Nick Against the World (42 Viewers)

[Bjerknes]

++ [ originally posted by jaecole ] ++


Anti-football? To a degree it is seen as anti-football but thats wide scale across Europe. It's not reserved for Italians like you make out.

I've posted in response to this about 10 times with you, you skip it every time and continually post it. I guess you see it as a poke at English teams or something. Quite silly really.

The point he's trying to make is what the English media and some others say about certain Italian teams that play a defensive game, labelling them boring and almost making it out to be a football sin. But when English teams do such a thing, such as Liverpool throughout the Champions League, you don't hear the media talking about the Reds supposed "sinful" defensive play. Why would that be? Because with that defensive style they brought back a trophy, no need to strike them down for that. See the double standards here?

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[gray]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++
The point he's trying to make is what the English media and some others say about certain Italian teams that play a defensive game, labelling them boring and almost making it out to be a football sin. But when English teams do such a thing, such as Liverpool throughout the Champions League, you don't hear the media talking about the Reds supposed "sinful" defensive play. Why would that be? Because with that defensive style they brought back a trophy, no need to strike them down for that. See the double standards here?

Maybe because the 'stronger' Italian teams shouldn't need to do that, but Liverpool didn't really have any other option.

Chelsea, on the other hand, have no excuse for their boring-ass style of play.

 

[jaecole]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++


Yeah not too many castigated Liverpool for their style of play, yet when an Italian side does the same thing the press consider it sinful. Bunch of hypocrites.

There we go. Another one.

Who critises this? I want an answer here. The English? I highly dount it's the Americans you are talking about because no offence, they probably don't even know what catenaccio is.

Do you think we have headlines every day about how boring Italian football is? Have you, or Nick ever actually seen these headlines from England because I sure as hell haven't. You are also overrating the Sun newspaper, who did blast the Italian final. But whats your point? Shouldn't they have? Wasn't it a boring final? To compare that to this game is completely stupid and really makes me question the intelligence of someone who would do that.

When English teams play this style (which we do and always have been using btw) those games are blasted also. Chelsea have been labeled boring this season (not a word about Italian football fyi). So why and how is this hypocritical? Don't the spanish (and every other nation) blast it just the same? The answer is yes.

No offence, but sometimes you make statements about things you have absolutely no idea about. You are comparing a 3-3 final with the most boring football match ever played, a match where it was going to penalties from half time, a match where there was hardly a shot on goal. Who is the hypocrite here?

 

[Bjerknes]

++ [ originally posted by gray ] ++
Chelsea, on the other hand, have no excuse for their boring-ass style of play.

Yeah they do, because it works. If defensive football works, why do anything else?

The whole purpose of playing a game is to win. If one system works better than another, use that system that just so happens to be defensive. Mourinho is not an entertainer (although he likes to be with the press), he is a manager. You cannot fault clubs for doing anything possible to win, but you can fault those imbeciles who have double standards for English and Italian teams.

 

[jaecole]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++


The point he's trying to make is what the English media and some others say about certain Italian teams that play a defensive game, labelling them boring and almost making it out to be a football sin.

Show me. I want to see some of this press because I must really be missing it and perhaps you are better informed than I am.

But when English teams do such a thing, such as Liverpool throughout the Champions League, you don't hear the media talking about the Reds supposed "sinful" defensive play. Why would that be? Because with that defensive style they brought back a trophy, no need to strike them down for that. See the double standards here?

No I only see your complete misunderstanding. English have and always will use defensive play when necessary. The only reason Italian football is ever blasted (which isnt often) is because of how some Italian games are decided before kick off. Liverpool scored 2 goals v Juve, then defended. 3 against Milan, then defended. Do YOU see the difference?

 

[Seven]

++ [ originally posted by gray ] ++

Maybe because the 'stronger' Italian teams shouldn't need to do that, but Liverpool didn't really have any other option.
.

That's a non-argument.

 

[Bjerknes]

++ [ originally posted by jaecole ] ++
No offence, but sometimes you make statements about things you have absolutely no idea about. You are comparing a 3-3 final with the most boring football match ever played, a match where it was going to penalties from half time, a match where there was hardly a shot on goal. Who is the hypocrite here?

See, there we go. You just labelled the 2003 Final the most boring match ever. That is a fallacy right there.

And no, I am not comparing both finals. Of course this final was much more exciting than the one two years ago.

But back to the point after the 2003 Final there was an incredible amount of bashing aimed towards our Italian teams, a lot of which came from the English. I even remember watching Sky Sports News a couple days after and they interviewed some English manager who labelled the Final the most boring ever and said that brand of football should not be played in Finals or even Semi and Quarterfinals. Then two years later after the Semi-final match between Chelsea and Liverpool at Stamford Bridge (you know, the one that was THE most boring match ever) Sky Sports News started off on the note "an exciting encounter at Stamford Bridge.." Please, far from it. Infact both legs were IMO less exciting than the 2003 Final. But I personally did not hear any criticism towards the style of play both teams used in those matches.

I also frequented Xtratime forums where there is a big population of Englishmen, and I won't have to tell you what they were saying after 2003 and the complete turn-around after the Semifinals this year. They used the excuse "well it was not as bad as the Final in 2003" and quite a few didn't even acknowledge how boring the matches actually were. These same English fans were the ones who joked "no more Italian finals" in 2003.

I know it's the not everybody who has double standards like that, but from what I've seen there are double standards in place for some fans and some media outlets. That's what I've experianced at least and I acknowledge it's not the whole country. Nick has probably experianced more than I have since I live in the "middle of football nowhere.."

 

[Bjerknes]

++ [ originally posted by jaecole ] ++



No I only see your complete misunderstanding. English have and always will use defensive play when necessary. The only reason Italian football is ever blasted (which isnt often) is because of how some Italian games are decided before kick off. Liverpool scored 2 goals v Juve, then defended. 3 against Milan, then defended. Do YOU see the difference?

OH really jaecole? You sure about that?

Well unless you're searching for excuses and forgetting about what actually happened I direct you to my former post in which I highlight the Semifinal first leg match at Stamford Bridge where two English teams played out to a 0-0 draw. I could see the draw coming after halftime like you just said about the All-Italian Final.

So was this game "decided before kickoff" or not because there are two English teams playing? Your starting to stereotype and you don't even know you're doing it jaecole.

"Oh we English never do such a thing.."

 

[jaecole]

See, there we go. You just labelled the 2003 Final the most boring match ever. That is a fallacy right there.

Why?

But back to the point after the 2003 Final there was an incredible amount of bashing aimed towards our Italian teams, a lot of which came from the English.

Rubbish. Yes that game was labelled boring because that is exactly what it was. Maybe if you were in the stadium like I was and witnessed the dead assed game as it really was from a neutral perspective. Maybe you were hyped up for Juve. But for us the Nation that put alot of effort into hosting this thing all we got was a game that was going to be 0-0 before it even started, no action, no effort and no atmosphere whatsoever. You expect the English media not to blast that? GET REAL. And we can blast that because we were hosting it. What you, Nick and everyone else keep moaning on about is anti-italian press. I want to see it.

The Chelsea - Liverpool game recieved just as much bad press. Although I don't really compare a two legged game (with the first game actually being the only boring one) with a final. So that point is irrelevent. And like I said, the game was widely labelled as boring, so hypocritical? No.

I also frequented Xtratime forums where there is a big population of Englishmen, and I won't have to tell you what they were saying after 2003 and the complete turn-around after the Semifinals this year. They used the excuse "well it was not as bad as the Final in 2003" and quite a few didn't even acknowledge how boring the matches actually were. These same English fans were the ones who joked "no more Italian finals" in 2003.

Football forums have nothing to do with our media. That's what we are talking about. Don't go off topic. You will find as many English men who say that as you will Italians who label our game kickball. That's not the discussion here.

I know it's the not everybody who has double standards like that, but from what I've seen there are double standards in place for some fans and some media outlets.

Again, I'm talking about your comments about our press. Don't give me this crap as a reason. Fans? I don't care. Show me the media outlets. So far you have quoted sky news, a line that is not a big deal. I want to see all the anti-italian press coverage. Show me one story infact. This is bullshit and you have no idea what you are talking about.

Fact is in the build ups to every game with an italian side, this season, last and since I can remember, I have never seen anything complaining about Italian's boring football. Nothing against the Italian league and nothing even in an International tournament. Sure you will get a few mentions in those shitty little has been professionals newspaper column but that's because they want to be controversial.

So again. Show me, or else you have just been shown to be wrong and should take back your unfounded claims.

Shadowfax, do you get this? Maybe what they print in Liverpool isn't what they print in London.

Nick has probably experianced more than I have since I live in the "middle of football nowhere.."

Well considering he has recently admitted to being off the mark on quite a few English myths, I see no difference in this one.

 

[jaecole]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++



OH really jaecole? You sure about that?

Well unless you're searching for excuses and forgetting about what actually happened I direct you to my former post in which I highlight the Semifinal first leg match at Stamford Bridge where two English teams played out to a 0-0 draw. I could see the draw coming after halftime like you just said about the All-Italian Final.

So was this game "decided before kickoff" or not because there are two English teams playing? Your starting to stereotype and you don't even know you're doing it jaecole.

"Oh we English never do such a thing.."

This is a slightly off topic from my main point here. My problem here is your views on the English media.

But sure, since you want it on this also. Italian game is looked down upon by some because of this. This is the Italian league we are talking about. Compare Italian league to English and that is the debate. This is irrelevent and off the mark. European competition is completely different and not once have I seen anything against defensive play in Europe. There simply is no bad press about this crap you are thinking. If there is, just show me it.

The final, I have mentioned in the previous post. Also funny how you are using one game as a comparison to the complete italian football game. Infact, it's fvcking stupid

 

[jaecole]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++
"Oh we English never do such a thing.."

I resent that statement. Pretty much sums up the whole problem here.

Respond to my points if you wish, or I'll discuss this with someone more mature.

 

[Emma]

I miss Pado. I cant relate to anyone else.

 

[Bjerknes]

++ [ originally posted by jaecole ] ++

Rubbish. Yes that game was labelled boring because that is exactly what it was. Maybe if you were in the stadium like I was and witnessed the dead assed game as it really was from a neutral perspective. Maybe you were hyped up for Juve. But for us the Nation that put alot of effort into hosting this thing all we got was a game that was going to be 0-0 before it even started, no action, no effort and no atmosphere whatsoever. You expect the English media not to blast that? GET REAL. And we can blast that because we were hosting it. What you, Nick and everyone else keep moaning on about is anti-italian press. I want to see it.

So is every match that ends up 0-0 going to be 0-0 before it even started? Or is that just for the Italians?

And what do you mean you have the right to comment on how matches are played out? If so I have the right to comment on what some of your media says about the Italian game, and it's not too promissing. From Sky Sports to some English commentators all across the globe.

Oh, and I can't just show you things that were said on Sky Sports or what others said about the matches. That's like asking me to show you the air.

The Chelsea - Liverpool game recieved just as much bad press. Although I don't really compare a two legged game (with the first game actually being the only boring one) with a final. So that point is irrelevent. And like I said, the game was widely labelled as boring, so hypocritical? No.

I did not see any bad press towards the English after that game, and do you expect me to take your word for it? I seriously heard nothing about how boring the Chelsea-Pool matches were on Sky Sports or any other English media source.

In this country on the Fox Soccer Channel there is a show called Fox Football Friday in which two Englishmen give us a synopsis of the events in world football, from the EPL to the Champions League. After the Chelsea-Pool matches they did not comment on how boring the matches actually were, and said that both were very tight but exciting displays of football. I also can't tell you how many times these guys stereotype Italian football, labelling it defensive and making backhanded comments persuading people to believe Italian football is perpetually boring. They indeed know what they're talking about when it comes to the English game, so sometimes I'm appauled to hear what they say about the Italians. God knows what they said about the Final in 2003.

Many English commentators I have heard stereotype the Italian game to be "defensive" and lacking the will to win the game. From the ESPN coverage of the Champions League to the Englishmen they have on Gol TV who covered UEFA Cup matches including Parma.

But yes, it's not every single media outlet. But you cannot deny there are some out there who don't watch their mouths or pens when it comes to talking or writing about the Italian game. I have seen it on Sky, on ESPN to some extent, and watching English commentators here in the States.

Perhaps we are making too much out of it, but it's not like it doesn't exist. We would not be commenting on it if it didn't exist.

 

[Bjerknes]

++ [ originally posted by jaecole ] ++
The final, I have mentioned in the previous post. Also funny how you are using one game as a comparison to the complete italian football game. Infact, it's fvcking stupid

Well it's not my fault you made rather dumb statement. What, should I just let it slide next time?

 

[jaecole]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++


So is every match that ends up 0-0 going to be 0-0 before it even started? Or is that just for the Italians?

And what do you mean you have the right to comment on how matches are played out? If so I have the right to comment on what some of your media says about the Italian game, and it's not too promissing. From Sky Sports to some English commentators all across the globe.

Oh, and I can't just show you things that were said on Sky Sports or what others said about the matches. That's like asking me to show you the air.

Of course not. It just so happens with this one that everyone was predicting it before hand, and when the Italians did just that, of course there was going to be some I told you so's. It was a dissapointment if not a joke of a final. I don't see your point and I don't see any reason to make comparisons to that and this wide scale opinion about English media that is completely off the mark.

I did not see any bad press towards the English after that game, and do you expect me to take your word for it? I seriously heard nothing about how boring the Chelsea-Pool matches were on Sky Sports or any other English media source.

A two legged game, the first of which was a tactical game by Chelsea. Not that big a deal and like I said, Chelsea have been slammed many times. Simply cannot compare this to that final. Had Liverpool and Milan produced such a final it would have been bashed the same probably ALOT worse than the Juve-Milan one. It's unfair statements you are making, and completely unfounded.

In this country on the Fox Soccer Channel there is a show called Fox Football Friday in which two Englishmen give us a synopsis of the events in world football, from the EPL to the Champions League. After the Chelsea-Pool matches they did not comment on how boring the matches actually were, and said that both were very tight but exciting displays of football.

Again, take this wider than 2 games and you have no case at all. I'm not even talking about those games.

I also can't tell you how many times these guys stereotype Italian football, labelling it defensive and making backhanded comments persuading people to believe Italian football is perpetually boring. They indeed know what they're talking about when it comes to the English game, so sometimes I'm appauled to hear what they say about the Italians.

Many English commentators I have heard stereotype the Italian game to be "defensive" and lacking the will to win the game. From the ESPN coverage of the Champions League to the Englishmen they have on Gol TV who covered UEFA Cup matches including Parma.

Commentators say Italian football is more 'defensive'. So it is, what's the point? Lacking in will. It often is when compared to EPL. Again what is the point and this is going off on a different tangent.

But yes, it's not every single media outlet. But you cannot deny there are some out there who don't watch their mouths or pens when it comes to talking or writing about the Italian game. I have seen it on Sky, on ESPN to some extent, and watching English commentators here in the States.

Perhaps we are making too much out of it, but it's not like it doesn't exist. We would not be commenting on it if it didn't exist.

Yes you are making too big a deal about it. Your last post was slightly more realistic. But compare it to the original argument against yourself and Nicks posts and you will see why I am slight bemused by this.

If we are only talking about what you mention in this post. Then sure, everyone will admit that. But you have really stepped it down.

Just try to be clear.

 

[jaecole]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++


Well it's not my fault you made rather dumb statement. What, should I just let it slide next time?

Stupid statement? You are avoiding the points here by comparing that game to the final. We can do that if you want, but that's not my objective. My objective was for you to clarify and explain your ridiculous posts about anti-Italian sentiment in the English media. A media of which, lets be honest, you have no idea about. Same with Nick.

Fact is the English press never talk badly off Italian football, infact they don't mention it at all. We don't cover Italian football. Commentators (atleast the good ones) I hear more pro than against. They continually praise the italian sides and players. So it's just annoying to see Nick for example post such opinion mostly based on belief.

But whatever, no biggie

 

[Bjerknes]

What I don't understand is how you can say a two legged Semifinal is exempt from tactical criticism. I have heard this argument given many times by other English fans and I don't understand how you can use that as an excuse.

If anything the Final is going to be more tight and restricted, not the first match of a Semi-final.

Everything is at stake in the Final with two teams playing on a neutral ground. There is usually equal support for both teams and nobody can use the "home field advantage" to take the game to their opponent. The one-match Final is where the title is decided, and the nerves of the players reach a climax. Teams are afraid to give up an early goal and usually that means teams stay away from taking risks ie throwing many players forward. In a two-legged Semifinal teams have the home field advantage, superior numbers of supporters in the stands to spur their team on, and the need to score a few goals before they travel to the oppostion's house for the second leg. If anything in this scenario teams will go for goals and open up a lot more than in a final. The away team will want to get an away goal, so they will push forward as well.

So I just don't accept this argument of "Finals should be open" because when it comes down to it the Final would call teams to be more cautious than a Semifinal, playing on neutral soil with everything at stake.

 

[jaecole]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++
What I don't understand is how you can say a two legged Semifinal is exempt from tactical criticism. I have heard this argument given many times by other English fans and I don't understand how you can use that as an excuse.

That isn't an argument that's why. I'm not making an excuse. Why are you continually talking about this? Irrelevent to my argument. Like I said that game was blasted. You are too caught up with that. You aren't seeing the whole picture. You are using the italian final as your argument when you are not even considering why it recieved that response. Nick has widened that to a 'English against catenaccio in general'.

If two italian teams had semi's like that, it wouldn't have been mentioned much either. That final was different and recieved such press only because it was so well predicted before hand, weeks had been spent 'hoping' the Italians would come and entertain when we finally have a chance to host a final. They show up and don't 'show up'. Of course they will be ripped on in the press. If English sides turn up in Italy and play kick ball they will be torn apart also. Difference is I won't come on this forum and make such a deal about it and I won't label the Italian press as anti-english and throw it up every time something is mentioned.

You have taken this discussion off topic and it now isn't what it was supposed to be.

You simply don't have a point, i'm sorry. You need to stop thinking of this such simplistic terms. Fact is, you can't speak for the English media so don't. I'll send you some newspapers and you find me the anti-Italian parts. Let's talk about something new, I'm spent

 

[Bjerknes]

Once again, it's not like it doesn't exist. I have given you many examples of English slander towards the Italian game, but fair enough. Send me some newspapers.

 

[Bjerknes]

Game coming up in 25 minutes. Forza USA.