Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Add Reply RSS Feed
4 Pages < 1 2 3 4 >Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 Blatter seeks quotas, Are English teams being victimised?

views
     
verx
post May 8 2008, 02:40 PM

Soshified Madridista
Group Icon
Elite
3,737 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur
QUOTE(berzerk @ May 8 2008, 02:33 PM)
About the Arsenal team being full of foreigners, I'd like to point out that most of these foreigners were actually brought into Arsenal at a young age and probably could, if they chose to, play for england (Almunia for example).

Players like Clichy, Fabregas, Song, Denilson etc could potentially play for England (or get a UK passport) if they wanted to.

So who is foreign now?

In fact the teams who go traditionally around poaching established foreign players are the mega clubs like Real Madrid (even in the 1950s they poach Puskas & Di Stefano), Inter Milan & Juve. 

Lastly, Sepp is an ass who should go back to suggesting women play in short skirts rather than disturbing football.
*
To be fair those teams that u mentioned bought their foreigners with transfer fees paid whereas Arsenal goes around signing youngsters who don't have professional contracts on little to no fees paid to the clubs that trained them. How you can justify Arsenal's policies and then claim that these "mega clubs" go around "poaching" is beyond me. Not that I'm against Arsenal or anything. The fact that so many could potentially play for England just proves that these players were signed at a very young age. Not that they will though.
berzerk
post May 8 2008, 02:41 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
706 posts

Joined: Dec 2007
QUOTE(verx @ May 8 2008, 01:45 PM)
What most around this region know about Real Madrid has largely been because of the galactico era started by Perez. It really put us on a global level. But of course the negatives come along with that. We have since been associated with the things that u relate there. Not all of them false of course but some are unfair criticisms in my view as well. Presidential campaigns were rarely about bringing bigger stars until Perez pulled off that Figo transfer. Since then it has become a trend. But that's what makes us different.
*
Friend, Real Madrid has been a galactico club since at least the 1950s.

see wikipedia
Santiago Bernabéu Yeste became President in 1945. He also reorganized the club at all levels.
Finally, beginning in 1953 he embarked upon a strategy of signing world-class players from abroad, the most prominent of them being the signing of Alfredo Di Stéfano and built the world's first truly multinational side. During Bernabéu's presidency many of Real Madrid's most legendary names played for the club, including the aforementioned Alfredo Di Stéfano, Ferenc Puskás, Francisco Gento, Héctor Rial, Raymond Kopa, José Santamaría, Miguel Muñoz, Amancio, Santillana, Juanito, José Antonio Camacho and others.

Added on May 8, 2008, 2:47 pm
QUOTE(verx @ May 8 2008, 02:40 PM)
To be fair those teams that u mentioned bought their foreigners with transfer fees paid whereas Arsenal goes around signing youngsters who don't have professional contracts on little to no fees paid to the clubs that trained them. How you can justify Arsenal's policies and then claim that these "mega clubs" go around "poaching" is beyond me. Not that I'm against Arsenal or anything. The fact that so many could potentially play for England just proves that these players were signed at a very young age. Not that they will though.
*
Which goes back to Sepp Blatter's plan & how you define a foreigner. If Real signs Arjan Robben for silly money after he spent several succesfull seasons in Chelsea & make many appearances for Holland then yes without question, Robben is a foreign Dutch player playing in s Spanish team.

If arsenal recruit Clichy as a 16 year old from France & train him at their academy for 3 years before making him a first team player, is Clichy a French player in an English team or a French/English dual national in an English team?


This post has been edited by berzerk: May 8 2008, 02:47 PM
verx
post May 8 2008, 02:49 PM

Soshified Madridista
Group Icon
Elite
3,737 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur
QUOTE(berzerk @ May 8 2008, 02:41 PM)
Friend, Real Madrid has been a galactico club since at least the 1950s.

see wikipedia
Santiago Bernabéu Yeste became President in 1945. He also reorganized the club at all levels.
Finally, beginning in 1953 he embarked upon a strategy of signing world-class players from abroad, the most prominent of them being the signing of Alfredo Di Stéfano and built the world's first truly multinational side. During Bernabéu's presidency many of Real Madrid's most legendary names played for the club, including the aforementioned Alfredo Di Stéfano, Ferenc Puskás, Francisco Gento, Héctor Rial, Raymond Kopa, José Santamaría, Miguel Muñoz, Amancio, Santillana, Juanito, José Antonio Camacho and others.
*
You trying to teach me the history of my club? laugh.gif
They were a multinational side but they were hardly a galactico club if you actually know what the galactico era meant. Perez was the one that coined the term and he just tried to sign the biggest names in football. Real Madrid in the 50's was different where Bernabeu actually tried to build the best team in the world. And the names u mentioned there that i bolded are Spanish. The least you could do was to get your facts straight.

Added on May 8, 2008, 2:51 pm
QUOTE(berzerk @ May 8 2008, 02:41 PM)
Which goes back to Sepp Blatter's plan & how you define a foreigner. If Real signs Arjan Robben for silly money after he spent several succesfull seasons in Chelsea & make many appearances for Holland then yes without question, Robben is a foreign Dutch player playing in s Spanish team.

If arsenal recruit Clichy as a 16 year old from France & train him at their academy for 3 years before making him a first team player, is Clichy a French player in an English team or a French/English dual national in an English team?
*
Easy. He's a French player in an English team. tongue.gif

This post has been edited by verx: May 8 2008, 02:51 PM
berzerk
post May 8 2008, 03:09 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
706 posts

Joined: Dec 2007
QUOTE(verx @ May 8 2008, 02:49 PM)
You trying to teach me the history of my club? laugh.gif
They were a multinational side but they were hardly a galactico club if you actually know what the galactico era meant. Perez was the one that coined the term and he just tried to sign the biggest names in football. Real Madrid in the 50's was different where Bernabeu actually tried to build the best team in the world. And the names u mentioned there that i bolded are Spanish. The least you could do was to get your facts straight.

Added on May 8, 2008, 2:51 pm
Easy. He's a French player in an English team. tongue.gif
*
José Santamaría was an import from Uruguay.

Santiago Bernabéu didn't use the term but it was essentially a galactico policy (i.e. buy the best players/most famous players after they performed well at a world cup). Alfredo Di Stéfano, Ferenc Puskás & Raymond Kopa were the Beckham's, Beckhams & Michael Owen's of their day. Of course other clubs like Inter were also filling up their teams with foreign superstars also.

Now if Clichy gets UK residency is he still a foreigner? What if he takes a UK passport?

This post has been edited by berzerk: May 8 2008, 03:09 PM
ky_khor
post May 8 2008, 03:09 PM

No.22
*****
Senior Member
894 posts

Joined: Nov 2004
QUOTE
Blatter: bla bla bla

translation;
England does not even qualify for Euro 2008. Therefore English clubs are suppose to be sucks. 4 in UCL quarter, 3 in Semi, both in final IS cheating. We need to apply the 6+5 or 10.5 + 0.5 rule so that English clubs remain as sucks as England. (so that Switzerland clubs can beat all of you)

whistling.gif whistling.gif

From the money point of view, the rules = pay cut + job opportunity cut for the foreigners. who's willing to hire you with high salary if you're not allowed to play on the field?
verx
post May 8 2008, 03:25 PM

Soshified Madridista
Group Icon
Elite
3,737 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur
QUOTE(berzerk @ May 8 2008, 03:09 PM)
José Santamaría was an import from Uruguay.
Oops..fair enough tongue.gif

QUOTE
Santiago Bernabéu didn't use the term but it was essentially a galactico policy (i.e. buy the best players/most famous players after they performed well at a world cup). Alfredo Di Stéfano, Ferenc Puskás & Raymond Kopa were the Beckham's, Beckhams & Michael Owen's of their day. Of course other clubs like Inter were also filling up their teams with foreign superstars also.
But it wasn't like that. Bernabeu would buy players that he felt would improve the squad in key areas regardless whether they were famous or not. Di Stefano for instance was playing in an illegal league at Colombia at the time and had not featured in any international match for a long time. He only got famous playing for Madrid. Perez didn't even want to buy defenders for crying out loud.

Is Man Utd adopting a galactico policy then? Their squad is multinational as well and they are trying to build the best team.

QUOTE
Now if Clichy gets UK residency is he still a foreigner? What if he takes a UK passport?
*
Do you think he will try and get a UK residency then? If he does then fairplay to him.
nazman
post May 8 2008, 03:39 PM


******
Senior Member
1,200 posts

Joined: Feb 2006
From: Wangsa Maju


Added on May 8, 2008, 3:41 pmEngland
Premier League English players (36%), Non-English (64%)

France
Ligue 1 French players (60%), Non-French (40%)

Spain
La Liga Spanish players (62%), Non-Spanish (38%)

Germany
Bundesliga German players (45%), Non-German (55%

Italy
Serie A Italian players (64%), Non-Italian (36%)

Source: Mirror 2007

» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


Blatter=Platini=Conspiracy?? whistling.gif

This post has been edited by nazman: May 8 2008, 03:45 PM
berzerk
post May 8 2008, 03:43 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
706 posts

Joined: Dec 2007
QUOTE(verx @ May 8 2008, 03:25 PM)
Do you think he will try and get a UK residency then? If he does then fairplay to him.
If Sepp's idea comes through, one way around the restriction would be to convert foreign players status. Either that or Arsenal will have to sell Clichy to PSG & buy Nicky Shorey for 25 million into to replace him.

This post has been edited by berzerk: May 8 2008, 03:44 PM
TSDuke Red
post May 8 2008, 04:59 PM

Look at all my stars!!
Group Icon
Elite
6,112 posts

Joined: Sep 2006
From: Earth
QUOTE(verx @ May 8 2008, 01:45 PM)
Again you are assuming alot of things here. I won't speak for the other teams but Real Madrid have toured Asia and done their fair share of brand building in Asia (maybe not so much in Malaysia). But their market is stronger over in the Americas. The fact that they have set up Realmadrid TV in English in US proves so. And I can tell u that despite the influx of money coming to the EPL, we are one club that can still compete with the English clubs (Our brand value is the  highest in the world). Where the Spanish and Italians have paled in comparison to the English is their league federation. The English league is run miles better than their continental counterparts.


What about the other clubs in Spain? I'm sure it has to be a concerted effort? There isn't a point in identifying with just one club and knowing nothing of the rest (though I'm sure there are Premiership fans who are the same). Manchester United were arguable the first club to really penetrate the East but only after the Premiership had gained a fairly large international following. In essence, it was a safe gamble. Although they may not do that well in selling original merchandise, they definitely have a large television following. Their efforts were also supplemented by the FA who has in recent times begun to organise mini tournaments or promotional matches here. Clubs like Newcastle, Birmingham and Norwich (ok so it was because of Proton) or some less fancied sides that have played here. They also have the "Legends" tour where former English league greats drop by for autograph session or whatever. My point is that there has been a massive effort not just to cultivate interest in English clubs, but in the English league in it's entirety.

My intention is not to claim that one league is another. To put things back into context, it's to suggest to Mr. Blatter than the success of English clubs is attributed to the fact that it is marketable, and thus attracts big sponsors and investors. Why it's marketable is because the FA put a lot of effort into making it appealing to a global audience. To want to limit the success of English clubs in Europe, so to speak is to suggest that the English FA were wrong to have done what they have done; to become profitable.

QUOTE
Really? Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that even before the days of live football there were generally more fans of English clubs than there are of the other European clubs. The fact that we are a Commonwealth country will always give the British game a upperhand.


In Malaysia, probably but we are talking about the whole of Asia here. I'm struggling to see how the fact that we are a Commonwealth country has to do with the English game being more popular here. I mean I myself was born after independence and aside from the fact we speak English, I don't see why I should feel any connection to England. Even if it were a language issue, we get English commentary for other leagues as well.

QUOTE
The Spanish league is as big as the English one in the Middle East given that the timings of the games are better for them.


Which would mean that the timing for Premiership matches are somewhat inconvenient? Suffice to say, when you have a large enough following, fans will chose to stay awake for matches, well some fans anyway. Case in point; European games, even in the group stages.

QUOTE
What most around this region know about Real Madrid has largely been because of the galactico era started by Perez. It really put us on a global level. But of course the negatives come along with that. We have since been associated with the things that u relate there. Not all of them false of course but some are unfair criticisms in my view as well. Presidential campaigns were rarely about bringing bigger stars until Perez pulled off that Figo transfer. Since then it has become a trend. But that's what makes us different. We have elections where the fans actually get to vote. For all the shouting from the English that their clubs rightfully belong to the fans, here is one club that is actually legally owned by the fans but we get criticised for it. Go figure. As for Del Bosque, his contract finished and we didn't renew it. He was always not going to continue on as he was just a youth coach who was promoted to do a temporary job but did wonders. He hasn't been successful since he left the club though. And we did go through alot of managers after that..something I'm not proud of but the club is alot more stable now.
Well I'm going to stop here as my knowledge on the matter ends here. As usual, I always seek to learn more about things that I don't know much about.

QUOTE(berzerk @ May 8 2008, 02:33 PM)
About the Arsenal team being full of foreigners, I'd like to point out that most of these foreigners were actually brought into Arsenal at a young age and probably could, if they chose to, play for england (Almunia for example).

Players like Clichy, Fabregas, Song, Denilson etc could potentially play for England (or get a UK passport) if they wanted to.

So who is foreign now?
I don't agree with this to a degree. In my opinion, to be classified as "homegrown", one has to be born in that country. I disagree all the same with players representing countries they have never visited, much like how John Barnes or Robbie Earl represented Jamaica. It probably is residual effect of globalisation. In other sports, you already see nations offering talented athletes from less fortunate nations to take up residence in their country.
Kerplunk
post May 8 2008, 05:22 PM

Enthusiast
Group Icon
Elite
802 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
Blatter was the one against the 39th game wasn't he?i think he has a problem with the success of the epl as a whole..he sees it as something 'spiralling out of control.' but wouldn't that be an incentive for other leagues to improve their standards to compete on a global level as well?that's a good thing in my opinion as every league would never be resting on their laurels in their quest to dominate the game in terms of commercial and on-field success
livingmonolith
post May 8 2008, 05:22 PM

Newbie
*****
Senior Member
821 posts

Joined: Nov 2007
i have to agree that what blatter and platini said has a certain degree of truth, the foreign invasion has stunted english players' emergence.

but being a malaysian who so happens to support an english team, i don't think too much of the nationalities of players who represent the clubs. this topic pretty much matters the most to the english FA and their national team. whether it's a dutchman or an indian or a malaysian even, who plays for the team that i support makes not much of a difference to me.

their idea is to introduce more english players into the game. there are no english players abroad, and the pool of english regulars in the bpl is really limited. there's nothing much to choose from for the national team, and there are not foreign experiences for any of those players except a handful who've gone abroad, for a short stint.

i do not agree with the quota personally, but the englishmen should make the decision themselves, whether they want the most exciting and profitable league in europe, or have more english players breaking into the first teams.

the latter is, of course, something that i couldn't be bothered with since i'm not even english to start with. i don't really care what happens to their national side.

This post has been edited by livingmonolith: May 8 2008, 05:24 PM
berzerk
post May 8 2008, 05:30 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
706 posts

Joined: Dec 2007
QUOTE(Duke Red @ May 8 2008, 04:59 PM)
I don't agree with this to a degree. In my opinion, to be classified as "homegrown", one has to be born in that country. I disagree all the same with players representing countries they have never visited, much like how John Barnes or Robbie Earl represented Jamaica. It probably is residual effect of globalisation. In other sports, you already see nations offering talented athletes from less fortunate nations to take up residence in their country.
Homegrown doesn't mean "home born". Arsenal's foreigners are mostly grown in England as they became the type of players they are under Arsenal's coaching.
In this sense, england are more deserving to exploit their talents than the national teams of their countries of birth who have invested less in their football development.

You could say the same for England's Carribean players (Barnes etc) and France's African players (Vieira, Makalele etc).
verx
post May 8 2008, 05:40 PM

Soshified Madridista
Group Icon
Elite
3,737 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur
QUOTE(Duke Red @ May 8 2008, 04:59 PM)
What about the other clubs in Spain? I'm sure it has to be a concerted effort? There isn't a point in identifying with just one club and knowing nothing of the rest (though I'm sure there are Premiership fans who are the same). Manchester United were arguable the first club to really penetrate the East but only after the Premiership had gained a fairly large international following. In essence, it was a safe gamble. Although they may not do that well in selling original merchandise, they definitely have a large television following. Their efforts were also supplemented by the FA who has in recent times begun to organise mini tournaments or promotional matches here. Clubs like Newcastle, Birmingham and Norwich (ok so it was because of Proton) or some less fancied sides that have played here. They also have the "Legends" tour where former English league greats drop by for autograph session or whatever. My point is that there has been a massive effort not just to cultivate interest in English clubs, but in the English league in it's entirety.
This is a great point you brought up. Which is why I said earlier in my post that the English league is run alot better. The Spanish clubs in general mostly handle their own affairs individually including negotiating TV deals. Which is why Real Madrid has a mammoth TV deal while the smaller clubs are really struggling. The LFP imo should have done alot better in marketing the league and putting more interest in a club's well being given that they have a really good product in their hands. But as u have it, Madrid and Barca are really the only global brands in Spain.

QUOTE
My intention is not to claim that one league is another. To put things back into context, it's to suggest to Mr. Blatter than the success of English clubs is attributed to the fact that it is marketable, and thus attracts big sponsors and investors. Why it's marketable is because the FA put a lot of effort into making it appealing to a global audience. To want to limit the success of English clubs in Europe, so to speak is to suggest that the English FA were wrong to have done what they have done; to become profitable.
I don't think Blatter was attributing the fact that the English league is more marketable. I may have got it wrong but I thought he was referring to the lucrative rewards of the Champions League. But after seeing the stats that one poster earlier posted, it did shock me and it must be a genuine concern for the English game.

QUOTE

In Malaysia, probably but we are talking about the whole of Asia here. I'm struggling to see how the fact that we are a Commonwealth country has to do with the English game being more popular here. I mean I myself was born after independence and aside from the fact we speak English, I don't see why I should feel any connection to England. Even if it were a language issue, we get English commentary for other leagues as well.

It is a language issue. How many times have we had ppl complain about the commentary in the Italian and Spanish games despite it being in English? Why isn't anyone willing to invest to bring more coverage of both leagues. I mean if they can get the TV rights why not go all the way? Skysports has Spanish coverage. Why doesn't Starsports fork out the money to bring it here? You may keep dismissing it but whether we like it or not there isn't a huge market over here for the Italian or Spanish game. They just don't see the returns. And we are talking about Malaysia and the SEA countries over here. In other parts of Asia there is more demand for the other European leagues.

QUOTE

Which would mean that the timing for Premiership matches are somewhat inconvenient? Suffice to say, when you have a large enough following, fans will chose to stay awake for matches, well some fans anyway. Case in point; European games, even in the group stages.
*
Timing for La Liga matches over here is inconvenient. The Middle East given that they are alot nearer to Europe actually enjoy the best coverage of all European leagues among Asian countries since the matches are all aired in the afternoon thus giving the other leagues similar exposure to the EPL.
And waking up for 3am matches every fortnight is easy. Try that twice every week and you'll understand what I'm talking about.

Added on May 8, 2008, 5:51 pm
QUOTE(berzerk @ May 8 2008, 05:30 PM)
Homegrown doesn't mean "home born". Arsenal's foreigners are mostly grown in England as they became the type of players they are under Arsenal's coaching.
In this sense, england are more deserving to exploit their talents than the national teams of their countries of birth who have invested less in their football development.

You could say the same for England's Carribean players (Barnes etc) and France's African players (Vieira, Makalele etc).
*
And which Arsenal foreigners were u referring to? The French African players grew up in France and were trained in the French football schools since they were kids. It's not even comparable to what Arsenal do who sign mainly youngsters around 15 yrs old. Again I might be wrong and there may be a few foreign youngsters who may have played for Arsenal since they were 6 or 7. Maybe you can enlighten us with a few examples?

This post has been edited by verx: May 8 2008, 05:51 PM
berzerk
post May 8 2008, 06:39 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
706 posts

Joined: Dec 2007
QUOTE(verx @ May 8 2008, 05:40 PM)
And which Arsenal foreigners were u referring to? The French African players grew up in France and were trained in the French football schools since they were kids. It's not even comparable to what Arsenal do who sign mainly youngsters around 15 yrs old. Again I might be wrong and there may be a few foreign youngsters who may have played for Arsenal since they were 6 or 7. Maybe you can enlighten us with a few examples?
*
There are quite a few foreign youngsters in the Arsenal academy (& the Man U & other club academies as well)

However thats not the point.
Take a player like Clichy who came to Arsenal at the age to 17 for a paltry £250,000 from Cannes. Would Clichy have been better off staying in Cannes to further his football training or going to Arsenal (Cannes are languishing one division below Ligue 2 at the moment). How much would he be worth on transfer to day? say £5 mill?

Cannes put in £500,000 of value into him over perhaps 5-7 years of coaching (say Wenger drives a hard bargain), Arsenal have put in over £4 mill. over 5 years. Who has contributed more to his development at a world class footballer?

This post has been edited by berzerk: May 8 2008, 06:41 PM
faris21
post May 8 2008, 07:03 PM

Newbies
*******
Senior Member
4,453 posts

Joined: Jan 2007
From: La Masia
let see Big Four 1st eleven line-up

Manchester 6:5
Van Der Sar
Brown-Vidic-Ferdinand-Evra
Ronaldo-Scholes-Owen-Carrick
Tevez-Rooney

Chelsea 4:7
Cech
Ferreira-Terry-Carvalho-Cole
Cole-Lampard-Essien-Ballack-Malouda
Drogba

Liverpool 2:9
Reina
Arbeloa-Carragher-Skrtel-Aurelio
Kuyt-Xabi-Mascherano-Gerrard-Babel
Torres

Arsenal 0:11
Almunia
Sagna-Toure-Gallas-Clichy
Eboue-Fabregas-Flamini-Hleb
Adebayor-v.Persie

sorry if something wrong with the line-up,i dont know BPL too much
verx
post May 8 2008, 07:20 PM

Soshified Madridista
Group Icon
Elite
3,737 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur
QUOTE(berzerk @ May 8 2008, 06:39 PM)
There are quite a few foreign youngsters in the Arsenal academy (& the Man U & other club academies as well)

However thats not the point.
Take a player like Clichy who came to Arsenal at the age to 17 for a paltry £250,000 from Cannes. Would Clichy have been better off staying in Cannes to further his football training or going to Arsenal (Cannes are languishing one division below Ligue 2 at the moment). How much would he be worth on transfer to day? say £5 mill?

Cannes put in £500,000 of value into him over perhaps 5-7 years of coaching (say Wenger drives a hard bargain), Arsenal have put in over £4 mill. over 5 years. Who has contributed more to his development at a world class footballer?
*
How did you come up with those values? Just because Clichy might be worth 5M GBP on the market today doesn't mean that's the value Arsenal have put into his development. How do you quantify how much a team has put into a player's development anyway? Most of the values are driven by market forces. So when Madrid bought Zidane you're saying Juventus spent over 40M on his development? That's bollocks.

And couldn't Clichy joined a First Division French Club and learnt his trade there and then maybe later in his career moved abroad? Would he have been a lesser player? Who knows. But the fact remains that many of these youngsters signed for Arsenal for economic reasons. Suggesting that Arsenal take most of the credit for these players' development is an insult to the other clubs. Then if that's the case why don't Arsenal sign some Malaysians over here and train them into professional footballers. Our national team would surely appreciate the help.
whoopa
post May 8 2008, 08:03 PM

b~o~b~o
*******
Senior Member
7,126 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: in ur base killin your d00dz
QUOTE(faris21 @ May 8 2008, 07:03 PM)
let see Big Four 1st eleven line-up

Manchester 6:5
Van Der Sar
Brown-Vidic-Ferdinand-Evra
Ronaldo-Scholes-Owen-Carrick
Tevez-Rooney

Chelsea 4:7
Cech
Ferreira-Terry-Carvalho-Cole
Cole-Lampard-Essien-Ballack-Malouda
Drogba

Liverpool 2:9
Reina
Arbeloa-Carragher-Skrtel-Aurelio
Kuyt-Xabi-Mascherano-Gerrard-Babel
Torres

Arsenal 0:11
Almunia
Sagna-Toure-Gallas-Clichy
Eboue-Fabregas-Flamini-Hleb
Adebayor-v.Persie

sorry if something wrong with the line-up,i dont know BPL too much
*
woo hoo bagus ... so it seems man utd can do the 6:5

faris21
post May 8 2008, 08:25 PM

Newbies
*******
Senior Member
4,453 posts

Joined: Jan 2007
From: La Masia
QUOTE(whoopa @ May 8 2008, 08:03 PM)
woo hoo bagus ... so it seems man utd can do the 6:5
*
they cant do soon since their young talent who is Nani,Manucho,Anderson and Pique not from Britain tongue.gif
berzerk
post May 8 2008, 09:25 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
706 posts

Joined: Dec 2007
QUOTE(verx @ May 8 2008, 07:20 PM)
How did you come up with those values? Just because Clichy might be worth 5M GBP on the market today doesn't mean that's the value Arsenal have put into his development. How do you quantify how much a team has put into a player's development anyway? Most of the values are driven by market forces. So when Madrid bought Zidane you're saying Juventus spent over 40M on his development? That's bollocks.

And couldn't Clichy joined a First Division French Club and learnt his trade there and then maybe later in his career moved abroad? Would he have been a lesser player? Who knows. But the fact remains that many of these youngsters signed for Arsenal for economic reasons. Suggesting that Arsenal take most of the credit for these players' development is an insult to the other clubs. Then if that's the case why don't Arsenal sign some Malaysians over here and train them into professional footballers. Our national team would surely appreciate the help.
*
Why not? Why else would a player be worth X mill more than another player?
Why else was Zidane worth 10 times more on his transfer from Juve to Real than his earlier transfer from Bordeaux to Juve 5 years earlier if not for the accumulated experience he gained at Juve?

Would Clichy be as good a player if he had played for PSG for the past 5 years? Fact is Arsenal has a superb record of developing young players.

Faris brings up a good point. Owen Hargreaves is an English player because he's obviously very English.
MobyDick
post May 8 2008, 09:37 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
731 posts

Joined: Jul 2005
From: Petaling Jaya
QUOTE(whoopa @ May 8 2008, 08:03 PM)
woo hoo bagus ... so it seems man utd can do the 6:5
*
If replace the keeper with Ben Foster, than can add 1 more foreigner.
« Next Oldest · Football Lounge · Next Newest »
 

4 Pages < 1 2 3 4 >Top
Add ReplyOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
 0.0229sec    1.06    5 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 19th December 2025 - 12:01 PM
All Rights Reserved © 2002- 2025 Vijandren Ramadass (~unite against racism~)
Removal Request
Powered by Invision Power Board © 2025  IPS, Inc.