Common "beliefs" that annoy you

flahavaj

stumpypeeps wrote: »

So you need a subscription to Sky, ESPN and Setanta or you're a moron. Your embarrassing yourself now.

FFS stumpy what are you on today? Do you honestly believe that seeing a guy maybe once or twice a season in the knockout stages of the CL is enough to make an informed opinion on the guy?

I don't have a subscription to any of those stations btw.

eagle eye

Melion wrote: »

Well when i started this thread, i never thought it would result in people defending a clueluess buffoon like John Giles.

Well I didn't expect anything about an Irish legend who was a brilliant analyst and writer about top level British football for at least 25 years to come up.

The man is 70 years of age and he may be living off his reputation a bit now but calling him a clueless buffoon is ridiculous. It actually annoys me when somebody says something so offensive about such a great Irishman.

stumpypeeps

flahavaj wrote: »

Its not about personal dislike. He seems like a very nice man. He's just lazy and unprofessional whe it comes to punditry.


There is a distinct lack of quality football pundits about at the moment. That in no way should be seen as a vindication of Giles and his laziness. Being lazy and unprofessional in a sea of mediocrity is embarrassing in itself.

Good pundits - Richie Sadlier, Steve McManaman, Gabrielle Marcotti, Dietmar Hamann, Sid Lowe have al struck me as above average in the last while.

The highlighted ones actually nicely disprove this load of absolute boll*x below btw.

Marcotti and Lowe are European football correspondents for Sports Illustrated and the Guardian. Hardly pundits.

I can't comment on the others, seen them maybe once or twice. Not enough to base a credible opinion on them. :pac:

Blatter

DB10 wrote: »

Are you kidding me?

Those guys clearly know very little outside the PL either.

Jamie Redknapp better than Giles, dear oh dear, where am I....

stumpypeeps wrote: »

Lol. Wilkins and Redknapp? Sycophantic clowns.

Christ.

I'm not commenting about how good they are as pundits, I'm stating that they clearly do more bloody research before a game than Giles bothers to and have a much better knowledge of basic facts on the clubs they are analysing.

But yeah, change the angle of the debate to suit yourselves.

Fuzzy_Dunlop

DB10 wrote: »

I agree actually, based on the last 5 years his signings have been okay but not great.

Silvestre
Squallaci
Almunia
Denilson - 4m
Koscielny - 10m
Arshavin - debatable
Gallas + 5m for Ashley Cole :rolleyes:
Baptista
Diarra
Amaury Bischoff


Some of them just were not upto scratch at all, and therefore some criticism is warranted.

You could make a similar list for every single manager out there. Also you listed a load of players that cost fuck all, Baptista was a loan and Bischoff was free and only really played in the reserves. The most expensive player there is Koscielny who has done well since christmas and will most likely be better next year as he's now settled.

Diarra was a great signing for £2m and it was down to himself wanting out that he was let go.

Melion

eagle eye wrote: »

Well I didn't expect anything about an Irish legend who was a brilliant analyst and writer about top level British football for at least 25 years to come up.

The man is 70 years of age and he may be living off his reputation a bit now but calling him a clueless buffoon is ridiculous. It actually annoys me when somebody says something so offensive about such a great Irishman.

So if he was english it would be ok to criticise him?

killwill

stumpypeeps wrote: »

I don't see how that matters. Scoring a hat trick against Almeria proves nothing. Performing well in the Champions league against your biggest rivals is what its all about.
I missed the Copa Del Rey final but in the other el Clasico's he was awful.

That is ridiculous, what "it is about" is judging a player week in, week out not on 2 games a season.

flahavaj

stumpypeeps wrote: »

Marcotti and Lowe are European football correspondents for Sports Illustrated and the Guardian. Hardly pundits.

I can't comment on the others, seen them maybe once or twice. Not enough to base a credible opinion on them. :pac:

They regularly give their opinions on football on podcasts and radio shows and sometimes on TV. Therefore they're pundits.

stumpypeeps

flahavaj wrote: »

FFS stumpy what are you on today? Do you honestly believe that seeing a guy maybe once or twice a season in the knockout stages of the CL is enough to make an informed opinion on the guy?

I don't have a subscription to any of those stations btw.

Either you're spending too much time on the pub or watching matches illegally on the internet.

I hope its not the latter. I couldn't respect any mans opinion that was formed through illegal activities.

flahavaj

Fuzzy_Dunlop wrote: »

You could make a similar list for every single manager out there. Also you listed a load of players that cost fuck all, Baptista was a loan and Bischoff was free and only really played in the reserves. The most expensive player there is Koscielny who has done well since christmas and will most likely be better next year as he's now settled.

Diarra was a great signing for £2m and it was down to himself wanting out that he was let go.

Not to mention he left out excellent signings like Nasri, Chamakh, Sagna, Vermaelan, Ramsey that wer also made in the time period he's describing.

flahavaj

stumpypeeps wrote: »

Either you're spending too much time on the pub or watching matches illegally on the internet.

I hope its not the latter. I couldn't respect any mans opinion that was formed through illegal activities.

I think you're the one who's been to the pub today tbh stumpy and you weren't watching soccer either! Deary me.

stumpypeeps

flahavaj wrote: »

They regularly give their opinions on football on podcasts and radio shows and sometimes on TV. Therefore they're pundits.

Two of the best opinions on the game you'll find. They are paid to research football daily as part of their jobs as journalists. Big difference to being a tv pundit.

eagle eye

Melion wrote: »

So if he was english it would be ok to criticise him?

Grow up.

flahavaj

stumpypeeps wrote: »

Two of the best opinions on the game you'll find. They are paid to research football daily as part of their jobs as journalists. Big difference to being a tv pundit.

Oh right. I guess Giles is writing his daily article for the Herald out of the goodness of his heart?

The man is paid by RTE AND a newspaper to give his opinions and he still doen't bother doing his homework.

Failing badly here stumpy.

Melion

eagle eye wrote: »

Grow up.

Thats not an answer

stumpypeeps

flahavaj wrote: »

I think you're the one who's been to the pub today tbh stumpy and you weren't watching soccer either! Deary me.

I think you're a little rattled. I'll leave you off for a while.

Good times.

eagle eye

Melion wrote: »

Thats not an answer

And its the reply you are getting to your non-answer.

DOC09UNAM

stumpypeeps wrote: »

Either you're spending too much time on the pub or watching matches illegally on the internet.

I hope its not the latter. I couldn't respect any mans opinion that was formed through illegal activities.

Watching the stream isn't illegal, hosting the stream is.

Revolution9

Following recent exhanges on this thread I'd like to express my displeasure at the belief that football forums are often used for open-minded, intelligent and rational debate :pac:

Melion

eagle eye wrote: »

And its the reply you are getting to your non-answer.

Non-answer?

You never asked me a question

You said that it annoys you to see people talking that way about such a great irishman. If he was english and i called him a clueless buffoon, would that be ok?

Frisbee

Yeah lads seriously back on topic or I'll get card happy...

eagle eye

Melion wrote: »

Non-answer?

You never asked me a question

You said that it annoys you to see people talking that way about such a great irishman. If he was english and i called him a clueless buffoon, would that be ok?

You just took the last line which was about how I'm personally annoyed by such comments about him and went with it. How about you address the full post if you want to have a discussion about it.

eugeneious

Fuzzy_Dunlop wrote: »

You could make a similar list for every single manager out there. Also you listed a load of players that cost fuck all, Baptista was a loan and Bischoff was free and only really played in the reserves. The most expensive player there is Koscielny who has done well since christmas and will most likely be better next year as he's now settled.

Diarra was a great signing for £2m and it was down to himself wanting out that he was let go.

Actually Arshavin cost around £14m-£16m, and Koscielney has been a very poor signing for the money spent on him. They have spent around £30m pounds on Arshavin, Squilaci and Koscielney and not a single one of them has shown they are good enough for the team. And Diarra wanted out because Wenger felt he wasn't good enough so he didn't play him, so the one good signing on that list was let out of the club.

Melion

Giles is clueless about anything outside the Premiership. Even his knowledge of that is a bit iffy. You can see that anytime he is on a CL game and stumblefúcks his way through his analysis.

Blatter

eugeneious wrote: »

Actually Arshavin cost around £14m-£16m, and Koscielney has been a very poor signing for the money spent on him. They have spent around £30m pounds on Arshavin, Squilaci and Koscielney and not a single one of them has shown they are good enough for the team. And Diarra wanted out because Wenger felt he wasn't good enough so he didn't play him, so the one good signing on that list was let out of the club.

Tbf, Arshavin has shown that he is good enough, he's just had a relatively poor 18 months.

I wouldn't write him off by any stretch.

flahavaj

Its fair to say indeed that we have learned today that there is a common belief that Giles is a good pundit, which IMO is utter boll*x.

Fuzzy_Dunlop

eugeneious wrote: »

Actually Arshavin cost around £14m-£16m, and Koscielney has been a very poor signing for the money spent on him. They have spent around £30m pounds on Arshavin, Squilaci and Koscielney and not a single one of them has shown they are good enough for the team. And Diarra wanted out because Wenger felt he wasn't good enough so he didn't play him, so the one good signing on that list was let out of the club.

Arshavin played a huge part in securing CL football the year he was signed so he was worth that kind of money in the end.

I disagree on Koscielny. I think he's gotten a bad reputation from mistakes early in the season but imo he is a good player. Although you're open to your own opinion on him as a player of course so we'll just have to disagree there.

Making £3m pound profit on a player that was at the club for a year I wouldn't consider to be bad transfer business. I agree that it would have been better to have kept him and played him for but from looking at the transfer side of things you can't really consider it bad business.

eagle eye

flahavaj wrote: »

Its fair to say indeed that we have learned today that there is a common belief that Giles is a good pundit, which IMO is utter boll*x.

I think there is only one person that has said he currently is a good pundit. Thats hardly a common belief.

flahavaj

eagle eye wrote: »

I think there is only one person that has said he currently is a good pundit. Thats hardly a common belief.

It was nothing more than a light hearted comment designed to raise a laugh or two, not a detailed straw poll of the current mood towards Johnnie Giles amongst the boards.ie soocer-following users.

Sir Gallagher

eagle eye wrote: »

Well I didn't expect anything about an Irish legend who was a brilliant analyst and writer about top level British football for at least 25 years to come up.

The man is 70 years of age and he may be living off his reputation a bit now but calling him a clueless buffoon is ridiculous. It actually annoys me when somebody says something so offensive about such a great Irishman.

Melion wrote: »

So if he was english it would be ok to criticise him?

Ah here, that's not what's being said at all, you probably know that though.

Revolution9

Lads, when I'm 70 and have amassed a wealth of experience in the game like Giles, me arse will I be researching Madrid and Barcelona playing against nothing clubs every week while I could be in the RTE green room sampling the coke and hookers on offer.

Giles has gotten lazy, but he has earned the right imo.

flahavaj

Revolution9 wrote: »

Lads, when I'm 70 and have amassed a wealth of experience in the game like Giles, me arse will I be researching Madrid and Barcelona playing against nothing clubs every week while I could be in the RTE green room sampling the coke and hookers on offer.

Giles has gotten lazy, but he has earned the right imo.

Not when he's still being paid to do the job he hasn't, with taxpayers money no less. If he's not prepared to make the effort, he shouldn't be doing it in the first place. I don't care who he is. He should just retire if he's just going to phone it in every week, give someone else a chance.

Frisbee

BACK ON TOPIC

flahavaj

Frisbee wrote: »

BACK ON TOPIC

I'm not being smart, but isn't the belief that Giles is any good as valid as any other common belief being discussed?

DOC09UNAM

It is to do with the topic?

Nailz

That penalty shoot-out's are a "lottery". Commonly peddled by the British media when England get knocked out of a tournament on penalties. Total bull.

Revolution9

flahavaj wrote: »

Not when he's still being paid to do the job he hasn't, with taxpayers money no less. If he's not prepared to make the effort, he shouldn't be doing it in the first place. I don't care who he is. He should just retire if he's just going to phone it in every week, give someone else a chance.

I'm surprised it bothers you that much that you brought out that taxpayers money line, usually reserved for hysterical rantings on trail blazing government ministers.

Giles can be funny to laugh at, and does correct Brady and any other pundits that may be on when they make their own foolish points. Promoting Kenny Cunnigham or some other bore is a step towards tedious Sky coverage. I much prefer outdated grumpy old men, than the likes of Cunnigham and Sadlier. Makes for better viewing in my opinion.

Anyway, does anyone tune into any televised football show hoping for insightful opinions?

Revolution9

Frisbee wrote: »

BACK ON TOPIC

How is it not on topic

Liam O

Revolution9 wrote: »

Lads, when I'm 70 and have amassed a wealth of experience in the game like Giles, me arse will I be researching Madrid and Barcelona playing against nothing clubs every week while I could be in the RTE green room sampling the coke and hookers on offer.

Giles has gotten lazy, but he has earned the right imo.

what would happen if you 'got lazy' in your job and just stopped doing any work? Doubt that would last too long. You think if Ryan Giggs or Gerrard or the likes decided that they'd just walk around doing nothing for 90 minutes because they have a wealth of experienced they wouldn't be out the door?

Roy Keane made a comment yesterday and got slated. He is probably the most successful Irish player of all time and yet his opinion is crap but Giles is god's gift to punditry?

CorkMan

That belief that Buffon is a better keeper than Casillas. So not true.

Blatter

Revolution9 wrote: »

How is it not on topic

I think the message was delivered with the other two posts. Let's not make a mountain out of a molehill now:)

Revolution9

Liam O wrote: »

what would happen if you 'got lazy' in your job and just stopped doing any work? Doubt that would last too long. You think if Ryan Giggs or Gerrard or the likes decided that they'd just walk around doing nothing for 90 minutes because they have a wealth of experienced they wouldn't be out the door?

Roy Keane made a comment yesterday and got slated. He is probably the most successful Irish player of all time and yet his opinion is crap but Giles is god's gift to punditry?

I don't have a job. I am lazy

I never said Giles is god's gift to pundrity I don't rate him as a pundit anymore. He is lazy. All I'm saying is that I'm not bothered with that fact, it doesn't annoy me and I'd still prefer a lazy Giles over a tedious bore like Kenny Cunnigham.

If Giggs or Gerrard got lazy they'd be dropped. Giles can be as lazy as he wants because of his reputation. Exploiting RTE's foolishness. Picking up a hefty wage and doing feck all work. And at 70 years of age, I'd do the exact same thing if I could!

Liam O

Revolution9 wrote: »

I don't have a job. I am lazy

I never said Giles is god's gift to pundrity I don't rate him as a pundit anymore. He is lazy. All I'm saying is that I'm not bothered with that fact, it doesn't annoy me and I'd still prefer a lazy Giles over a tedious bore like Kenny Cunnigham.

If Giggs or Gerrard got lazy they'd be dropped. Giles can be as lazy as he wants because of his reputation. Exploiting RTE's foolishness. Picking up a hefty wage and doing feck all work. And at 70 years of age, I'd do the exact same thing if I could!

fair enough...

Sir Gallagher

Not so much a common belief about the game but i don't get the common belief that Soccer AM is or ever was the absolutely hillarious show it's made out to be. Seems to be just a pack of gimps acting like gimps with a few funny football clips thrown in.

Revolution9

Sir Gallagher wrote: »

Not so much a common belief about the game but i don't get the common belief that Soccer AM is or ever was the absolutely hillarious show it's made out to be. Seems to be just a pack of gimps acting like gimps with a few funny football clips thrown in.

Was okay about 6 years ago. Never loved it.

Melion

Sir Gallagher wrote: »

Not so much a common belief about the game but i don't get the common belief that Soccer AM is or ever was the absolutely hillarious show it's made out to be. Seems to be just a pack of gimps acting like gimps with a few funny football clips thrown in.

It was amazing a few years ago, went rapidly downhill as soon as Tim Lovejoy left.

_blank_

Zebra3 wrote: »

Each has merits, but surely there is one that you prefer over the other?

Not really, I'd happily watch a match between two awesome passing teams, or a match between two teams mastering the art of defending, or a mix of both.

I think it is extremely absorbing watching a well drilled defensive unit shutting out a flairy passing side (Jose's Inter at the Nou Camp for instance, a master class in two banks of four stopping everything thrown at them, made harder for them with the man sent off, as they hadn't really an option to start an attack, and certainly would have been very stupid to even think about it).

It's beautiful to see brilliant defenders doing their thing, one of my heroes growing up was Franco Baresi.

That's not to say I prefer it to amazing attacking exploits, I don't.

Zebra3 wrote: »

I prefer (and see it as superior) watching teams playing passing attacking football without resorting to cheating, however I can also respect the ability of a team to defend as you suggest without resorting to cheating.

And that's your prerogative, but I think it's a fairly snobbish to say a defensive set-up is inferior to an attacking one.

Zebra3 wrote: »

Phrases like "park the bus" are trotted out in the media by moronic ex-pros trying to sound intelligent, and usually repeated by people who have no understanding of the game.

I know that, and it's those people I don't like, they don't appreciate defenders.

A football team is made up of attackers and defenders, one is not more important or integral to the team than the others.

spiralism

The notion that, every time Rangers fans act the bollix, that "it's an old firm thing" and "they're only as bad as each other"

Fr Tod Umptious

The notion that, every time Celtic fans act the bollix, that "it's an old firm thing" and "they're only as bad as each other"

Fromvert

When praising goalkeepers the phrase ''he's a good shot stopper'' always gets mentioned as some sort of defining factor in how good they are.

Every keeper is, the difference between the best and the rest is concentration, decision making, commanding their area, distribution, organising and talking to the defenders.