+reps are been given for this amusing yet accurate dissection of why city is crap
Need to spread a bit first
Need to spread a bit first
Buy on AliExpress.com
[ENG] Premier League 2015/2016 (25 Viewers)
- Thread starter Dostoevsky
- Start date
- Status
Buy on AliExpress.com
Bare minimum improvement. But Mancini is an unimaginative and pragmatic mofo who just plays it safe and focuses on little else. Its insulting to see it as an improvement to your coaching pedigree if you are an improvement on him. Pellegrini's Villareal showed much better football then what Mancini done in City and Inter. But Pellegrini is clearly not a coach for a top team, out of his depth. He belongs in Valencia or Tottenham level.
I'm not downplaying his talent or technical abilities but his impact has not been as big as was expected nor am I talking about his future achievements. At the moment his impact on his teams success is minimal but now with De Bruyne out he has his chance to show his worth. I have no doubt that we'll see a different Sterling when Pep takes charge.
- - - Updated - - -
I clearly rate him more than you but I see his faults that you have pointed out. I think he has one top club job left in him.
- - - Updated - - -
I clearly rate him more than you but I see his faults that you have pointed out. I think he has one top club job left in him.
But there are those special talents that rise to their high exceptions or even surpass them like Dybala. More often you have to wait for them to deliver and I'm sure City had that in mind when they bought him. It also has to be said that City had but themselves in a really bad position in the negotiations for their lack of homegrown players which resulted in the need to buy both Sterling and Delph for any price necessary.
That is true. But Sterling was a clear raw talent for Liverpool so they retarded if they expected big key player from him. He isnt in the talent bracket that likes of Dybala and true top top talent/players are, even if he is extremely potent talent for sure.
- - - Updated - - -
Read this
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490
- - - Updated - - -
Read this
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490- - - Updated - - -
I'm not familiar with british laws and I hope he does go to jail but I see him doing community service and having a restricted freedom (doing his time at home). Plus he is a first time offender.
I swear I just can't understand how dumb you can be when you are rich and famous, just like the idiot Benzema, why would you need to do that? Not only why would you do that, but why would you NEED to do that when you can easily have pornstars over any hotel or friend's house with so much money and fame.
And I suspect Guardiola being coach more than cancels out any issue of the name 'Man City', if that was an issue.
- - - Updated - - -
Here's a response to the chat the other day about Leicester not being up to playing in the CL:
At the other extreme Leicester’s success is something more grave, evidence of the chronic mediocrity of the Premier League. For the richest teams, finishing second to Leicester should be an indelible spot of shame. There have already been dark mutterings about the ease with which Real Madrid , Barcelona or Bayern Munich might swat aside England’s own-brand champions next season. Who knows, perhaps even with the same ease they’ve been swatting aside Manchester United, Manchester City, Arsenal and Liverpool for the last five years.
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2016/feb/11/leicester-city-no-fairytale-claudio-ranieri
- - - Updated - - -
And here is a highly pretentious article about Wenger with an interesting point hidden away in it:
The drift into self-parody
It is perhaps the coaches who stay longest at a club who are most susceptible to that process of diminution – or, at least, in whom the process can most readily be discerned. Brian Clough, for instance, changed after the split with his assistant Peter Taylor in 1981. He also lost his long-time coach Jimmy Gordon to retirement that summer, while finding himself restricted financially, partly by repayments on the loan taken out to build the new stand at the City Ground and partly by the largely unsuccessful signings of Justin Fashanu, Ian Wallace and Peter Ward for a combined £2.7m.
Forest could no longer go out and sign the likes of Trevor Francis, but Clough also stopped buying the likes of Larry Lloyd and Kenny Burns. The great side of the late 70s that, in the space of four seasons won promotion, the league, two League Cups and two European Cups, featured a core of difficult personalities other clubs had given up on, players written off elsewhere as drinkers or gamblers or awkward bastards.
By the eighties, the make-up of Clough’s squad had changed. “I didn’t mind naughty boys,” Taylor wrote in With Clough By Taylor. “Underneath many of them had hearts of gold – Brian was different from me. He preferred the good lads.” Perhaps it was the absence of Taylor, perhaps it was his mutually bruising experience with the wilful and articulate Fashanu, perhaps he was simply tired but Forest’s personality changed, from the rough-and-ready drinkers of the seventies to the good boys of the eighties with hair as neat as their passing.
Clough’s ambitions changed as well: once he had wanted trophies and had manipulated chairmen and pulled all manner of scams to achieve that goal; by the 80s, playing neat football was enough. Keeping Forest consistently in the top six was in itself an extraordinary achievement given their resources, but in the 70s he had smashed through those limitations.
A diminution of ambition
Wenger, although a very different character to Clough, has perhaps gone through a similar process. His great sides featured rough diamonds and hard men but more recently, with the constraints imposed by the repayments on the new stadium, there is a clear template of an Arsenal player: their squad is full of small technically accomplished creative midfielders. They might not have the neat side partings of eighties-era Forest, but there is a clear Arsenal haircut. And, as with Forest, there is a sense that, in the face of clubs with far greater resources, winning trophies has almost been forgotten about in favour of playing technically adept football in the manager’s image.
In part, perhaps, there is an element of self-parody to this. In his introduction to the 20th-anniversary edition of Infinite Jest, the writer and critic Tom Bissell observes that “all great stylists eventually become prisoners of their style”. It’s understandable that managers should fall victim to the same process: rather than asking how best to solve a problem, Wenger begins to ask how Arsène Wenger would solve the problem.
He has solved countless problems in the past, so he turns to past experience; there is a danger, though, that what was successful in the past will no longer be successful, either because of a false identification – that is, that a present problem resembles a past problem but is in fact different – or simply because circumstances have changed. The result is that Wenger becomes ever more Wengerian, that the experience of past success becomes – counterintuitively – an obstacle to future success. It may be that this is why, with a handful of exceptions, most notably Alex Ferguson, managers seem to be limited to a decade of sustained achievement at the very peak of the game.
In that, the media and public have a role. The need for narrative and readily understood personalities means that Wenger is encouraged to be Wengerian. However independent he may be, there must be an aversion, however subconscious, to being questioned about abandoning your principles. If Wenger had gone out last summer and smashed Arsenal’s transfer record to sign a holding midfielder, it would in a sense have been an admission that for years he’s been wrong and the public has been right; stubbornness sets in – and, as stubbornness becomes part of the Wenger personality, becomes self-perpetuating.
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2016/feb/11/arsenal-arsene-wenger-title-leicester
- - - Updated - - -
Here's a response to the chat the other day about Leicester not being up to playing in the CL:
At the other extreme Leicester’s success is something more grave, evidence of the chronic mediocrity of the Premier League. For the richest teams, finishing second to Leicester should be an indelible spot of shame. There have already been dark mutterings about the ease with which Real Madrid , Barcelona or Bayern Munich might swat aside England’s own-brand champions next season. Who knows, perhaps even with the same ease they’ve been swatting aside Manchester United, Manchester City, Arsenal and Liverpool for the last five years.
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2016/feb/11/leicester-city-no-fairytale-claudio-ranieri
- - - Updated - - -
And here is a highly pretentious article about Wenger with an interesting point hidden away in it:
The drift into self-parody
It is perhaps the coaches who stay longest at a club who are most susceptible to that process of diminution – or, at least, in whom the process can most readily be discerned. Brian Clough, for instance, changed after the split with his assistant Peter Taylor in 1981. He also lost his long-time coach Jimmy Gordon to retirement that summer, while finding himself restricted financially, partly by repayments on the loan taken out to build the new stand at the City Ground and partly by the largely unsuccessful signings of Justin Fashanu, Ian Wallace and Peter Ward for a combined £2.7m.
Forest could no longer go out and sign the likes of Trevor Francis, but Clough also stopped buying the likes of Larry Lloyd and Kenny Burns. The great side of the late 70s that, in the space of four seasons won promotion, the league, two League Cups and two European Cups, featured a core of difficult personalities other clubs had given up on, players written off elsewhere as drinkers or gamblers or awkward bastards.
By the eighties, the make-up of Clough’s squad had changed. “I didn’t mind naughty boys,” Taylor wrote in With Clough By Taylor. “Underneath many of them had hearts of gold – Brian was different from me. He preferred the good lads.” Perhaps it was the absence of Taylor, perhaps it was his mutually bruising experience with the wilful and articulate Fashanu, perhaps he was simply tired but Forest’s personality changed, from the rough-and-ready drinkers of the seventies to the good boys of the eighties with hair as neat as their passing.
Clough’s ambitions changed as well: once he had wanted trophies and had manipulated chairmen and pulled all manner of scams to achieve that goal; by the 80s, playing neat football was enough. Keeping Forest consistently in the top six was in itself an extraordinary achievement given their resources, but in the 70s he had smashed through those limitations.
A diminution of ambition
Wenger, although a very different character to Clough, has perhaps gone through a similar process. His great sides featured rough diamonds and hard men but more recently, with the constraints imposed by the repayments on the new stadium, there is a clear template of an Arsenal player: their squad is full of small technically accomplished creative midfielders. They might not have the neat side partings of eighties-era Forest, but there is a clear Arsenal haircut. And, as with Forest, there is a sense that, in the face of clubs with far greater resources, winning trophies has almost been forgotten about in favour of playing technically adept football in the manager’s image.
In part, perhaps, there is an element of self-parody to this. In his introduction to the 20th-anniversary edition of Infinite Jest, the writer and critic Tom Bissell observes that “all great stylists eventually become prisoners of their style”. It’s understandable that managers should fall victim to the same process: rather than asking how best to solve a problem, Wenger begins to ask how Arsène Wenger would solve the problem.
He has solved countless problems in the past, so he turns to past experience; there is a danger, though, that what was successful in the past will no longer be successful, either because of a false identification – that is, that a present problem resembles a past problem but is in fact different – or simply because circumstances have changed. The result is that Wenger becomes ever more Wengerian, that the experience of past success becomes – counterintuitively – an obstacle to future success. It may be that this is why, with a handful of exceptions, most notably Alex Ferguson, managers seem to be limited to a decade of sustained achievement at the very peak of the game.
In that, the media and public have a role. The need for narrative and readily understood personalities means that Wenger is encouraged to be Wengerian. However independent he may be, there must be an aversion, however subconscious, to being questioned about abandoning your principles. If Wenger had gone out last summer and smashed Arsenal’s transfer record to sign a holding midfielder, it would in a sense have been an admission that for years he’s been wrong and the public has been right; stubbornness sets in – and, as stubbornness becomes part of the Wenger personality, becomes self-perpetuating.
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2016/feb/11/arsenal-arsene-wenger-title-leicester
That is true. But Sterling was a clear raw talent for Liverpool so they retarded if they expected big key player from him. He isnt in the talent bracket that likes of Dybala and true top top talent/players are, even if he is extremely potent talent for sure.
- - - Updated - - -
Read this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490
- - - Updated - - -
Read this
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490
I was just looking at the messages he was sending her, guy was fucking desperate. She only wanted a signed shirt 
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/adam-johnson-read-31-whatsapp-7359991
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/adam-johnson-read-31-whatsapp-7359991
- Status