User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.5951 seconds
55 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
And flip . . .
Pep had a strange career after he left Barca.
SPOILER!!!!
That goal was great, but completely offside. I guess that evens things on that front.
I'm just glad the right team won and we can have a final that's about the football - two great sides - rather than one team's narcissism.
Be champions."
I'm just glad the right team won and we can have a final that's about the football - two great sides - rather than one team's narcissism.
Maybe this is just me but I find Bayern and Inter to be two teams you can safely say are narcissistic.
They're nowhere in the same scale as Barcelona's narcissism (or, for that matter, Madrid when they are good).
I get a kick out of the guy but I don't think having Jose Mourinho involved results in less narcissism.
I think so. I though the way Inter stayed calm and organized in defense the last 30 minutes of the game was fun to watch.
For them there isn't!
But... but... Barcelona are the good guys!
Seriously, the footballing world needs to seriously crawl out of Barcelona's backside... The way they are canonised by the world media is truly pathetic and Inter Milan deserved to beat them last night, just as Chelsea deserved to beat them this stage last year, blocked only by an official with stars in his eyes and bulge in his shorts (and I HATE Chelsea). Inter Milan beat Barcelona comprehensively, they were stout in defense and Barcelona had absolutely no answer. They matched them all over the park, dive for dive. And I for one am glad that they did, because Barcelona are so unbearably smug. Charitable and morally upstanding acts don't give you a right to lord it over everyone else, otherwise they cease to be charitable and morally upstanding.
Anyone complaining about anti-football must have a short memory because Inter beat them 3-1 last week, and by the looks of things they were looking to play the same sharp counter attacking football last night (hampered by the same breed of blind linesman as last week, do they need clarification on the offside rule?) before they went down to ten men because of a blatant dive. Continuing their game from the first week would have been suicide with 10 men on the pitch at the Nou Camp.
But of course Inter are expected to do the polite thing and just let the magic of Barcelona happen and get hammered 5-0 right? The only "anti-football" last night was cheating to have a man sent off, that's what turned it into a one-sided defensive display so those whinging about it need to direct their complaints to Sergio Busquets, not Jose Mourinho.
The guy took the words right out of my mouth! I was actually there when Barcelona won the European Cup for the first time - Guardiola actually played in that game. Sampdoria pretty much outplayed them apart with Koeman's freekicks being Barcelona's main threat. Eventually Koeman scored a long-range free kick in extra time to win 1-0. Of course, when Barcelona do it, creating fewer chances and relying on set-pieces isn't "anti-football" (whatever that means) it's glorious and noble and just. Pshaw.
Who do we all think is going to win the final? I'm going with my heart over my head, and saying Bayern.
Priorities for next year:
Backup for Torres
Left-sided AM (Van der Vaart?)
New left-back.
And, if I'm greedy, replace Kuyt.
Now if only Fulham can turn things around so we can have an all-English final - although playing Hamburg in Hamburg would be cool too.
We were the better team tonight, but not by enough. I guess the damage was done in the first leg.
Fiddlesticks.
Just a couple years ago they were all but relegated. I tend to think managers are over-emphasized as the causes of success or failure, but it's hard to deny what Hodgson has done there.
The odds are really interesting right now too.
Benitez to be Liverpool manager next season: 2-1 (Wow! But they seem to have no idea who will take his place)
McClaren to be next West Ham manager 4-6 on (the smart money clearly knows something, when you add Zola is 1-5 on to be gone from West Ham by the start of next season)
Aguero to move to Chelsea by end of summer: 6-4 (they obviously don't think it's a done deal)
Raul to MLS by end of summer: 5-4 (I hadn't heard this! Wow! Which team?)
Note: I don't bet. But loads of footballers do, so once a move is set up, the odds shift fast.
Even better than that Atletico would be the only Spanish team in one.
I'd like McClaren well enough, I agree that Zola seems doomed.
I reckon he'll jump before he's pushed.
If McClaren takes the West Ham job he needs his head examining. He's close to winning the Eredivisie with FC Twente and getting Champions League football and after that it wouldn't be surprising to see him get an offer from one of the larger German clubs. He would be best served staying out of the Premier League for a while, particularly a club which at best can aim for mid table mediocrity.
It's more that calling Inter Anti-Football is daft and has more to do with how José played his final year or so at Chelsea when forced to shoe horn in players he didn't want then how Chelsea play. That and reaction to Mourinho himself being pretty much marmite.
All of José's teams outside that later Chelsea team have played good attacking football.
A real anti-football team would be a team like Stoke or Deportivo.
RBNY allegedly, but that one is at least a year old by now and predates the Thierry Henry to the same club rumours.
What BFFB said about McLaren leaving Twente for West Ham. McLaren just needs to win at mid-table mediocrities NAC Breda to be certain of winning the league (leaving Ajax to wonder how you finish second with a +83+ goal difference), while West Ham have transfer listed the entire squad other than Scott Parker.
Villa to Barca for 41 million euro plus Bojan and Hleb (the Marca rumour) makes almost as little economic sense as the deal that brought Ibra there in the first place.
The weird thing is that he was actually quite mobile at Inter, especially last season (when he was essentially their only serious offensive option). If one put the econcomics aside, the deal made sense for Barca on paper, but Ibra's issues with European competition look to be just too big for it to work.
He's one of the most frustrating athletes I've ever had the pleasure/pain of watching on a regular basis. His physical gifts (especially his other-worldly flexibility and balance) are extraordinary and allow him to do things that literally no other top flight footballer can do, but he will also drive you absolutely crazy with his attitude and underachieving in big games.
"I. Am. Brilliant."
Yes. First English manager to win a major European league since Robson in 1996, I think.
TBH I'm not even sure England was a major European league when Wilkinson won in 1992, standards were really low in those days. So by my reckoning it was Howard Kendall.
So, how big is Man City-Tottenham on Wednesday? I'm working from home so I'll be able to sneak out and catch the game at a local.
Also, just to give 'em a lonely shout out, Freiburg is safe in the Bundesliga.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2010/may/03/lazio-roma-inter-serie-a
Technically, the only decisive result would be an away win for Spurs. However, given the fixtures for each club on the final day of the season, you have to figure that if City win they're in and if Spurs can manage a draw they're in.
Right. I'm not sweating Burnley. I think this game is the decider.
All the more reason for Spurs to get the job done on Wednesday night so they don't have to hope for West Ham to do them any favors at the weekend.
Watch out for the bald nutter in the black polo. Hilarious.
Hey, if Zola walks (which I have to think he will - see #1139), who are your top choices to replace him? Both realistically and wishful thinking-ly.
I was thinking of the group stage. My bad for not making it clear.
I guess my non-McClaren preference lies with Avram Grant, but I don't know how realistic that is either.
Hughes is a good shout, I think. Now that he's had a taste of the big time, though, will he consider himself in the running for a gig at Anfield should Rafa scuttle off to Italy? I doubt he would be offered the Liverpool job, but he might defer a decision on an offer from West Ham until Rafa's successor is settled on, which could irritate the Davids.
Don't know about Hoddle; not sure how keen he is to get back into managing.
Grant seems like an obvious choice, but I'm not sure how anxious he'd be to join another club where his hands may be tied financially.
For pure entertainment value, I'm hoping for Roy Keane or Phil Brown.
I've lost a ton of respect for Gerrard this year. He's acted like a brat who's surrounded by players who aren't worthy of his respect, while simultaneously having an awful (by his standards) season. He's the captain--he's supposed to be an inspiration, not a petulant child. So, yeah, I'm with you in fearing he'd get even more influence.
Do you think Rijkaard would be a realistic/good choice? Is he at Galatasaray these days? I fear if we get an English manager, we'll be stuck buying British players, when Man U, Villa and Tottenham already have all the good ones.
I'm on the fence about Benitez staying. I agree he's better than most of the other options, but he seems to have Scott Skiles'd this team--it's not only that his tactics were too defensive this year, it's that the players just didn't show up. I think he's lost them.
And, go, Tottenham! Your fans deserve it.
Any "big name" candidate from outside the club is going to have a better sense of how the whole ownership situation is likely to work out before signing up.
I don't agree with you about Gerrard though. Yes he's had a bad season by his standards, but he has carried the club on his back since his late teens - single handed at times. So if he has one bad year I'm not going to get too mad at him. But how has he acted like a brat? How has he acted like a petulant child? Riera and Babel have, obviously. Torres has. Even Carragher has. Gerrard I don't see it. I think he's just getting old, which is awful for me to watch because he's basically my age. Gulp.
Mattbert - Mark Hughes is not stupid. He knows he is not going to be considered for the Liverpool job. He was a prominent Man Utd player, it's instant disqualification (Paul Ince excepted). Whether he'd want the West Ham job is another story though - I imagine he'll get much better offers.
Oops. Yeah, hadn't thought of that for some reason.
I'd love to see it though. I really enjoy watching Tottenham play and as a relative newcomer to soccer I find their fans to be some of the most passionate of all the teams in the EPL.
Yeah, it could be a case of which team is least apathetic about the game. That's looking past tomorrow anyway, which is probably bad luck.
Now you've done it.
I'm so nervous about the game that I'm going to subject myself to Fulham v Stoke instead. Not sure whether the Cottage does scoreboard updates of other games, but I'll be doing my best to avoid them. The forecast for tomorrow night looks to be on the chilly side, otherwise I'd wear my Primer t-shirt on the off chance I make it into some highlights.
Don't check this thread during the game. I may be making comments during the game since I'll be watching it by myself. I like to "talk" while I'm watching tv.
Not to worry; I have an old-fashioned brick of a phone. No internets or any of that newfangled insanery.
They're at home and they're in pretty good form, so I think they have a slight advantage. All Spurs need is the draw, though. I think it's a toss up. Garreth Bale has been outstanding and my hope is he'll punch Man City in the face early and cause a bit of panic.
Gomes
Kaboul--Dawson--Bassong(King if fit)--Assou-Ekotto
Palacios--Modric--Huddlestone
Lennon--Gudjohnsen--Bale
I reckon that team has enough backbone to keep City's dangerous wingers at bay and enough pace and flair to cause some trouble of their own on the break. Eidur, Modric, and Thud will help keep possession when Spurs have it. The threat of Lennon and Bale will help keep City's wide players pinned back a bit.
He'll play 4-4-2, though, and probably start Crouch.
It's long so I only skimmed it.
However, the general quality of the writing is good enough that I'm going to soldier on. Just had to get that off my chest.
However, I think that blog is missing the point. Of course Arsenal have way more commercial revenues than Spurs - they have way more fans. Of course Spurs' results aren't as good as the directors paint them - you can't make money in football (although you can have capital appreciation). Of course Spurs are losing cash even as they report "profits" - all their assets are intangible or illiquid, they have large fixed cash outgoings in terms of wages, and the economy has been very poor, particularly in London. Just because Spurs are fourth in the league doesn't mean you should compare them to Arsenal... in terms of their fanbase and achievements they are much closer to West Ham. The last time they won the league, Burnley were the defending champions, and Ipswich won the following year. We are coming up to the 20th anniversary of Spurs last winning a major trophy - and even that was a huge shock.
This is not like american sports - there is no notion of "parity", and there is no expectations that teams should have equal revenues. The blog is basically criticising them for being a football club as opposed to an NFL franchise. Spurs don't have a lot of fans, and they don't have much history of success. What they do have is wealthy fans, even for London, and an ability to suck a lot of money out of them. In terms of finding and exploiting revenue streams, I think they're the best in the world. We are talking about a mid-table club that has always been in the shadow of their infinitely more successful neighbours, but are punching way above their weight, on the field and off. ENIC have been fantastic owners for Spurs. The question is, what happens next. I do not understand their plans for a new stadium, but the way that progresses is clearly going to determine their future for the next decade.
Of course. My objection was that the author said we should ignore the "one-off" sales of Berbatov and Keane when assessing the real financial health of the club that year, without making allowances for the corresponding "one-off" costs of replacing them. Had those two not been sold, it's true that Spurs may not have reported a profit. However, it's silly to ignore only one side of the ledger.
Just because Spurs are fourth in the league doesn't mean you should compare them to Arsenal... in terms of their fanbase and achievements they are much closer to West Ham.
I beg your pardon? West Ham? Maybe all the lesser clubs' achievements look the same from the lofty perch of a Liverpool fan, but this is just insulting. Let's review...
Premier League, best finish - Spurs 5th (twice); West Ham 5th (once)
First Division (pre-EPL), best finish - Spurs champions (twice), 2nd place (4 times); West Ham 3rd (once)
FA Cup - Spurs won 8 times, runners-up once; West Ham won 3 times, runners-up twice
League Cup - Spurs won 4 times, runners-up 3 times; West Ham zero wins, runners-up twice
UEFA Cup/Europa League - Spurs won twice, runners-up once; West Ham never been in it
UEFA Cup Winners Cup (now defunct) - Spurs won once; West Ham won once, runners-up once
Other than that ill-advised comparison (Aston Villa is a far better analogue, in my opinion), I think your comments about the fan base are pretty accurate based on my experience here. Comparatively few, comparatively wealthy, and comparatively vociferous.
Arsenal - (large gap) - Spurs - (small gap) - West Ham, and not
Arsenal - (small gap) - Spurs - (large gap) - West Ham
i.e. that they are closer to West Ham than they are to Arsenal. I wasn't trying to equate the two clubs. Spurs have had more success in their history than West Ham**, and they also have more fans.
As for Villa... well, they have way more fans than Spurs, they're the biggest team in Birmingham whereas Spurs are probably now just the third team in London - although when I was growing up they had more fans than Chelsea, which shows that things can change. Villa are in many ways the polar opposite of Spurs - a very big and well-supported team, but very little glamour attached to them. Partly that's Birmingham vs London, partly that's Villa's failure to really take over the West Midlands in the way that Man Utd have taken over Lancashire or Liverpool have taken over Cheshire.
**although if you limit it to the past 20 years, it's far closer than the reputations of the clubs would suggest
Good god, you don't want Glenn Hoddle managing by horoscope o_O
He's good tactically but has an ego bigger than Mourinho and has the great player handicap of not understanding why every player can't be as good as he was.
This is true. I was thinking strictly in terms of achievements/honors. There are definitely significant cultural and structural differences between the clubs, but in terms of silverware they're quite close.
He's spent some time heading up his own academy that, I think, focuses on getting "failed" teenage prospects back on track. I wonder if this experience will have changed his approach to managing at all, i.e. would he be more patient now?
He did well at Southampton. His time at Spurs was just fine, the problem was ludicrous expectations, and that crook Pleat fighting against him in the board room. Under Hoddle, Spurs finished 9th and 10th. That's not a great success, but it's not failure either. He could have been on his way to great things, given time, but we'll never know.
Wolves was not a good stop for him, but even there, he was unlucky with all those draws, and they still nearly made the playoffs each year. His time there was a failure but not a disaster.
Overall that's three successes, two decent jobs, and one mitigated failure. He deserves another job - if he wants one, which is by no means certain.
And by the way I am no Hoddle fan. I'm too young to remember his (proper) playing days, so I don't have any fond memories of him there. He drove me nuts when he was England manager with this faith-healer ######## and his refusal to play McManaman, and he makes my skin crawl as a Sky pundit with his arrogance and self-promotion. So it's an effort for me to talk him up, but based on what he's actually done, as opposed to the nonsense, I think he's very underrated.
**I'm not including Capello as he's yet to manage in a tournament.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main