Do you agree?

hey!!! we have 4 English men in our 1st team!

Khaled wrote:Carlo Garganese @carlogarganese: 10 reasons why football is dead...

5 ) Teams like Inter don't have a single player from their own country

What??
Castellazzi,Ranocchia,Pazzini,Longo says hallo..
Btw:
The club was founded on 9 March 1908 as Football Club Internazionale, following a "schism" from the Milan Cricket and Football Club (44 members). A group of Italians and Swiss (Giorgio Muggiani, a painter who also designed the club's logo, Bossard, Lana, Bertoloni, De Olma, Enrico Hintermann, Arturo Hintermann, Carlo Hintermann, Pietro Dell'Oro, Hugo and Hans Rietmann, Voelkel, Maner, Wipf, and Carlo Ardussi) were unhappy about the domination of Italians in the AC Milan team, and broke away from them, leading to the creation of Internazionale. The name of the club derives from the wish of its founding members to accept foreign players as well as Italians.

Money makes the game more competitive. More teams will fight for the throne.

There are ofcourse good and way things that follow with it, but overall it's improving the game. Unless you are a Arsenal fan(No offence).

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:7 is complete and utter horse shit btw.

What i mean by this is it's possible to actually play other kinds of football style that tiki taka and actually not be playing kick and rush btw and many teams do.

And hardly any teams in England play kick and rush anymore.....

ad 8.) I actually agree with Viva that the goal-keepers got better nowadays and thus freekick goals got more difficult.

1 )

10 reasons Carlo Garganese is currently butthurt:
9 of them are the decline of Serie A
and the 10th reason is that Rogaine has not been effective for him

not surprised he managed to involve PL somehow

RedOranje wrote:

The Franchise wrote:

VivaStPauli wrote:There never was an awful lot of free kick goals, though. And I don't see plastic footballs ruining anything.

Yeah, but now there is none.

Cristiano's hit and hope is actually the best method out there.

Technicians like Pirlo, Del Peiro seem to have dropped right off. Pirlo has scored like 2 in the past 5 years it seems.

Plastic balls (especially like the jubalini) changes the game. It doesnt exactly ruin it, but it makes things more difficult for some and easier for others.

So, in the past, the game was easier for some and more difficult for others due to leather footballs? How is one any better/worse than the other? The only thing plastic footballs due (and they're generally not actual plastic, really) is ensure that the ball(s) used in every match is more similar to those used in other matches. The change in material ensures more uniformity of equipment, meaning that on any given day a game is less likely to be influenced by a defect in the ball and more likely to be influenced by the players on the pitch. I fail to see how that's bad for the sport.

No, I dont think so. Balls were hit more "true" from my experience, the balls had predictablilty and the skill of the shot was what beat the goalie.

The old Mitre balls or Adidas, if you hit them as hard as possible with your laces they would fly in a straight line.

Now, if you hit a Jubalini (and to lesser degrees some of the other balls we see today) as hard as possible it will move about 3 different directions before it reaches the goal. When I say 3 im not exagerrating, it literally moves 3 different directions at times.

Previously, to get this much movement (actually less) you would need to strike the ball with the outside of your boot while still having great force to create that topspin (see Roberto Carlos goal vs France).

As I said, now, simply hitting it as hard as possible creates incredible movement.

It takes less skill to trick a goalie.

I would also point to various goals scored with the Jubalini (I can provide youtube if you need) with frankly would never happen with the old balls.

As I said, the Del Piero's, the Pirlo's, the Beckhams seem to be gone (despite them still playing). Balls are not hit with the same predictability of the past, what worked before doesnt work now. From my playing experience I feel it also, trying to use the inside of your foot to generate curl is harder, the ball feels much more weightless.

Whereas, simply hitting it as hard as possible results in incredible movement.

Could "cradle-snatching" be related to ambition??? Cause I'm sure that thats always existed and I don't think that its killing football. Although just like there is ambition, there is loyalty.

Inter does have Italian players though.

Poli, Pazzini, Ranocchia (just off the top of my head)

Ok, it's not a lot of Italian players and they are built around foreign players but still, it's just incorrect to say they have no Italians..

Only Chelsea and Stoke play hoof ball


I disagree with almost all of them btw.

Hoof ball wins you tourneys

Nuff said

Khaled wrote:Carlo Garganese @carlogarganese: 10 reasons why football is dead...

10 ) Ibrahimovic and Thiago Silva could leave Milan for PSG's money

1 ) Manchester City are the biggest club in England

Same guy who berates Arsenal for not spending ......


And if he is going to bring up points about how football is apparently 'dead' then the crap and lies that journalists spew all over the newspapers and websites are a major problem.
But ofcourse, they have reliable sources~

Robbery wrote:Hoof ball wins you tourneys

Nuff said

Euros and WC - Spain
Last 5 Cls - Chelsea, Barca, Inter, Barce, United
Only 1 team played 'hoof ball', Chelsea didnt even play hoofball ffs, they just sat deep and conutered.

jibers wrote:

Robbery wrote:Hoof ball wins you tourneys

Nuff said

Euros and WC - Spain
Last 5 Cls - Chelsea, Barca, Inter, Barce, United
Only 1 team played 'hoof ball', Chelsea didnt even play hoofball ffs, they just sat deep and conutered.

But still hoofball won a trophy

how can you say hoofball wins tournaments.. not even remotely true in the past 10 years, look at barca and spains dominance..

barca 2011 wrote:Could "cradle-snatching" be related to ambition??? Cause I'm sure that thats always existed and I don't think that its killing football. Although just like there is ambition, there is loyalty.

Cradle-snatching is related to the capitalistic economic model implemented in the west where the bigger fish eat the smaller ones day after day. Cradle snatching will only get worse in the future given the current circumstances.

The Franchise wrote:

RedOranje wrote:

The Franchise wrote:

VivaStPauli wrote:There never was an awful lot of free kick goals, though. And I don't see plastic footballs ruining anything.

Yeah, but now there is none.

Cristiano's hit and hope is actually the best method out there.

Technicians like Pirlo, Del Peiro seem to have dropped right off. Pirlo has scored like 2 in the past 5 years it seems.

Plastic balls (especially like the jubalini) changes the game. It doesnt exactly ruin it, but it makes things more difficult for some and easier for others.

So, in the past, the game was easier for some and more difficult for others due to leather footballs? How is one any better/worse than the other? The only thing plastic footballs due (and they're generally not actual plastic, really) is ensure that the ball(s) used in every match is more similar to those used in other matches. The change in material ensures more uniformity of equipment, meaning that on any given day a game is less likely to be influenced by a defect in the ball and more likely to be influenced by the players on the pitch. I fail to see how that's bad for the sport.

No, I dont think so. Balls were hit more "true" from my experience, the balls had predictablilty and the skill of the shot was what beat the goalie.

The old Mitre balls or Adidas, if you hit them as hard as possible with your laces they would fly in a straight line.

Now, if you hit a Jubalini (and to lesser degrees some of the other balls we see today) as hard as possible it will move about 3 different directions before it reaches the goal. When I say 3 im not exagerrating, it literally moves 3 different directions at times.

Previously, to get this much movement (actually less) you would need to strike the ball with the outside of your boot while still having great force to create that topspin (see Roberto Carlos goal vs France).

As I said, now, simply hitting it as hard as possible creates incredible movement.

It takes less skill to trick a goalie.

I would also point to various goals scored with the Jubalini (I can provide youtube if you need) with frankly would never happen with the old balls.

As I said, the Del Piero's, the Pirlo's, the Beckhams seem to be gone (despite them still playing). Balls are not hit with the same predictability of the past, what worked before doesnt work now. From my playing experience I feel it also, trying to use the inside of your foot to generate curl is harder, the ball feels much more weightless.

Whereas, simply hitting it as hard as possible results in incredible movement.

I agree with this. It's not always easy to hit a "knuckle ball" accurately though

vanDEEZ wrote:how can you say hoofball wins tournaments.. not even remotely true in the past 10 years, look at barca and spains dominance..

He clearly is referring to Chelsea's UCL win which wasn't even huff ball either...

Just an example of why Carlo is talking shit



In the build up to this move every player on the team had a touch and the Liverpool player's didn't touch the ball once.

Kick and Rush league

Carlo watches too much Serie A.

danyjr wrote:

barca 2011 wrote:Could "cradle-snatching" be related to ambition??? Cause I'm sure that thats always existed and I don't think that its killing football. Although just like there is ambition, there is loyalty.

Cradle-snatching is related to the capitalistic economic model implemented in the west where the bigger fish eat the smaller ones day after day. Cradle snatching will only get worse in the future given the current circumstances.

Agreed but what I meant to say is that players will always want to move to a bigger club rather than stay at a small one. But yes, now more and more clubs that are becoming the "bigger" clubs have little to no history, at least more than in the past.

Players want to move to a bigger club because smaller clubs nowadays have no chance of winning a title and also can't match the higher salaries paid by big clubs.

A good example is Valencia. A team which never was as big in terms of fan-base or financially compared to Barcelona or Madrid but enjoyed great success in the beginning of the millennium nowadays has almost no chance of being in the top two let alone winning La Liga despite consistently being La Liga's 3rd best team. And it is not only the huge revenue that big teams make but also the distribution of TV rights in Spain which promotes the duopoly of Madrid-Barça because LFP lost it's power in distribution to Mediapro.

Germany and England have far better systems promoting smaller clubs by sharing the TV right deals equally with only small bonuses for teams which perform better- United earning only 1.5 times what Wolves made last year while Barcelona or Madrid make almost 20 times the amount a La Liga relegation zone team earns.

And whatever happened to Financial Fairplay?

10 ) Ibrahimovic and Thiago Silva could leave Milan for PSG's money

So what's your point?



9 ) Some people actually think Cristiano Ronaldo is in the best five players of all time

Meh. Some people.



8 ) There are virtually no more free kick goals (related to point 2)

True. No Juninho or Beckham present atm.



7 ) Everyone but Spain and Barcelona copies the kick and rush Premier League

That's a dang lie.



6 ) 99% of players are media trained = BORING

Not buying this one.



5 ) Teams like Inter don't have a single player from their own country

This one's a bit shameful IMO.



4 ) Players like William Gallas get given the No.10 shirt

Peter Griffin voice: OMG. Who cares?



3 ) Cradle-snatching

That happens eveywhere and has happened since a while. Nothing new.



2 ) Plastic footballs

Can't have an opinion on this.



1 ) Manchester City are the biggest club in England

So what. Deal with it, bro.




I wonder what I would have thought if someone paid me to write this sort of stuff.

The Franchise wrote:Football isnt dead, thats just a silly thing to say.

But of the 10, I would agree with about 6 or 7.

So its either Barca or donkey football? Thats racist.