Goooooooooooooooooooooooooool

[mjazzg]

17 minutes ago, Brad said:

King Power, while significant, was never the size of the “Kings of Araby” that own Man City. I only hope the Premier League make the charges stick. 

Me too, it's financial doping, next up Newcastle United. Oil state owned football clubs won't do anyone any favours apart from the money men. 

In contrast, Chelsea's experience this last season goes to show how poorly managed mega-spend doesn't work. Boehly's like a kid in a sweet shop.

Lots of coverage here of how City's premiership win has a bad taste to it although I fear that vested interets may find a way of prevailing. 

Edited May 24, 2023 by mjazzg

[Dmitry]

25 minutes ago, mjazzg said:

Lots of coverage here of how City's premiership win has a bad taste to it although I fear that vested interets may find a way of prevailing. 

Recently a participant in an online discussion I sometimes participate in, who referred to the "premiership' as another term for the PL,  was corrected by another participant to the effect that premiership was to be applied to rugby, not football.

[mjazzg]

45 minutes ago, Dmitry said:

Recently a participant in an online discussion I sometimes participate in, who referred to the "premiership' as another term for the PL,  was corrected by another participant to the effect that premiership was to be applied to rugby, not football.

Yes, that's correct, rugby Premiership and football Premier League.

I shall pay my penance at the altar of sports marketing 🙃

[Dmitry]

14 minutes ago, mjazzg said:

Yes, that's correct, rugby Premiership and football Premier League.

I shall pay my penance at the altar of sports marketing 🙃

Interestingly, I know two Britons, one a Scot, another an Englishman, neither of whom could give a hoot about football, but they follow rugby very intensely. As i was explained, rugby is a toughness-building sport in schools, while football is not as popular.

[mjazzg]

24 minutes ago, Dmitry said:

Interestingly, I know two Britons, one a Scot, another an Englishman, neither of whom could give a hoot about football, but they follow rugby very intensely. As i was explained, rugby is a toughness-building sport in schools, while football is not as popular.

There are two codes of rugby, Union and League. League is very much focussed in the northern industrial areas of England and here rugby can be very popular and played in state funded schools; traditionally Rugby League is a working class sport. 

Rugby Union is most often played in public schools (confusingly these are not open to all but fee paying establishments) and has a link to a more affluent socio-economic group as a result. Although in some regional centres in the South West it has a working class tradition too.

Only in some parts of northern England will Rugby League challenge football in popularity, not so Rugby Union anywhere.

I think in Scotland rugby Union may challenge football in popularity in some regions.  In Wales rugby Union rules supreme, part of the Welsh DNA practically

All rugby fans will make the claim that it's a toughness building game, part of it's raison d'etre.  I had the misfortune to play rugby in my teens, hated it - not fast enough to keep out of ttrouble, not big enough when I was in it!  Really enjoy watching it now although the very strong link with brain injury and damage is beginning to take the shine off for me.

Edited May 24, 2023 by mjazzg

[Rabshakeh]

My five year old is desperate to go to a game. I've been waiting to pick it until we are on a run of some sort of form. The last thing I want is for his first experience of live football to be miserable faces, booing and endless fearful long balls. He has the rest of his life as a football fan for that.

[Rabshakeh]

1 hour ago, Dmitry said:

Interestingly, I know two Britons, one a Scot, another an Englishman, neither of whom could give a hoot about football, but they follow rugby very intensely. As i was explained, rugby is a toughness-building sport in schools, while football is not as popular.

As @mjazzgpoints out, this is partly a class issue.

Rugby (Union) and cricket are games you can talk about in "polite" circles. Football (and in the North Rugby League) is not considered so polite.  Rugby vs football remains an important and quite complex social cue for Brits of all sorts, even now, although quite what the cue is does differ by age, class, regional / national background, and how the person to whom you are speaking seems to project themselves.

A major difference is in the team following. Rugby and cricket do not have anything like the following at the local / team level that football has. Instead, they are far more about the national game. Cricket at county level is almost a joke.

I find that in a white collar work or social context in England you will hear a lot more about rugby and cricket, since you will typically be hearing the conversation of middle class people, sometimes from international backgrounds. The friendly rivalry between the national teams is a very important part of rugby and cricket. Tickets to rugby or cricket are a far more common choice for entertaining prestigious clients than tickets to a football match. Conversely, football remains king across most of the country and has its own set of social cues.

[mjazzg]

45 minutes ago, Rabshakeh said:

My five year old is desperate to go to a game. I've been waiting to pick it until we are on a run of some sort of form. The last thing I want is for his first experience of live football to be miserable faces, booing and endless fearful long balls. He has the rest of his life as a football fan for that.

Such thoughtful parenting is to be admired! No child needs route one at that age but also incompetent playing out from the back could scar for life too. A minefield.

31 minutes ago, Rabshakeh said:

As @mjazzgpoints out, this is partly a class issue.

Rugby (Union) and cricket are games you can talk about in "polite" circles. Football (and in the North Rugby League) is not considered so polite.  Rugby vs football remains an important and quite complex social cue for Brits of all sorts, even now, although quite what the cue is does differ by age, class, regional / national background, and how the person to whom you are speaking seems to project themselves.

A major difference is in the team following. Rugby and cricket do not have anything like the following at the local / team level that football has. Instead, they are far more about the national game. Cricket at county level is almost a joke.

I find that in a white collar work or social context in England you will hear a lot more about rugby and cricket, since you will typically be hearing the conversation of middle class people, sometimes from international backgrounds. The friendly rivalry between the national teams is a very important part of rugby and cricket. Tickets to rugby or cricket are a far more common choice for entertaining prestigious clients than tickets to a football match. Conversely, football remains king across most of the country and has its own set of social cues.

Yes to this but I'd break that down to stratas even within white collar. I've hardly done a manual day's work in my life but in all my jobs it's been football talk over rugby and polite bemusement towards my cricket enthusiasm. Friends in city financial and legal careers are always off to Twickenham and Lords, have children playing rugby and will occasionally slum it at the Emirates or Stamford Bridge. 

Saracens v Harlequins sold out the Tottenham Stadium this season, I tried to get tickets thinking there'd be tons available.  

[Dmitry]

59 minutes ago, Rabshakeh said:

My five year old is desperate to go to a game. I've been waiting to pick it until we are on a run of some sort of form. The last thing I want is for his first experience of live football to be miserable faces, booing and endless fearful long balls. He has the rest of his life as a football fan for that.

On the positive side, an afternoon in the stands would greatly expand his vocabulary. 

[mjazzg]

3 minutes ago, Dmitry said:

On the positive side, an afternoon in the stands would greatly expand his vocabulary. 

😂

[Rabshakeh]

34 minutes ago, mjazzg said:

Yes to this but I'd break that down to stratas even within white collar. I've hardly done a manual day's work in my life but in all my jobs it's been football talk over rugby and polite bemusement towards my cricket enthusiasm. Friends in city financial and legal careers are always off to Twickenham and Lords, have children playing rugby and will occasionally slum it at the Emirates or Stamford Bridge.

I'm a solicitor, so I can confirm that.

All firms that I have worked in have been very clearly split:

The lawyers generally like international rugby. There are exceptions. Among the Brits, I find that football sometimes follows a city upbringing whereas rugby generally follows the rural and public school upbringing of the greater majority of lawyers in the City. Certainly the assumption is that people in the City will naturally enjoy rugby.

Non-lawyers like secretaries, IT and print room staff tend to like club football pretty much exclusively. 

On the other hand, most of my friends are journalists (for reasons that are obscure to me), an equally middle class job but one where football is as widespread as mockney accents, and rugby might as well not exist.

I have always enjoyed the idea of cricket, but never really found the time to understand it.

51 minutes ago, mjazzg said:

 will occasionally slum it at the Emirates or Stamford Bridge. 

It's funny. Always Arsenal or Chelsea, at least for the Brits. Semi-ironic West Ham fandom hasn't made it to the City yet.

[mjazzg]

3 minutes ago, Rabshakeh said:

I'm a solicitor, so I can confirm that.

All firms that I have worked in have been very clearly split:

The lawyers generally like international rugby. There are exceptions. Among the Brits, I find that football sometimes follows a city upbringing whereas rugby generally follows the rural and public school upbringing of the greater majority of lawyers in the City. Certainly the assumption is that people in the City will naturally enjoy rugby.

Non-lawyers like secretaries, IT and print room staff tend to like club football pretty much exclusively. 

On the other hand, most of my friends are journalists (for reasons that are obscure to me), an equally middle class job but one where football is as widespread as mockney accents, and rugby might as well not exist.

I have always enjoyed the idea of cricket, but never really found the time to understand it.

It's funny. Always Arsenal or Chelsea, at least for the Brits. Semi-ironic West Ham fandom hasn't made it to the City yet.

Surely all West Ham fandom has to be semi-ironic?!  I speak as someone whose very early years were spent obsessed by Moore, Hurst and Peters

[Dmitry]

Man U - Chelsea starts in a few minutes. While Chelsea is again proving that money can't buy me love, Man U is only a point away from the Champions League in the coming season. Should be a blast to watch. Maybe Misha Mudryk will finally score...he's 14-0. 

[Dmitry]

Kick-off is in just over an hour from now. All the PL teams are playing. It's do or die for Everton, Leicester and Leeds, two of whom will be relegated. If Leicester do go down, they will be the first club in 28 years to do so after having won the PL, since the Blackburn Rovers in 1994/1995.
It's needless to talk about the venerable Everton, who have not been relegated to the lower division since 1951. In fact, they are the second longest-tenured club in the top flight of the English football, after Arsenal, who've been in the top league since 1920. 

[mjazzg]

Half time and Leicester are the best placed of the three...

[Dmitry]

1 hour ago, mjazzg said:

Half time and Leicester are the best placed of the three...

How the fortunes change...we are out, along with the hapless Leeds, and Everton lives on.

 

 

[mjazzg]

The vagaries of fortune...and football 

Everton continue their ever more tenuous grasp of the Premier League. They may well go down next year along with Luton and probably Sheffield United.

[adh1907]

Treble ahead, c’mon City!

[Dmitry]

6 hours ago, adh1907 said:

Treble ahead, c’mon City!

The best club in the world right now. I see no equal, or even a challenger.

[Dmitry]

On 5/28/2023 at 4:46 PM, mjazzg said:

The vagaries of fortune...and football 

Everton continue their ever more tenuous grasp of the Premier League. They may well go down next year along with Luton and probably Sheffield United.

I don’t know how the Forest managed to stay up, with that lackluster lineup. They are my candidate for the relegation next year. The Saints were a much better team, at least on paper, and look how they sunk. But Leicester was much-much worse. The first club in history to be relegated after five consecutive top ten league finishes.

The FA CUP FINAL starts in half an hour. Will Man City make history and win the treble? We shall see.

 

 

 

 

[adh1907]

What a night! Solid performance from City, Inter fouling throughout then suddenly discovering how to play football after going one goal down. Watching in Madrid, free to view here, avoiding Real Madrid fans!

 

[Dmitry]

5 hours ago, adh1907 said:

What a night! Solid performance from City, Inter fouling throughout then suddenly discovering how to play football after going one goal down. Watching in Madrid, free to view here, avoiding Real Madrid fans!

 

City made history, but not without struggle. If not for the terminally-unlucky Lukaku, things may have been different. In the last 10 minutes Inter made good chances in the box, but luck wasn't on their side, it was all doled out to Ederson, who was City's man of the match. Congrats to the City fans! 

[mjazzg]

Not sure that Lukaku is terminally unlucky as opposed to terminally incompetent!

I didn't see the game as not on free to air here. For all the positives about City's style of football I still think there's a sour taste of potential financial doping. Not until that is cleared up will I remove the asterisk against their competition wins.

[Brad]

3 hours ago, mjazzg said:

Not sure that Lukaku is terminally unlucky as opposed to terminally incompetent!

I didn't see the game as not on free to air here. For all the positives about City's style of football I still think there's a sour taste of potential financial doping. Not until that is cleared up will I remove the asterisk against their competition wins.

For the above reasons I was rooting for Inter. Middle Eastern money is on its way to ruining one sport (golf) and now it has ruined football. 

[Dmitry]

3 hours ago, mjazzg said:

Not sure that Lukaku is terminally unlucky as opposed to terminally incompetent!

I didn't see the game as not on free to air here. For all the positives about City's style of football I still think there's a sour taste of potential financial doping. Not until that is cleared up will I remove the asterisk against their competition wins.

I was being generous. After all, he continues to play for the best clubs in Europe (for whatever reasons)...

City did not own the midfield, like they usually do. Haaland was covered solid, and didn't produce much. Overall, not a great game from MC, but they did lose, in my opinion, the best player in the world after 30 minutes, when De Bruyne pulled his hemi.

28 minutes ago, Brad said:

For the above reasons I was rooting for Inter. Middle Eastern money is on its way to ruining one sport (golf) and now it has ruined football. 

I was rooting for Inter also. Their defensive game was excellent. Plus, Man City is awash in Sheikh Mansour's dinars. Guardiola is an amazing manager, no doubt.