FootyEra 19/20 Season |OT| This is the place where we hate/love VAR

Muddy Water

Member
Nov 13, 2017
290
the saudis are probably the best owners you could get. yeah, the politics connected to the country aren't pretty, but on the other hand there isn't a billionaire on earth who doesn't have blood on their hands. wealth is accumulated and gained off of the backs and lives of people period. and that's just the way capitalism works.
I don't know, man. Your average billionaire is probably an asshole, yeah. But at least John W. Henry didn't order the literal assassination of a journalist. That I know of.
 

Kromeo

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,256
John Henry might be an ass but you can't deny he's been proactive in trying to get Liverpool back to the top, he's like the complete opposite of Kroenke as far American owners go
 

SMD

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,746
John Henry might be an ass but you can't deny he's been proactive in trying to get Liverpool back to the top, he's like the complete opposite of Kroenke as far American owners go
He doesn't do anything, it's Mike Gordon and Michael Edwards. If anything, we kept fucking up when Henry kept sticking his dick in it and now he's just on the sidelines we've been miles better.
 

Kromeo

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,256
Either way, all these big changes we saw at the top at Arsenal don't seem to have had any positive effect yet, whoever the new manager is they really need to sort their recruitment out
 

DBT85

Member
Oct 26, 2017
8,545
I don;t want the Saudis as owners, but I have little doubt the club would be run better if they were in charge compared to the Glazers. They literally wouldn't take a penny out for a start, might actually fix the leaking roof, and install people throughout the pipeline that know what they are doing becase they wouldn't tolerate anything other than success.

You'd just find a few bodies in the concrete of the new stand which could have been people they were unhappy with. Tho at least maybe not someone who helped build it.
 

Elynn

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,071
Brittany, France
I don't know I feel like there are a lot of quality forwards around in women's football and I wouldn't have gone for the one that had like 2 goals in the whole of 2019.

edit: oh alex morgan 3rd lmao. The nail in the coffin.
 
Last edited:

Carl2291

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,530
VVD wins the CL and completely dominates the Premier League and Messi still wins because he scores goals against farmers.
 

Elynn

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,071
Brittany, France
I mean............. was anyone really not expecting him to land top 3? If the CL is the argument then VVD should have won, and we know that didn't happen either...
Mané has been better than Ronaldo in every single way in 2019. More goals, more assists, wayyyy more matches, better goals/game ratio. On top of being a CL winner and a serious contender for the most competitive league in Europe for both 2018/2019 and 2019/2020. Also went to the Afcon's final with Sénégal.
Mané should absolutely be ahead of him.
 
Last edited:

RocknRola

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,773
Portugal
Mané has been better than Ronaldo in every single way in 2019. More goals, more assists, wayyyy more matches, better goals/game ratio. On top of being a CL winner and a serious contender for the most competitive league in Europe for both 2018/2019 and 2019/2020. Also went to the Afcon's final with Sénégal.
Mané should absolutely be ahead of him.
We're all aware that these trophies are rarely ever about stats or even the trophies won. It's become a popularity contest. Messi and Ronaldo could break both their legs, be away from a pitch for 11 months in a year, return to play a few minutes in the matches leading up to the award ceremony and they'd be considered contenders anyway.

Hence, my question: Was anyone really not expecting him to make it top 3? Seems unlikely anyone else will get any fair shot while these two are active.
 

Firemind

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,449
Kind of unfair to show those stats when VVD is a defender though. It's comparing apples to oranges.
 

Elynn

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,071
Brittany, France
We're all aware that these trophies are rarely ever about stats or even the trophies won. It's become a popularity contest. Messi and Ronaldo could break both their legs, be away from a pitch for 11 months in a year, return to play a few minutes in the matches leading up to the award ceremony and they'd be considered contenders anyway.

Hence, my question: Was anyone really not expecting him to make it top 3? Seems unlikely anyone else will get any fair shot while these two are active.
I don't know if I was expecting it but I was hoping at least. Thought he deserved it and despite people saying only the 1st matters I think it would have been nice for him to be recognized on the podium. I think that ranking shows how much of a popularity contest it really is, much more than Messi coming 1st.
 

Damn Silly

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,881
Personally, I'd have given it to VVD, but it's been hard to argue against Messi for most years since he's been around.

Anyway, who gives a shit about small-tier guff like that when there's awards like this about

 

FairyEmpire

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,256
So it's either Ronaldo or Messi, regarding the results of the individual years. Basically the one who scores more that year takes the crown. What a stupid award.
 

Tawpgun

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,107
Same shit happens in american football.


If you're not a quarterback you are likely not becoming MVP. If you are a defensive player forget about it.

They honestly should make one specific for each position.
 

Steve Winwood

Member
Oct 31, 2017
2,547
I mean, Messi is just a much better player than van Dijk given the rules of football. Because of how the game is played, it's easier for attackers to have an outlier impact than defenders: the difference between Messi and a league-average Spanish striker might well be .75 goals a game, whereas no CB can project to have that level of impact. (Yes, I know Liverpool's record before/after van Dijk, but, as excellent as van Dijk was, a ton of that was xG variance.)

Think Ronaldo was genuinely mediocre for large chunks of this year, and I agree that Mane would've been a more deserving #3.

Like, I get that it's more fun to reward team success and mix it up, but I like treating the award as a record of who the actual best player in 2019 was for historical purposes. If it's Messi every year, he should win the award.
 
Last edited:

plexxrock

Banned
Feb 19, 2019
446
Look at Klopp at Liverpool. Poch at Spurs. The right manager with the right backing can absolutely make United a title contender again. It's not like saying Newcastle or Watford suddenly coming up top, it's a top 7 team that is a couple of players short and has a few underperforming. United are miles behind Liverpool and City but not within impossible distance over the next 3 seasons.
no, you aren't a ''couple'' players short. you are an entire middfield plus subs, atleast one winger and a couple of defenders short. and yes, in terms of how you are run you might as well still be in the last century when compared to the likes of city or liverpool. (or any other modern football club who is ambitious and has a vision)

3 seasons to catch up to city and liverpool? (add chelsea to that, and leicester) so in three seasons you are gonna make up for already being half a decade behind? do you perhaps have a delorean parked out back to facilitate this?

financially backed? do you have any idea on cost to build this?

let's break it down shall we?

* you at current have one player who could be considered world class. pogba, and he is looking at the door as soon as he possibly can, selling him you'll be lucky to get maybe a 120 million. in the current market that'll get you two players of high standard, tops.

* your so called ''scouting-network'' is currently one of the biggest laughingstocks of the football world, it's extremely archaic and dated both in structure and practice. (as evidenced when you supposedly looked at several hundreds of fullbacks and central defenders before ringing up the clubs down the street and paid out the ass for the two that had the highest profiles in the premier league in the season that had just past. not to mention how long it takes for you to facilitate the deals, your negotiation periods are woefully long.

* you have training staff that are getting constant reports against them of how bad they are, and that the fitness regiments for your current squad aren't up to expected standard at all.

* the guy currently in charge of decisionmaking in regards to transfers/hiring has no formal education what so ever in the field he's currently employed in, and there are several statements to be found from world class managers who have been approached by this individual, and who turned you down because he came off as a clown.

* you have a decent academy, but you have no structure in place for how to vet and bled the talent you have coming through, people are being kept inhouse instead of being sent out on loans and spend years in the u23. and the players who are brought up into the first team squad have no senior players to help them develop and to guide them.

* your current first team squad is completly devoid of any real leader like characters, who have a natural ability to lead, is respected and who have the ability to take hold of a game where most of the team is underperforming. (in the past you've had one or more in all three sections def - mid - att)

Okay indulge me, who do you think are the only managers we could attract? Flores, Silva, Pulis? Not a chance in hell. Even recently we're still linked with Allegri and Poch. United is still a massive job, and it was Mourinho's dream job - arguably the most successful manager of recent times along with Pep.

To think United can only attract a mid-table manager is beyond ludicrous. Ole is there, rightly or wrongly, by the board's own volition - it wasn't the only option.
i said world-class managers. i wouldn't consider allegtri or ancelotti as that in 2019 (going into 2020) nor are they particulary progressive or known for developing players. they can still do a job sure, but do i think ancelotti and allegri will be lifting any more league titles? no. and linked with? i could fill half a page with names from last summer alone of players you were linked with. in the end one player in total made an effort to leave their club for manchester united. and we all know who that is, and what you paid to get him.

do i think you could get someone like carlo or allegri? sure. do i think progressive coaches like marco rose, thomas tuchel, julian nagelsmann, brendan rodgers or erik ten hag would go anywhere near manchester united without a complete top to bottom restructuring and new owners? no i don't. do i think you have a prayer in hell of getting pep or klopp? (even if they hadn't been at city or liverpool) no, not for a second, you already tried with the latter, and he said your club was run like disneyland not a football club)

if pochettino signs on under current ruling, it'll be one of the most absurd manager contracts in football history in terms of wages. i also think (based on everything that's been said about the months passed at spurs) that he needs atleast a few months to properly recharge. i like poch alot and it would be very sad to see him tarnish his coach rep.


For me personally yes Ole is a top 50 United player for a variety of reasons. And he will be to the vast majority of the fanbase. And yes Ole was absolutely appointed because he was a breath of fresh air compared to Mourinho and changed the toxic atmosphere that permeated at the time.

Glazer's have invested in the club, but our purchasing team has also made poor decisions with that money. The fanbase's current issues are more with Woodward's management than the Glazer's.
to any united fan that know their history, of what players have worn your shirt. no ole does not make a top 50 list. and no, he wasn't appointed for being a ''breadth of fresh air'' he got hired because he cost nothing compared to what a coach with a proper cv had, because he had a name association from being a former player at the club. the fact he got hired off of a game where you got played off the pitch for the entire game, and managed a few shots in total on goal all game and still lucked into a last minute penalty due to a deflection says it all about the premise for why he was hired.

and no, the glazers haven't ''invested'' in your club, homie you have water litterally leaking through the roof at several places throughout old trafford. your costs to gain ratios in terms of revenue for the club are extremely lopsided towards you spending a fraction of your avaliable financial resources.


Our net spend in the last five years is only behind City. Just short of £400m, averaging £75m a year. Tottenham's net spend over the last five years is £94m, £18m a year making them 17th in the table. He would do well at Leicester but again looking at the size of the clubs and potential he and any other manager would chose United all day long.
tottenham spent over a billion building a new stadium, so it's hardly a resonable comparasin. unlike united they also have a more advanced and structured scouting network, that have allowed them to build a considerably better squad than what you have managed. not to mention how you have spent your money in comparasin to city.

leicester currently have alot more potential than manchester united, because there is nothing historicly that suggest anything at united is likely to change. your spend doesn't suggest you are going to invest more in player costs. your scouting over the last 5 years does not indicate that you are all of a sudden going to be able to uncover more unknown talent for lower cost (which would allow you to bring in more players for the same money as someone with a higher profile)

and the state of your current squad does not indicate anything other than that your academy talent are going to be struggling to develop due to the lack of senior players of high standard in your squad. and the fact that you aren't sending players out on loan on a consistent enough basis.

meanwhile, leicester has one of the best scouting networks in world football (as evidenced by their business the last 5 years) they have an ownership who is heavily invested in the club, that cares about developing and constantly furthering the clubs profile. they have an academy that (for the size of the city) produce very promising talent on a consistent basis.





I have my own issues with Saudi ownership but again, Glazers have improved since their initial stint here and I still believe that having a footballing structure in place detached from Woodward would make the world of difference. I want Woodward out, but I wouldn't be opposed to him staying there as long as there was a DoF and what not handling the footballing decisions and Woodward kept himself to business and boardroom activities. He's undeniably amazing at the business side of the club.
you don't get it do you? ed woodward is there because the glazers (who you claim have improved) want him there. at any other club in the world ed would have been thrown out on his head litterally years ago. and undeniably amazing at the business side? you are litterally top 3 biggest club in the world, what you are saying is like stating that mcdonalds are undeniably doing amazing when compared to joe's burgerbar who has three locations total.

and what you are saying isn't even accurate, he's undeniably mediocre at anything that has anything to do with running a football club. he hasn't transformed or raised your clubs profile, nor has he even grown it in any way shape or form during his time there. everything was already in place, the only thing he's been good at is balancing your books allowing the glazers to get as much money as possible out of your revenue stream year after year.

sponsors are pulling funding and not renewing contracts, you are failing on a massive scale to attract world class players to your club (as evidenced by your only one in pogba who can't wait to leave, and who would have gone already in the summer if you hadn't litterally forced him to stay by refusing to sell. do i have to mention this player has played a minimal amount of minutes this season and has lined up injury after injury all fall)
 
Last edited:

FairyEmpire

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,256
I mean, Messi is just a much better player than van Dijk given the rules of football. Because of how the game is played, it's easier for attackers to have an outlier impact than defenders: the difference between Messi and a league-average Spanish striker might well be .75 goals a game, whereas no CB can project to have that level of impact. (Yes, I know Liverpool's record before/after van Dijk, but, as excellent as van Dijk was, a ton of that was xG variance.)

Think Ronaldo was genuinely mediocre for large chunks of this year, and I agree that Mane would've been a more deserving #3.

Like, I get that it's more fun to reward team success and mix it up, but I like treating the award as a record of who the actual best player in 2019 was for historical purposes. If it's Messi every year, he should win the award.
I mean, of course goals are "more important" strictly speaking, but one could argue that a defender that stops multiple dangerous opportunities per match (or a keeper saving their team from screamer goals) is equally as important. You win a match by outscoring your opponent, you can do that by winning 6-5 and 1-0 alike. It would be nice if they didn't just give out the award to one of the most prolific attackers all the time (or default it to a different Real Madrid player, like Modric or that time they gave it to Cannavaro because they kinda needed to get someone Italian for the World Cup but they didn't really wanna go for Buffon or the others, defaulting it to the dude that left to Real).

Messi is one of the best football players ever. This is not being debated, this is fact. It's also fact that he and the teams he was in in the past 12 months have underachieved big time, including quite a debacle against Liverpool where they threw away a 3 goal lead. It would be wrong to claim it was only because of Messi, but those things gotta count for something. Likewise, and I'm a Juventus supporter, Ronaldo has been playing very much under his potential all season long. His last season was great (not quite his best one but still very high level), but since August-September he wasn't anywhere near his usual level. The fact he's been scoring left and right against non-existent entities in football like Lithuania is fairly irrelevant. And yet, he also came in 3rd, because his name is Ronaldo. He wasn't even the best player for Juventus this season, and yet he easily beats anyone else in that team as well.

They really just look at Messi and Ronaldo 90% of the time and decide who played better that year. They barely leave room for anyone else. What Liverpool did last year was majestic. Higuain at Napoli managed to score 36 goals in 35 matches a couple years ago, in a championship with tough defenses like Serie A, and he was barely considered. When Inter won the Champions League and Netherlands reached the finals in the world cup, Messi won it instead despite everything. Juventus' defenders allowed them all kinds of records in Europe, among other things a season with only wins and draws. Or going back to before the Messi & Ronaldo supremacy, Buffon in 2006 won the Serie A, then at the World Cup that he won he conceded a whopping 2 goals: an own goal and a penalty. He saved everything else, including what is arguably one of the best saves in the history of this sport in the final.


Absurd reaction time. And he didn't win it either. I certainly am not claiming Messi and Ronaldo aren't in a class of their own in terms of attackers. The sheer amount of goals and opportunities they create in nearly every match make them ridiculously dangerous nearly every match, gifting an insane amount of points to the teams they play in. But even when their seasons were not that good in terms of results, they win anyway. 2010 was more egregious than this year, but the point remains. If we only look at attackers and the amount of goals, it makes sense Messi and Ronaldo win nearly all the time. It does not make sense that when other decisive players brought their teams to unbelieveable wins they are not rewarded because they scored less goals in the process. It does not make sense that Ronaldo still gets 3rd in a year he was far from his level and well below many other attackers around (Higuain, Lewa, you name it). The irony is that the only recent time they broke the spell was Modric last year, and it happened despite Ronaldo coming from one of his best 12 months ever but they really wanted the award to stay at Real Madrid. And then the next year he does like 1/5th of what he did that year and he still comes close to the award. Why?

The Ballon d'Or shouldn't be about what your surname is, it should be about what you achieved in the prior 12 months. Messi scored a lot, but it didn't translate to much in terms of cups as he also stumbled in decisive moments. Since football is a team sport and not an individual one, they probably should award the most decisive player of a dominant team every now and then too (eg. somebody from Liverpool). Somebody who played beyond the level his team would imply (eg. Sanchez & Di Natale back at Udinese or Vardy when Leicester won the title). A defender or a keeper that saved their team from opponents far superior when it comes to attacking (Juventus in 2015 survived to a crazy strong Real Madrid in the semifinals, Buffon & and the BBC defense saved everything bar two penalties). No, let's always give it to a player who scores a lot in one of the strongest teams in the world.

In a vacuum, if you only look at attackers, Messi makes sense. It would be nice however if the biggest award of this sort didn't practically default to Messi and Ronaldo every fucking time based on who scored more that year, and they dared looking at the big picture. Ronaldo and Messi have enormous media presence, even somebody who never watched a football match will likely be able to tell you they're the two best players right now (not unlike in tennis where for a while all I could hear was Nadal vs Federer, and I never even watch that sport). But that's the thing, it's a default option ultimately when they're top 3 even in disappointing seasons, winning even when they shouldn't just because of their surnames. It's boring because the message it pushes is that it doesn't matter who you are, what you do, as long as you don't get the media relevance those two get and score 50-60 goals per year in teams that already create 500 chances per season, go fuck yourself you ain't getting no awards. Even if your performance average in your role exceeds those two and if you brought your team to cups literally against Messi and Ronaldo.
 
Last edited: