline: "Why do you want Mahrez to go to a big club?"

If anybody can do a better job of translating than either me or Google, go for it.

Auclair suggests it'd only be justice served if the "marvelous artist" Mahrez, who's had both fantastic moments and a fantastic overall season, wins the PFA Player of the Year award.

This weekend, a friend of Auclair's that's a Watford fan said, "I've tried to find just one reason not to like Leicester and Mahrez, and I just can't." After the game, Mahrez said something to the effect of "Maybe we can do something crazy," with a smile Auclair suggests reveals a happiness footballers dream of having.

Others have told or tweeted to Auclair things like well that's nice, but he'll be moving to a "big" club soon. Auclair admits, sure, Leicester have neither the titles nor the reputation of Barcelona or Real Madrid, but perhaps this mattering so much shows things that are wrong with the sport.

Unpredictability is one of the beautiful things about sport yet players (see PSG) and fans alike seek certainty and comfort. Maybe being a "big club" is just trying to build a collection of stars instead of a team, and beating on clubs with crap budgets every week.

Auclair mentions the reservations people have about the creeping "Americanisation" of football and likens the way big clubs operate to the Hollywood studio wars of the 60s and 70s. Studios were in an arms race to collect all the stars they could, and eventually cinema became boring, with studios forgetting about quality because they were too concerned with fitting as many big names as possible onto the marquee.

But Auclair says the weasel word of "Americanisation" forgets that behind the stereotype, a refreshing parity exists in American sports. Underneath the pomp and circumstance of the Super Bowl, you'll find that there's always at least one different team in it every year.

Auclair bemoans that football has become like F1. He's thankful for Leicester, and says that without them, football would be boring. He wonders if maybe Americans, who know a thing or two about entertainment, are onto something when it comes to sport.

He mentions the English word "match" to denote a contest, and how other senses of the word have connotations of equality, yet football has created a world where many games are no match all. He scoffs at the notion that players like Zlatan go to clubs like PSG for a new "challenge" and says that Mancini at Sampdoria and Totti at Roma took on tasks that are real challenges.

He closes by saying that Mahrez staying at Leicester will not prevent him from being a great player and that the Champions League has missed having a club like them in it. If they're playing in the Champions League next season but Man U and Liverpool aren't, what good is the notion of a "big club?"

---

I can take some issue with Auclair's comments about American sports, as they can have things like salary caps and draft systems because they exist in their own sporting ecosystems. American business leading a charge to close shop in the Champions League does suggest that not all is well with this approach. But Auclair's larger point stands: big clubs, players, pundits, fans, and businessmen have already created a closed system of sorts in their minds and use this as a safety blanket. Just look at how so many people have stated reasons not based on any fact for why Leicester were supposed to struggle this year, or why they were supposed to drop off at any time. These excuses all boil down to confused people just saying Leicester don't have the reputation as the teams that are "supposed" to be leading the pack.

Edited by Jordan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Notts Forest' have never won either considering there is no such club.

NOTTS FOREST,Notts Forest,Notts Forest,Notts Forest,Notts Forest,Notts Forest,Notts Forest,Notts Forest,Nott Forest,Notts Forest,Notts Forest,Notts Forest

You spelled scum incorrectly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, just a true football fan.

Pretty much nothing pisses the Notts Forest fans off more, than being called Notts Forest, so they will always be Notts Forest to me.

To be fair, i could, and often do call them alot worse than that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Notts Forest have NEVER won the Champions League or even competed in it. The old European Cup format had little resemblance to the current competition.

 

It is Notts Forest, but you're doing the competition a disservice there. It may be much harder to win now, but we'll still be playing for the European Cup next year. Football was not invented in 1992!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By that logic there is no such club as Man City, Man United, Spurs etc.

 

Well there is because 'Spurs' - for example - is their nickname. 'Man Utd' and 'Man City' are shortened versions - a bit like 'Leicester' instead of 'Leicester City'. So Nottingham Forest are simply 'Forest'. There is no such club as 'Notts Forest' just like there isn't any such club as 'Man U' or 'Bristol' which I somehow hear/see football fans refer to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And don't you just love telling everyone about it?

You should introduce yourself to me one day. You'll know it's me because I wear t shirts that say 'I'm a bigger football fan than you'.

Edited by Fox92
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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