In Poch we trust
I mean, all understandable now that I’ve been able to reflect (and now that they’ve won). Multiple injuries to regulars, sleet coming down throughout the match, and Burnley playing a cynical, time-wasting style that frankly has no place in the Premier League. Let them be relegated and they can take that crap to Championship and do their thing there.
As seen on Twitter, after the match “What the f*** does the F in Burnley FC stand for?”
The Wembley pitch as well doesn’t help. I’m going to the UK in February, hopefully I can catch a game in the new stadium.
Teams like Burnley are expected to compete with teams that possess infinite more resources than them, whilst the reward for staying in the premier league is a shit load of money. It’s a self fulfilling prophecy that a lot of the smaller teams will end up playing negative football to ensure they get those TV payments year in year out. Witness the likes of Stoke hanging around for years playing a spoiling role that nobody was particularly excited about seeing on a Sunday afternoon.
I have been waiting for a European Super League for years so that the “haves” can go and play their all-star football against other similar teams and top flight English football can maybe become more competetive. Probably wishful thinking.
I agree with you 100% on why teams like Burnley play the way they do @moss_icon . I would have them playing like that as well if I was their manager. What’s the purpose of playing wide open and losing by 8 goals just so the other team can look good?
And yet there are sides like Bournemouth, who was bankrupt, nearly dissolved, and playing League Two in 2009…and now they’re looking likely for a top ten Premier League finish. And they’re doing it by playing dynamic football that never sells itself short for box-packing, time-wasting tactics. Ditto for Watford…and keep an eye on Cardiff, if they can stay up. They also come at teams. In fact, so too do Brighton Hove Albion and also Huddersfield.
I mean, they do play defensively and sensibly against top six clubs…but they don’t stand around back-passing the ball at the 20-minute mark like Burnley, either.
Well I would point to Fullham as a team who tries to play open football and is getting absolutely thrashed for it. Hudersfield can’t score worth a damn and seem to be letting in quite a few so I would think that some defensive football and trying to nick a point here or there might be prudent for them. Cardiff have recorded half of their wins in their last four games and are two points out of the drop zone so I don’t think they have been that much of a success with playing open football. I’m not saying it’s fun to watch when a team parks the bus for 90- minutes, but I don’t begrudge smaller teams doing that when playing the big teams.
I’m more concerned with big budget teams playing with negative tactics rather than the minnows.
Going by the above it’s astonishing Burnley are in the Prem at all. They are so far adrift financially of the rest. I don’t have an issue with a team playing miserable football under those circumstances, getting the EPL TV payments is the only way for such a small side to begin to improve.
It’s hilarious that pretty much none of the good English teams are actually owned by the English.
There’s our economy in a nutshell.
Funniest one there is West Ham, jointly owned by pornographers.
Not gonna have Jose Mourinho to kick around anymore at United. He’s out as of this morning.
Hands off Pochettino…
I just came to post that! No respect, I tells ya
Liverpool won 2-nil yesterday, but with Chelsea and City both trailing in the second half, the Reds might be having a better day today, even.
As a completely related aside, I’ve always found it interesting how most English (perhaps European as a whole) teams seem to be referred to by city name, while most U.S. sports teams go by a mascot/team name.
I know there are maybe some exceptions, like the Tottenham Spurs (right?), but you hear “Chelsea” to talk about, well, Chelsea, whereas Chicago would typically be “the Bears.”
I can think of a few reasons why this is the case, but it’s just an interesting divergence to me.
Yep, Spurs are one of the few teams in the EPL known more for their nickname than their official affiliation. Wolves are the other that comes to mind.
And both Tottenham and Wolverhampton aren’t even best known by their official nicknames, either: Tottenham Hotspur and Wolverhampton Wanderers…which I guess are secondary nicknames.
And then you’ve got Manchester City, which to some fans are the Sky Blues, and to other fans simply “City” and to other fans they’re Citizens.
Now then. Don’t even get me started on why the official preferred abbreviation for City is Man. City (with the dot) and yet for the other Manchester team, it’s Man United (no dot.)
My son calls Watford the Mooses since one is on the logo, but I don’t believe moose are native to England. Maybe they came over through the Chunnel.
So. Liverpool look as if they could draw away now and have the League title well in hand by mid January.
And Southampton have won their first two matches with a new manager, Cardiff have looked much better of late, and Fulham, Huddersfield, and Burnley appear to be in real difficulty for escaping the relegation zone.
The main drama left in the league soon may be for those top four positions for CL play.
It’s not a moose, it’s a Hart. Drawn by someone who’d never seen a Hart before.
Meanwhile, apparently City were playing Football Manager today.
And yet still lost, which is great news for Liverpool. I still have a hard time processing City’s ascendance since when I started paying attention to the Premier League, I’m pretty sure they weren’t even in it and were at best a yo-yo club. If only a billionaire oil Sheikh would buy Everton. . .
You know who the biggest new United supporters for the next 5 months will be?
Spurs fans.
“Ole’s great! Such a smart decision. Keep him around!!”