The European football thread

[ukhotstove]

Originally Posted by ukhotstove

could win my first ever trophy in English football.

Tell a lie in my first season in charge of Wigan I won the Under 18's Cup

[bababui]

Originally Posted by ukhotstove

Tell a lie in my first season in charge of Wigan I won the Under 18's Cup

I'll alert the media

[ukhotstove]

Originally Posted by bababui

I'll alert the media

Ahhhhhhh but what about Man Utd and Ferguson when he brought players like Beckham (ok bad example lol), Scholes, Butt, Giggs and so on through the youth team

[mlyons]

Originally Posted by ukhotstove

England squad a load of bs yet again, second best rated left back not in the squad again oh but wait he doesn't play for a fashionable club, whats the betting if Baines leaves Wigan in the Summer that he'll be in an England squad minutes later. If Phil Neville is better than Baines then no wonder England can win jack, only player you can really say is from an unfashionable club is Bent from Charlton.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/foot...ls/6453061.stm

Actim's got Neville rated the 24th best player in the Premier League with Baines not even cracking the top 100. I've never heard anyone say Baines was better before now. Are you sure you're not just looking at this through Wigan-colored glasses?

Baines is a nice-looking up-and-comer and all, but he's not an elite player yet.

[redmarkYankees]

Originally Posted by mlyons

Baines is a nice-looking up-and-comer and all, but he's not an elite player yet.

True, but Phil Neville never was elite and is hardly looking to the future. England never develop because we never rebuild, as we should, after another poor World Cup. We'll only find out if Baines is good enough by giving him a chance.

[molarmite]

Soccer tomorrow morning, I'm pretty excited.

[ukhotstove]

Originally Posted by redmarkYankees

True, but Phil Neville never was elite and is hardly looking to the future. England never develop because we never rebuild, as we should, after another poor World Cup. We'll only find out if Baines is good enough by giving him a chance.

The ideal chance was in the friendly against Spain.

[ukhotstove]

Originally Posted by mlyons

Actim's got Neville rated the 24th best player in the Premier League with Baines not even cracking the top 100. I've never heard anyone say Baines was better before now. Are you sure you're not just looking at this through Wigan-colored glasses?

Baines is a nice-looking up-and-comer and all, but he's not an elite player yet.

Maybe but fans and pundits alike rank Baines highly as for the Actim stats I wouldn't treat them as gospel as I doubt anyone would rate Phil Neville the 24th best player in the Premiership, you have to look outside the box sometimes.

[rangers85]

Originally Posted by molarmite

Soccer tomorrow morning, I'm pretty excited.

Same here, mainly because I'll get to see my Blackburn Rovers play on TV in America for the second time in a week, and overall one of just a few times since Blackburn never draws the TV matches here.

[ukhotstove]

I agree with rmY we never do rebuild we just patch things up qualify then have a poor tournament, patch things up qualify and have a poor tournament. It's a sad state of affairs if we have to play someone like Phil Neville at left back who isn't even a recognised left back, put Baines in give him a chance in a pressure situation because no direspect to Israel but if we can't beat them and give Baines a chance at the sametime then it's about time we gave up.

[ukhotstove]

Originally Posted by rangers85

Same here, mainly because I'll get to see my Blackburn Rovers play on TV in America for the second time in a week, and overall one of just a few times since Blackburn never draws the TV matches here.

Lucas Neill's return, should get a warm welcome from the Blackburn fans lol.

[rangers85]

Originally Posted by ukhotstove

Lucas Neill's return, should get a warm welcome from the Blackburn fans lol.

Haha yeah, what an ass.

Oh well, some of the players that have replaced him have done so just as well if not better. So I guess in the end I don't care quite as much.

[ukhotstove]

Originally Posted by rangers85

Haha yeah, what an ass.

Oh well, some of the players that have replaced him have done so just as well if not better. So I guess in the end I don't care quite as much.

Hughes pretty much said the same thing this week, with the players he could bring in it's probably done Blackburn a favour with Neill leaving.

[mlyons]

Originally Posted by ukhotstove

I agree with rmY we never do rebuild we just patch things up qualify then have a poor tournament, patch things up qualify and have a poor tournament. It's a sad state of affairs if we have to play someone like Phil Neville at left back who isn't even a recognised left back, put Baines in give him a chance in a pressure situation because no direspect to Israel but if we can't beat them and give Baines a chance at the sametime then it's about time we gave up.

Well, you've got a few issues here. One is that you don't think Neville should be on the squad. That's fine, and I can see why you wouldn't want a 30 year old without a lot of upside on the squad three years before the next World Cup, since he most likely won't be much of a contributor at that point. Your second issue is that you seem to think the best choice other than Neville would have been Leighton Baines. That, I think, is pure homerism. Why not Gareth Barry (who plays an excellent left back), for example, whose CV is a lot more impressive than Baines'? What does Baines really have to recommend himself beyond potential?

[ukhotstove]

Originally Posted by mlyons

Well, you've got a few issues here. One is that you don't think Neville should be on the squad. That's fine, and I can see why you wouldn't want a 30 year old without a lot of upside on the squad three years before the next World Cup, since he most likely won't be much of a contributor at that point. Your second issue is that you seem to think the best choice other than Neville would have been Leighton Baines. That, I think, is pure homerism. Why not Gareth Barry (who plays an excellent left back), for example, whose CV is a lot more impressive than Baines'? What does Baines really have to recommend himself beyond potential?

Hmmm just one issue as you agree with me on the Neville situation, as for Barry he's only played once under McLaren and that was on the left side of midfield so by that he doesn't see him as a left back. And "homerism" as you call it lmao how many times have you seen Baines play ? I've seen him enough times over the last few years to know that the only player that skins him is Ronaldo and show me a player who he doesn't skin.

Also if you actually read what I typed then you would see I never said that Neville shouldn't be in the squad I said he shouldn't be playing leftback, to be honest I don't think he should be in the squad but if your going to discuss things then at least talk about things I've said and not things I haven't said

If as you state that I'm suffering from "homerism" then why have you never seen me bang the drum for Chris Kirkland ? Simply because I don't even rate him the best goalkeeper at Wigan, why have you never seen me bang the drum for Ryan Taylor ? England under 21's rightback simply because he's a raw talent and not full International class, why have you never seen me bang the drum for Emile Heskey ? Who's playing some of the best football of his career so I'm far from a Homer Simpson (okay I thought it was funny lol)

Also if you read the Actim stats which to me are a load of nutsacks they calculate a players rating by this method.

Calculation 1 - Assesses a player's contribution to a winning team, based on points won by the team when he appeared.

So by this method anyone no matter how good they are if they play on a poor team they don't gain points here, so actually you could get a forward scoring a goal in 5 games straight but if his team losses 2-1 in every one of those 5 games he still wont be rated in this because his team lost in those 5 games.

Calculation 2 - Assesses a player's performance in each game, by allocating points for actions that positively contribute to a winning performance such as shots, tackles, clearances and saves. It also takes points away from players for negative actions such as yellow/red cards and shots off target.

Probably the only one they actually get right here.

Calculation 3 - Allocates points based on time on the pitch.

Again handicaps the players on poor teams, if your a defender on a poor team your team is more than likely losing in the last say 10 minutes so who does a manager take off ? A defender so again this hinders players on poor teams not poor players.

Calculation 4 - Allocates points for goal scorers.

Using Gareth Barry as an example here, penalty takers (which he is) and forwards only really get rated here. If your a player on a poor team you don't get chances to score, again hinders players on poor teams.

Calculation 5 - Allocates points for assists.

Again only praises attacking players and defenders who play on attacking teams.

Calculation 6 - Allocates points for clean sheets.

Again imo another flawed stat as players on poor teams get handicapped also again you could be on a team that wins 5 straight games 2-1 but not get rated in this, I'm sure we've all seen goalkeepers play a great game and concede a goal but for us to say if it wasn't for the goalie it could have been 5 or 6 but it doesn't take this into account.


If you actually look at the top 100 on Actim you'll see that around 90% of them play on teams in the top 10 of the Premiership, does this mean that there aren't any good players playing on bottom 10 teams ? And I'd say around what 80% of the top 100 play on teams that are in the top 5, it's no coincidence that 9 of the top 21 are from Man Utd the top team in the Premiership. Heck I'm a washed up over the hill pub player with a dodgy knee and if I played for Man Utd their that good they could carry me and still win games and I'd be rated fair high up the Actim charts

[mlyons]

Well, you realize that the main reason good teams are good is because they have better players, right? There isn't some sort of discriminatory technique against lower-half teams that makes them lose games; their players just don't have as much quality as those on upper-half teams. Granted, one player out of eleven can't turn a poor team into a contender, but if Wigan (for example) really had that many excellent players, wouldn't they be doing a little better than 15th place? In a sport where it's so difficult to objectively measure individual contribution for most positions, don't you have to rely somewhat on how well a team does with a given player in the lineup? Because, honestly, individual observation by a fan -- especially a fan who sees the same team in the majority of his viewing -- isn't going to give you any sort of accurate evaluation of a player. Unless you've seen every other left back in the Premiership as often as you've seen Baines, you're not going to be able to come up with an objective evaluation of his ability, so it's important to rely on some outside source as a counterbalance to your personal observations. I'm just asking if you've seen any sort of objective outside source that rates Baines as highly as you feel he deserves.

[Muppetus Galacticus]

In case someone doesn't want to know, here is something from the Spurs v Watford match

*** Spolier in White ***

"You'll think I'm joking here but believe me, I'm not... Paul Robinson's free-kick from his own half is left by Watford defender Lloyd Doyley, bounces and then sails over Watford keeper Ben Foster's head. Unbelievable. England's number one scores against his deputy. Training should be fun this week."

[ukhotstove]

Originally Posted by mlyons

Well, you realize that the main reason good teams are good is because they have better players, right? There isn't some sort of discriminatory technique against lower-half teams that makes them lose games; their players just don't have as much quality as those on upper-half teams. Granted, one player out of eleven can't turn a poor team into a contender, but if Wigan (for example) really had that many excellent players, wouldn't they be doing a little better than 15th place? In a sport where it's so difficult to objectively measure individual contribution for most positions, don't you have to rely somewhat on how well a team does with a given player in the lineup? Because, honestly, individual observation by a fan -- especially a fan who sees the same team in the majority of his viewing -- isn't going to give you any sort of accurate evaluation of a player. Unless you've seen every other left back in the Premiership as often as you've seen Baines, you're not going to be able to come up with an objective evaluation of his ability, so it's important to rely on some outside source as a counterbalance to your personal observations. I'm just asking if you've seen any sort of objective outside source that rates Baines as highly as you feel he deserves.

But I don't just see the same team playing I also see the opposition and 9 times out of 10 Baines is the best leftback in the game that's how I come up with the observation that he should be given a chance at leftback in front of players like Phil Neville who I've actually seen play on the same field as Baines on a few occasions.

You kind of look at thinks as black and white, if teams are good then it means all their players are good and if teams are poor then all their players are poor and if players are in the actim stats (which most of the pro teams in Europe don't use they actually use the Opta stats) then it means their the best players.

But having seen your location I'd like to know how you come up with the conclusion that other players should be given a chance instead of Baines, you see football is one of a very few sports were watching it on TV doesn't give you the full view of the game or how players play.

Example being a forward, he may not score a goal in a game nor even have an assist in a game but he could have opened up chances for the other players by pulling a defender out of position something you probably wont see on a TV screen.

See in other sports you can see things in black & white, baseball if a player gets a hit or a homerun or strikes a player out, it doesn't matter if he's running round in the outfield and the ball never goes near him it doesn't effect the game where in football it does but there's no stat for that, when you watch Ice Hockey, Football (NFL & College) and Basketball on TV you can pretty much see every player the whole game so it's easier to rate those players than it is football players.

And you go on about "if Wigan had that many excellent players" who said that ? Because I know I didn't, I know Wigan don't have excellent players they have some decent players in Baines (works his socks off but never gets shown on TV), Heskey (another who works his socks off but never gets shown on TV), Camara (when he decides to show up) De Zeeuw (but getting too old and doesn't last a season), Filan (good goalkeeper but retiring end of season), Taylor (lost alot with two bad injuries and a raw talent), Kilbane (waste of space), McCulloch (one of the better players at Wigan), Hall (another one who isn't consistant enough) Boyce (had a great season may even be Latics player of the season along with Baines and Heskey), Kirkland (goes missing in action every now and again that's why I don't think he's Englands No1).

Like you see I don't suffer from homerism as you stated, I know the limitations and the pluses of Wigan players and other people do so as well that's why players and managers alike have said Baines deserves a chance and that's why teams are after Baines.

[rangers85]

Wow, that was a load of BS from the refs in the Blackburn/West Ham match.

[mlyons]

Originally Posted by ukhotstove

Like you see I don't suffer from homerism as you stated, I know the limitations and the pluses of Wigan players and other people do so as well that's why players and managers alike have said Baines deserves a chance and that's why teams are after Baines.

All I want to know is who those other players and managers are who say Baines should be on the national team. I don't know -- I try to follow football as best as I can here in the US, but there's plenty I don't see. If there are expert observers who say Baines deserves the spot, I will happily concede the point. I'm saying I've never heard anyone say it before now, and I don't entirely trust the lone opinion of a Wigan fan over the man actually in charge of picking the national team and an (admittedly flawed but better than any available alternatives) objective rating system.

All I have to go by are the resources available to me, none of which (other than you) indicate to me that Baines would be a good choice for the national team. I'd love to be pointed towards different resources, though.