Jump to content

The English Football Thread


Steve
 Share

Recommended Posts

Persuasive Parish brings a calming voice to football’s coronavirus dilemma

https://theathletic.com/1785462/2020/05/03/steve-parish-crystal-palace-coronavirus-neutral-venues-premier-league/

steve-parish-crystal-palace-coronavirus-premier-league-return.jpg

Steve Parish’s argument, laid out in 1,400 words and published in the Sunday Times as well as on Crystal Palace’s website, was articulate and persuasive. It was timely, too, given the crescendo of calls for more openness from club hierarchies. It began with an acknowledgement of the wider issue, a nod to the grim context which, for many, has damned Project Restart from the outset. But there was no beating about the bush.

“Yes, it is partly about the money,” he admitted, having already outlined the reasons for seeking to finish the current campaign on the grounds of sporting integrity. “Nobody wins if the Premier League receives less money. Nobody.”

Palace’s chairman spoke of football’s status as “one of the most efficient tax-generating industries in Britain”, and pointed out that, for all the criticism of players being paid too much, 50 per cent of those salaries go straight back into the public purse. Premier League clubs pay around £3.3 billion in tax every year; parachute and solidarity payments totalling £400 million drift annually down the pyramid into the English Football League; the National League and leagues further down receive £25 million. Then, of course, there is the impact clubs have on local businesses in their respective communities. They are integral.

This, he continued, “is about football’s whole ecosystem and the exchequer, and the many secondary industries football enriches.” So yes, it is about money. And it is only right and proper that discussions over what happens next, whenever next proves to be, take place.

Cue the chorus of disgust from those crying “greed”. But, for all the romantic attachment they hold for their fans, football clubs are businesses. They are as eager to crank back into life as those shops currently paying hefty rents while boarded up on a deserted high street. These have been unprecedented times, a situation no one had ever envisaged.

As Parish reflected, no business is immune to the realities of sliding profits and cash-flow problems. Of course, there are cogent arguments that those in the elite division pay too much when it comes to salaries, and are disproportionately over-reliant upon broadcast revenues to make ends meet. But no one anticipated a global pandemic which would threaten that influx of television money and render the entire sport at risk overnight.

Parish and Palace are approaching this from the position of a team ensconced in mid-table. Three successive victories ahead of the suspension had thrust them closer to the European qualification places than the relegation cut-off. Some might consider them relatively neutral as a result, though the truth is every Premier League club has a vested interest. The prize money on offer per place of around £2.5 million ensures as much. They are also a team anxious to maintain their development.

Palace’s own model relies heavily on those broadcast revenues which could be cut off if the season is abandoned now. Their annual wage bill in their last published accounts in 2017-18 was £117 million. The club were comfortable with how their business operated while television monies amounted to £121 million — more than 80 per cent of their entire revenue of £150 million. Like clubs up and down the division, they will not want to contemplate the sudden loss of their primary revenue stream.

“I also have a duty to my club, staff and the wider sport,” wrote Parish. Palace continue to pay their staff in full. They surveyed the scene as the crisis first gripped and considered their options, but ultimately decided against furloughing or tapping into the government’s job retention scheme.

Like every other club, Palace are doing what they can at a local level to help in the fight against coronavirus, from providing 900 meals a week for frontline NHS workers in cooperation with food charity, City Harvest London, to helping arrange the safe delivery of 3,000 personal protection masks to Croydon Health Services NHS Trust.

The ability to provide such services, however, can only carry on while their business is still viable. The bottom line remains that they need football to return and their contracts with broadcasters to be fulfilled.

Some of those chairmen who sat in on Friday’s Premier League meeting undoubtedly left the talks frustrated at proceedings. All would accept these are desperately difficult negotiations and there is no perfect solution while no vaccine exists for COVID-19. But there was grumblings that, come what may, some teams seemed intent upon effectively blocking the completion of the campaign. They have cited the reality that playing almost a quarter of the campaign in neutral venues damages the sporting integrity of the league. There has been talk of a rift between those most threatened by relegation, and the rest.

Parish stressed that if the current season cannot be concluded, why should we assume the next can start in August or September? “Are we convinced things will look so much different from how they do today? Many of the same issues regarding player welfare, venues and closed-doors matches will exist then. The more we can work it out now, the better chance we have of coming out of this with the game we all love in a position to recover over time.”

Not that this was a club owner blindly dismissing all the doubts, concerns and even distaste, felt by plenty, at the thought of live sport returning. The fight against the virus is ongoing across a world in mourning. Parish acknowledged that talks over Project Restart were instigated with a caveat: “If the nation decides that the gravity of events dictates that it’s simply not appropriate to play, then we must and will respect that.”

But the return of the game in some guise — even if it is behind closed doors and devoid of the crackle and excitement provided by partisan supporters in stadiums — could raise spirits. Some will find the thought abhorrent, but plenty of others will consider football a positive distraction, one that could even prove vital to the nation’s collective mental health.

“Football is meaningless — but it is magnificently meaningless,” wrote Parish.

Again, there was a sense of perspective in his approach when it came to potential public order issues (from fans congregating at stadiums) or the prospect of paramedics and ambulances being drawn from the front-line to the stadiums. Similarly, there remains the thorny matter of testing — “We cannot take testing capacity from one person in greater need” — and an acknowledgement that players must not feel browbeaten into returning prematurely. The mood among Palace’s own squad is understood to be one of eagerness to train with a view to playing matches once more, and there is an underlying faith in the advice that the club’s medical staff will provide for them.

One player indicated to The Athletic a conviction that the club would only allow them back to their base in Beckenham once they were sure the appropriate level of medical testing was in place, and they would be “as well protected as is possible” to resume matches.

“They wouldn’t be pushing for this if they didn’t feel they could offer us that when the time comes,” he says. “They know what would happen if one of us fell ill, and the knock-on effects that would have through the club, and even the sport.

“There are always going to be a million different arguments against playing. You could probably use the same arguments to avoid the supermarkets or never leave your house. It all comes down to risk and players are probably lower risk than most who will be going back to work in the weeks and months ahead.”

That view apparently reflects the general mood within the group. Others may well have reservations, understandably, but there is an acceptance that a dialogue will be required to convince all parties that this is the right way to move forward.

Palace’s reaction to the current crisis, like that of plenty of other clubs in the Premier League, has been impressive. But, as a business, they need the hope that there is light at the end of the tunnel. Parish’s appraisal was honest and thoughtful, acknowledging there are grey areas and that reaching an agreement that pleases everyone will be tricky.

There was no turning a blind eye to the bigger problems facing society as a whole. “But caring about the terrible situation around us, and caring about our clubs and industry are not mutually exclusive.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 65k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vesper

    8887

  • Laylabelle

    4734

  • Jase

    2657

  • Special Juan

    2603

'You are walking and you don't know if they are going to kill you': Angel Di Maria's wife recalls 's***' time at Manchester United, brands English people 'weird', the food 'disgusting' and says girls wear too much make-up

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8290885/Angel-Di-Marias-wife-recalls-s-time-Manchester-United.html

😂😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, NikkiCFC said:

'You are walking and you don't know if they are going to kill you': Angel Di Maria's wife recalls 's***' time at Manchester United, brands English people 'weird', the food 'disgusting' and says girls wear too much make-up

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8290885/Angel-Di-Marias-wife-recalls-s-time-Manchester-United.html

😂😂

it was Manchester, what did he expect?

poxy shithole

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Premier League clubs to debate whether to dump VAR for rest of season

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/may/08/premier-league-clubs-to-debate-whether-to-dump-var-for-rest-of-season-five-substitutions-ifab

Ifab gives green light but clubs expected to stick with it

Vote needed on whether to allow five substitutions

Premier League clubs will debate whether to dump VAR for the remainder of the season – if it can be completed – after the International Football Association Board (Ifab) said that individual competitions can do so if they want to.

The clubs, who will hold a conference call on Monday, must also vote on another Ifab temporary amendment – whether to agree to the use of five substitutes in matches.

It is not thought that the clubs will veto the use of VAR partly because, until the Ifab announcement, it had not been on the agenda. The clubs agreed to introduce the technology for this season and it could be argued that a move away from it for the final matches would compromise the integrity of the competition. Furthermore, it would seem strange to remove a feature of the game that would return at the start of the following season.

There has been the suggestion that dropping VAR would make it slightly easier to plan for the resumption of play but it has no material impact on the staging of games from a logistical standpoint.

If clubs agree to extra substitutions, each side will have three opportunities, excluding half-time, to make changes. Fifa said the measure could be applied in competitions that finish before the end of 2020.

“The temporary amendment comes into force with immediate effect,” it said, “and has been made as matches may be played in a condensed period in different weather conditions, both of which could have impacts on player welfare.”

snip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Vesper said:

Premier League clubs to debate whether to dump VAR for rest of season

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/may/08/premier-league-clubs-to-debate-whether-to-dump-var-for-rest-of-season-five-substitutions-ifab

Ifab gives green light but clubs expected to stick with it

Vote needed on whether to allow five substitutions

Premier League clubs will debate whether to dump VAR for the remainder of the season – if it can be completed – after the International Football Association Board (Ifab) said that individual competitions can do so if they want to.

The clubs, who will hold a conference call on Monday, must also vote on another Ifab temporary amendment – whether to agree to the use of five substitutes in matches.

It is not thought that the clubs will veto the use of VAR partly because, until the Ifab announcement, it had not been on the agenda. The clubs agreed to introduce the technology for this season and it could be argued that a move away from it for the final matches would compromise the integrity of the competition. Furthermore, it would seem strange to remove a feature of the game that would return at the start of the following season.

There has been the suggestion that dropping VAR would make it slightly easier to plan for the resumption of play but it has no material impact on the staging of games from a logistical standpoint.

If clubs agree to extra substitutions, each side will have three opportunities, excluding half-time, to make changes. Fifa said the measure could be applied in competitions that finish before the end of 2020.

“The temporary amendment comes into force with immediate effect,” it said, “and has been made as matches may be played in a condensed period in different weather conditions, both of which could have impacts on player welfare.”

snip

The Premier League:

We want to maintain the integrity of the competition.

Also the Premier League:

Let's reduce each half of football.

Let's play at neutral grounds.

Let's dump VAR for the rest of the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Jason said:

The Premier League:

We want to maintain the integrity of the competition.

Also the Premier League:

Let's reduce each half of football.

Let's play at neutral grounds.

Let's dump VAR for the rest of the season.

I wish all these clubs/players/executives/fans would all stop the bullshit and just admit they want what best suits their club.

Everytime we hear about people wanting voids they bang on about integrity/morality being the reason behind why it's their preference yet the one thing all these people seem to have in common is they support or are employed by a club who would benefit.

The only exception to that rule are United fans but we all know exactly why that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Tomo said:

I wish all these clubs/players/executives/fans would all stop the bullshit and just admit they want what best suits their club.

Everytime we hear about people wanting voids they bang on about integrity/morality being the reason behind why it's their preference yet the one thing all these people seem to have in common is they support or are employed by a club who would benefit.

The only exception to that rule are United fans but we all know exactly why that is.

I would love to be in one of their meetings to be honest because I swear they have had like 100 of them by now and they look no closer to agreeing on anything or forming a cohesive plan on how to restart the season. Almost every day you see news of stupid suggestions being mentioned or that some stakeholders are not being consulted over a return etc. It's not exactly safe to return yet in England and yet, they are finding stupid ways to try and force the resumption. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Telegraph

Friday May 8 2020

Football Nerd

Why we must use our eyes as well as stats to judge goalkeepers

694F6D30AAA1022BD17A746113A606DC.png

By Daniel Zeqiri

David de Gea at Manchester United

Where does David de Gea stand in the pantheon of great goalkeepers? CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES

Through football's coronavirus hiatus, we are committed to providing a weekly newsletter of facts, analysis and retrospectives. If there is a topic you want us to cover please email [email protected].uk. Above all, stay safe.

 
 

The subject for this week's newsletter comes from one of our readers, so thanks to Neil H who asks:

"There is lots of speculation and argument over who has been or is the best goalkeeper to grace the Premier League. What do you guys think and what do the stats say?"

Evaluating goalkeepers and defenders using statistics is a really interesting subject, and a troublesome one for scouting teams within the game. It is no coincidence that Arsene Wenger and Sir Alex Ferguson, two of the greatest managers from the Premier League era, made several boo-boos in this department.

Attacking players produce quantifiable output - shots, key passes, assists, expected goals and so on - that can be used to analyse their quality in a relatively straightforward way. This is not true of defenders and goalkeepers. Goals, assists, and key passes have universal value and a clear outcome in a way tackles, clearances or saves do not.

Often these rudimentary measures are simply a reflection of how much work a defender or goalkeeper gets through. For instance, you might recall a young Ben Foster thriving on loan at relegated Watford in 2006-7 when he was peppered with shots, but struggling at Manchester United when his concentration was tested due to long spells of inactivity. Goalkeepers in poor teams will make plenty of saves.

Petr Cech holds the record for Premier League clean sheets with 202, while Pepe Reina holds the record for clean sheet ratio with 134 in 291 appearances: 46.05 per cent. Both were fantastic goalkeepers at their peak, but also played for well-drilled Jose Mourinho and Rafael Benitez defences in an era of conservative tactics. How much should that influence our judgement?

If we go on save percentage, the top 10 goalkeepers in Premier League history are as follows (based on those with 100 appearances or more):

 
age mistmatches graph

 

Cech stands out again, as does Edwin van der Sar. But do we really believe Marcus Hahnemann and Manuel Almunia are in the best 10 goalkeepers in Premier League history? Of course not, which demonstrates the difficulty of evaluating goalkeepers using stats alone.

Readers will surely be shouting the name Peter Schmeichel at their phone or laptop - the goalkeeper you would expect to win a public poll on this subject - but his time at Manchester United came before Opta started collecting stats like save percentages. Schmeichel was an integral part of several title wins and his style influenced a generation of goalkeepers, so I would not object to those who argue he was the best.

Today, there are more sophisticated metrics for measuring goalkeeper performance such as Opta's Expected Goals on Target metric.

XGoT, unlike plain old Expected Goals, is a post-shot model. That means it takes into account not just the location and quality of the shot, but the goalmouth location where the shot finishes. XGoT throws out all the attempts that end up off target regardless of their xG value. That makes it a useful metric for assessing goalkeepers, because counting all the shots that do not test them could prove misleading.

Moreover, it paints a more accurate picture of goalkeepers' performances on long-range efforts. A shot from 30 yards might have an xG value of 0.03, meaning any goal from that range reflects badly on a goalkeeper statistically. As we all know however, there are occasional shots from distance that leave goalkeepers with little chance, and XGoT takes that into account. For example, Daniel Sturridge's goal at Stamford Bridge last season had an xG value of 0.03, but registered 0.58 on XGoT because it was so perfectly placed into the top corner.

According to this measure, the top five goalkeepers in the Premier League currently are: Vicente Guaita, Martin Dubravka, Dean Henderson, Hugo Lloris and Ben Foster. Crystal Palace goalkeeper Guaita has kept out 9.6 more goals than you would expect. But surely they are not better goalkeepers than Alisson or Ederson, I hear you ask?

In short, assessing goalkeepers is difficult and remains quite subjective. Maybe we just need to use our eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Jason said:

I would love to be in one of their meetings to be honest because I swear they have had like 100 of them by now and they look no closer to agreeing on anything or forming a cohesive plan on how to restart the season. Almost every day you see news of stupid suggestions being mentioned or that some stakeholders are not being consulted over a return etc. It's not exactly safe to return yet in England and yet, they are finding stupid ways to try and force the resumption. 

A 3rd Brighton player has been tested postive. Been training individually but still..had they not been then what then? Theyd have no team. 

And same for any other team in the retstat. Player tests postive surely the rest have to isolate. Happened in Germany already 

It's silly. And talks if testing players and whatever. Use those for the people who are close contact first! Like Lampard himself said it's silly to use tests on players when others need them more.

Even in empty grounds they'll still be people around. No getting past that especially if they want these games aired.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Laylabelle said:

A 3rd Brighton player has been tested postive. Been training individually but still..had they not been then what then? Theyd have no team. 

And same for any other team in the retstat. Player tests postive surely the rest have to isolate. Happened in Germany already 

It's silly. And talks if testing players and whatever. Use those for the people who are close contact first! Like Lampard himself said it's silly to use tests on players when others need them more.

Even in empty grounds they'll still be people around. No getting past that especially if they want these games aired.

Just like the government, they don't have a fucking clue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the season ends where it is and teams positions are taking into accounting the Villa would have a case on their hand if they want to still relegate.

They have a game in hand which with a win would take them out the bottom

Same with Sheffield. Win their game and they'd be in 5th place

Probably be so much easier to get void if anything. There has to be a cut off point to starting and its bound to be a disaster if all it takes is one player testing postive.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Driven by money. They want to play it out or they owe billions to TV companies.

I find that the Premier League's lack of cohesive planning is the stupidest part in all of this. They are desperate to make sure the season is completed, fine but they don't have a freaking clue on how to go about it. They have had so many meetings with the clubs and gone nowhere, we hear stupid suggestions every few days to somehow force an early resumption and they don't even have a proper medical procedure on ensuring the safety of the players, staff etc involved for when the season resumes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • 0 members are here!

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

talk chelse forums

We get it, advertisements are annoying!
Talk Chelsea relies on revenue to pay for hosting and upgrades. While we try to keep adverts as unobtrusive as possible, we need to run ad's to make sure we can stay online because over the years costs have become very high.

Could you please allow adverts on this website and help us by switching your ad blocker off.

KTBFFH
Thank You