Your unpopular footballing opinions Mod warnings - post#128

Invertpyramid

Fescue wrote: »

I often wonder are Barstoolers fans of alcohol who enhance their drinking experience with football or fans of football who enhance their football watching with alcohol?

It's all about the alcohol. They would still be in there drinking if there was no game on.

Fescue

Invertpyramid wrote: »

It's all about the alcohol. They would still be in there drinking if there was no game on.

I have a lot of respect for fans of drinking. They're what keeps the standard of pubs so high in Ireland, meaning we don't lose drinkers abroad to foreign pubs at a young age.

adox

MarkSRFC21 wrote: »

Barstooler

Should be your sig.

Darkglasses

MarkSRFC21, this isn't a thread for you to grill people about how they watch football, so stay out of this thread, thanks.

Will I Amnt

8-10 wrote: »

There really should be a LOI v Barstoolers Superthread

It would just be LOI heads, the rest of us don't really care.

Turtyturd

Couple of posters with a bit of a shoulder on their chip.

8-10

Turtyturd wrote: »

Couple of posters with a bit of a shoulder on their chip.

Is that a Suarez reference?

Omackeral

Will I Amnt wrote: »

It would just be LOI heads, the rest of us don't really care.

Here's a shocker. 95% of LOI 'heads' enjoy watching football on tv too, even the all evil EPL!

Will I Amnt

Omackeral wrote: »

Here's a shocker. 95% of LOI 'heads' enjoy watching football on tv too, even the all evil EPL!

I never said otherwise.

Fescue

Omackeral wrote: »

Here's a shocker. 95% of LOI 'heads' enjoy watching football on tv too, even the all evil EPL!

95% of barstoolers don't enjoy watching LOI unfortunately.

Omackeral

Will I Amnt wrote: »

I never said otherwise.

Fair enough. It's just some people seem to think that LOI supporters are just martyrs for their own clubs and forsake all else. Most would watch the Premier League regularly too.

CSF

Turtyturd wrote: »

Couple of posters with a bit of a shoulder on their chip.

You one of them seemingly.

Fuhrer

Will I Amnt wrote: »

It would just be LOI heads, the rest of us don't really care.

As someone who goes to LOI games, id rather be on the barstooler side.


Intolerable bunch

OwaynOTT

I've a confession to make, I actually don't watch football at all as I'm too busy typing my posts in the match threads.

I'm what you would call a sap.

trashcan

Fescue wrote: »

95% of barstoolers don't enjoy watching LOI unfortunately.

Their loss.

CSF

Fuhrer wrote: »

As someone who goes to LOI games, id rather be on the barstooler side.


Intolerable bunch

Who?

Nuri Sahin

Mr Blobby wrote: »

While I agree with a lot of what you said, I still think you're wrong about a few things.

Ozil had been called average and has been called out quite often by plenty of the media and people here. For me he is being singled out not because he's an Arsenal player, but mainly because he cost an awful lot. Yet for all the stick he gets he had an extremely similar season to David Silva.. A player who's had plenty of praise and par 2 extra goals had practically identical stats all while playing beside better players.

His form for Germany has been Ok but not nearly as bad as some very silly people would have you think. He's playing in a team that really isn't suited to his style.
He has Howedes at LB.. A player who rarely ever makes runs down the line.
Kroos in the middle who doesn't really ever make runs and instead likes to stay centre, and Klose up top who's to slow which makes it very difficult for anyone to pass to him.

Either Way I think the criticism of Ozil had been way over the top, all while players like Hazard,the entire Spain team and plenty of others aren't even mentioned.

I'll stick to the World Cup for this if you don't mind, as I really don't have much of an opinion on Silva this season, to be honest.

I'll give you that, Howedes at LB is a problem, undoubtedly, anyone who has seen my posts regarding Germany in their matchthreads knows how much it annoys the bejesus out of me seeing him play there and Durm not get a single minute of action, despite being very impressive at LB for Borussia Dortmund this past season.

In saying that, for someone of Ozil's ability, I can't excuse his lackluster performances because of him the issue of LB.

Sure, in the case, I might as well excuse Hazard too. Again, in matchthreads until they were knocked out, I've been lambasting the likes of Oscar, who is overhyped beyond proportion, talented no doubt, but overhyped nonetheless by some. Then there is Mr. Hazard. Hazard for me has been the flop of the tournment and I have been fairly relentless at times admittedly, because it genuinely confuses me why he's getting nowhere near the stick he deserves. At least with Oscar, you can point towards his form nose diving ever since the first couple of months at the start of last season. That's an indictment on Scolari's absurd stubbornness, which like Oscar, he's seemingly getting little flack for, amongst his tactics and persisting with players who should nowhere be the squad let alone the starting eleven.

Back to Ozil, he's been 'ok' as you said, he's had his moments. Little runs here and there, and some superb passes, but when I compare him to the World Cup four years ago.. well, he was a different player. A much more involved player, someone who while still disappeared late-ish into games, you could excuse him due to what he put in into the opening hour.

Kroos has been the outstanding midfielder for me.
Schurrle has had very positive impact from the off the bench.
Muller does his thing and he does it mighty well.
Schweini has had a couple of very good games, some less so.
Khedira like Schweini.
'The Traitor' (I could call him far worse, but I have people trying to get me banned, so I won't) has been getting lambasted by the non-Bayern pro press, believe you me and while I'm delighted at that.

Ozil has a chance to turn an 'ok' World Cup into a very good one though this Sunday. It's been too many years since his last standout performance for country against notable opposition. While I wanted Loew and somewhat Bayern to fail miserably, I do hope he does have a good game.

Oh, and anyone getting upset with the Daily Mail piece the other day is an fool (again, can't say what I want to say about that paper, but you get the point) btw. I read a Daily Mail piece if I need a laugh (the comment section is quite funny).

markcahill1985

I think Fellaini deserves another crack at United, has been tarnished by association with Moyes (and being rubbish last year) Think he deserves a chance to impress LVG util Xmas.

bucketybuck

Opinion: The majority of football fans don't actually care about quality football and wouldn't know it if it kicked them up the backside.

There are a lot of hipsters who like to post about how they watch certain games "for the football" :rolleyes:, when the fact is that most fans would far rather have the Sky sports hype and drama than a respectable football match.

To illustrate, say you have a match between 22 of the greatest players to ever play the game, they are playing under aliases as just random guys, and the game has no build up, no commentary, no analysis and no buzz around it whatsoever. On the other channel you have Stoke v Newcastle Monday Night LIVE!!!

The majority of fans would be bored by the first match. They would turn to the Sky Sports match and enjoy it far more regardless of its quality. People like to knock the Sky Sports style excitement when in fact the enjoyment of football for most fans is all the better for it.

marienbad

bucketybuck wrote: »

Opinion: The majority of football fans don't actually care about quality football and wouldn't know it if it kicked them up the backside.

There are a lot of hipsters who like to post about how they watch certain games "for the football" :rolleyes:, when the fact is that most fans would far rather have the Sky sports hype and drama than a respectable football match.

To illustrate, say you have a match between 22 of the greatest players to ever play the game, they are playing under aliases as just random guys, and the game has no build up, no commentary, no analysis and no buzz around it whatsoever. On the other channel you have Stoke v Newcastle Monday Night LIVE!!!

The majority of fans would be bored by the first match. They would turn to the Sky Sports match and enjoy it far more regardless of its quality. People like to knock the Sky Sports style excitement when in fact the enjoyment of football for most fans is all the better for it.

would you be one of that 'majority' ?

Mickeroo

bucketybuck wrote: »

Opinion: The majority of football fans don't actually care about quality football and wouldn't know it if it kicked them up the backside.

There are a lot of hipsters who like to post about how they watch certain games "for the football" :rolleyes:, when the fact is that most fans would far rather have the Sky sports hype and drama than a respectable football match.

To illustrate, say you have a match between 22 of the greatest players to ever play the game, they are playing under aliases as just random guys, and the game has no build up, no commentary, no analysis and no buzz around it whatsoever. On the other channel you have Stoke v Newcastle Monday Night LIVE!!!

The majority of fans would be bored by the first match. They would turn to the Sky Sports match and enjoy it far more regardless of its quality. People like to knock the Sky Sports style excitement when in fact the enjoyment of football for most fans is all the better for it.

Yes most would rather watch a competitive league game than a friendly.

Smithwicks Man

Unpopular opinions:

1. Just because a game finishes 0-0 doesn't mean it was a bore draw. There's been many 0-0 games I've watched (including a couple in this WC) where you're on the edge of your seat from start to finish.

2. The price that the English Clubs pay for players, especially English players, is farcical. There's almost always a better player in the same position available for two-thirds of the price on the continent and clubs in the other European leagues wouldn't dream of paying the same money for these players.

thelad95

Not sure if this is unpopular or even 'hipster' but the fact so few English players play outside the English league show a general decline in the standard of English players and not that the EPL is so good players don't need to leave.

bucketybuck

marienbad wrote: »

would you be one of that 'majority' ?

Yes I would. As I get older I have gotten far more realistic about why I am watching certain sports, teams or games.

The Italian league could be far better football than the Premier league but the vast majority of fans will not get as much enjoyment from watching it.

bucketybuck

Mickeroo wrote: »

Yes most would rather watch a competitive league game than a friendly.

Who said it was a friendly? You just attributed the friendly tag to it because it had no buzz or hype, showing that it is the hype that makes a game competitive, not the quality.

Mickeroo

bucketybuck wrote: »

Who said it was a friendly? You just attributed the friendly tag to it because it had no buzz or hype, showing that it is the hype that makes a game competitive, not the quality.

No, I know Monday night live on sky is generally a premier league match so it should be competitive. There's rarely any buzz or hype around a Newcastle vs Stoke match. What teams are the incognito legends playing for? Is there a trophy up for grabs? I find it very hard to sit through a match if there's nothing at stake regardless of who the players are.

bucketybuck

Mickeroo wrote: »

I find it very hard to sit through a match if there's nothing at stake regardless of who the players are.

And regardless of the quality, which was my point.

Generally what is at stake is whatever the hype machine has told you is at stake. Take that away and you have a product that most fans don't actually want to watch.

Mickeroo

bucketybuck wrote: »

And regardless of the quality, which was my point.

Generally what is at stake is whatever the hype machine has told you is at stake. Take that away and you have a product that most fans don't actually want to watch.

I'd rather watch an actual grand prix than a bunch of greats in a race that means nothing. You take the stakes out of any sport and it's boring. What you're describing is the very nature of competitive sport and why we watch it in the first place.

Marty McFly

Smithwicks Man wrote: »

.

2. The price that the English Clubs pay for players, especially English players, is farcical. There's almost always a better player in the same position available for two-thirds of the price on the continent and clubs in the other European leagues wouldn't dream of paying the same money for these players.

Don't think that an unpopular opinion most people hold that view that if EPL team buys English they always overpay.

bucketybuck

Mickeroo wrote: »

I'd rather watch an actual grand prix than a bunch of greats in a race that means nothing. You take the stakes out of any sport and it's boring. What you're describing is the very nature of competitive sport and why we watch it in the first place.

Who are you arguing against?

My original point was that despite all the people who like to talk about the quality of football (for example Spain being better quality than the Premiership), for the majority of fans the actual quality is utterly irrelevant. Dress the LOI up in all the Sky Sports hype and people would prefer to watch it ahead of some better league.

More to the point, most fans couldn't judge the quality anyway, they base their opinions on the hype and not on their own knowledge of the game.

bucketybuck

thelad95 wrote: »

Not sure if this is unpopular or even 'hipster' but the fact so few English players play outside the English league show a general decline in the standard of English players and not that the EPL is so good players don't need to leave.

But very few English players ever played outside of England, its hardly a new thing.

Mickeroo

bucketybuck wrote: »

Who are you arguing against?

My original point was that despite all the people who like to talk about the quality of football (for example Spain being better quality than the Premiership), for the majority of fans the actual quality is utterly irrelevant. Dress the LOI up in all the Sky Sports hype and people would prefer to watch it ahead of some better league.

More to the point, most fans couldn't judge the quality anyway, they base their opinions on the hype and not on their own knowledge of the game.

I agree with your point in that case but That's not what you described though, you described the options as being Newcastle vs Stoke or a game with two teams made up of the best players ever, but not using their real names and also there would be no advertising or anything basically a secret game.

A better analogy would be having Newcastle vs Stoke on one channel, have it be a cracker of a game and have United vs Liverpool on the other channel and it be dull as dish water. More people would still watch the boring game because of the hype (except for Stoke/Newcastle supporters obviously).

Smithwicks Man

Marty McFly wrote: »

Don't think that an unpopular opinion most people hold that view that if EPL team buys English they always overpay.

Yes but I don't think people understand how much they overpay.

Adam Lallana and Luke Shaw, for example, cost a combined total of €70m which is fairly outrageous yet there doesn't seem to be a word about it.

Smithwicks Man

bucketybuck wrote: »

Who are you arguing against?

My original point was that despite all the people who like to talk about the quality of football (for example Spain being better quality than the Premiership), for the majority of fans the actual quality is utterly irrelevant. Dress the LOI up in all the Sky Sports hype and people would prefer to watch it ahead of some better league.

More to the point, most fans couldn't judge the quality anyway, they base their opinions on the hype and not on their own knowledge of the game.

You have to consider that the majority like watching the Premiership because they support a team playing in the league which makes a difference.

Take this example - You support Sunderland who are hovering in 17th near the end of the season. On one channel Hull City are playing Norwich in a drab affair with no real sign of quality from either side and the game is hyped up to the extreme as a relegation battle.

On another channel El Clasico is on which is a scintillating affair with a much higher calibre of player on show.

I'm guessing the majority will still watch the first game because it would have an effect on the team they're supporting, not because they've been brainwashed into following the hype machine.


I personally don't think the Premiership is the best league in the world and find it cringeworthy the way every Sky Sports pundit says it every chance they get. There's absolutely no evidence to back up such a claim. It's the same way SSN make it out that every English player who shows even a glimpse of quality could go on to be the best in the world.

bucketybuck

Mickeroo wrote: »

A better analogy would be having Newcastle vs Stoke on one channel, have it be a cracker of a game and have United vs Liverpool on the other channel and it be dull as dish water. More people would still watch the boring game because of the hype (except for Stoke/Newcastle supporters obviously).

Well, I was just trying to differentiate between a game of pure quality and a game of lesser quality, and which of the two the average fan would take more enjoyment from. But your example does indeed work better.

Smithwicks Man wrote: »

I personally don't think the Premiership is the best league in the world and find it cringeworthy the way every Sky Sports pundit says it every chance they get. There's absolutely no evidence to back up such a claim. It's the same way SSN make it out that every English player who shows even a glimpse of quality could go on to be the best in the world.

But its in the fans interests that they say it every chance they get. That very hype is increasing the perceived stakes in every game and thus the perceived value the fans take from the games. Without that Sky Sports hype you just have men running around a field.

Smithwicks Man

bucketybuck wrote: »

But its in the fans interests that they say it every chance they get. That very hype is increasing the perceived stakes in every game and thus the perceived value the fans take from the games.

Obviously. Of course they're going to hype it up to the last. It's a business.

What exactly is your point?

bucketybuck wrote: »

Without that Sky Sports hype you just have men running around a field.

And without the men you just have a field

DeanAustin

Luis Suarez will be a failure at Barcelona.

The_Kew_Tour

he will do alright, but will have a breakdown here and there

Just want Thank You for today(
technically yesterday) Suarez.

DeanAustin

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

he will do alright, but will have a breakdown here and there

Just want Thank You for today(
technically yesterday) Suarez.

We'll see. I think he's a very good player but I'm not convinced he's at the level Barcelona obviously think he is (the Messi, Ronaldo, Bale level). Allied to a suspect temperament, I can see either ending in tears or with egg on my face.

Smithwicks Man

DeanAustin wrote: »

We'll see. I think he's a very good player but I'm not convinced he's at the level Barcelona obviously think he is (the Messi, Ronaldo, Bale level). Allied to a suspect temperament, I can see either ending in tears or with egg on my face.

Suarez is most definitely at Bale's level.

DeanAustin

Smithwicks Man wrote: »

Suarez is most definitely at Bale's level.

We will see. Proof of the pudding will be in the eating next season. Bale's done very well at a much higher level and coped with a lot of pressure because of his fee.

I'm betting Suarez won't do likewise.

Smithwicks Man

DeanAustin wrote: »

We will see. Proof of the pudding will be in the eating next season. Bale's done very well at a much higher level and coped with a lot of pressure because of his fee.

I'm betting Suarez won't do likewise.

I'd say Suarez will do just fine at Barcelona. Based on their performances over the last 2 years I'd definitely have them at the same level.

Will be very hard for him to live up to his £75m transfer fee though as not many players are worth that.

Bale hasn't lived up to his I don't think (not saying he didn't have a great season but his fee was far too inflated to begin with) and Neymar certainly hasn't lived up to his in his first season either.

Liamalone

That Suarez went for £64m and is cheap at that.

Will I Amnt

The role of captain has almost completely diminished to the point where it loses all importance.
In many cases it's just handed to the star player regardless of personality or presence on the pitch. Messi and Ronaldo both captain their countries, the former being one of the least vocal players I've ever seen and the other the most self obsessed player in the history of the game.

Not having an armband won't stop the strong, vocal players from getting their instructions across or encouraging their teammates. Leading the team out and standing beside the referee while he tosses a coin have become the main duties of a captain nowadays.
They could do away with the role completely and it wouldn't affect the game in the slightest.

Optimalprimerib

ROCKMAN wrote: »

Only proper way to watch football is in the pub with a lovely pint and a kick ass 60 inch TV.
You get to see everything instead of been stuck at the game where you miss 95% of what is going on.
:pac:

I know your pulling the piss but I watched the brazil columbia game in the pub and thought brazil dominated the game. It was only when I came home I found out how cynical they were. The pub for me is the worst place to watch a game.

shamrock55

Will I Amnt wrote: »

The role of captain has almost completely diminished to the point where it loses all importance.
In many cases it's just handed to the star player regardless of personality or presence on the pitch. Messi and Ronaldo both captain their countries, the former being one of the least vocal players I've ever seen and the other the most self obsessed player in the history of the game.

Not having an armband won't stop the strong, vocal players from getting their instructions across or encouraging their teammates. Leading the team out and standing beside the referee while he tosses a coin have become the main duties of a captain nowadays.
They could do away with the role completely and it wouldn't affect the game in the slightest.

Just look at argentina against holland, messi as captain,but who was rallying the troops before and during et, mr mascherano (i know he used to be captain)

Optimalprimerib

Fescue wrote: »

Do you watch football at home on the TV?

When you watch it do you watch it on a hd 60 inch tv? If you dont you clearly have not invested in the sport you love and therefore are not a real fan

The vast majority of football fans in Ireland haven't a clue.

Sanity_Saviour

bucketybuck wrote: »

Well, I was just trying to differentiate between a game of pure quality and a game of lesser quality, and which of the two the average fan would take more enjoyment from. But your example does indeed work better.



But its in the fans interests that they say it every chance they get. That very hype is increasing the perceived stakes in every game and thus the perceived value the fans take from the games. Without that Sky Sports hype you just have men running around a field.

I think people on boards are far too interested in proving that they "don't buy the Sky hype" and that every time the media/sky sports come close to praising someone, people fall over themselves to disagree. I find it bizarre.

This wasn't aimed at you by the way just the site in general.

auldgranny

DeanAustin wrote: »

Luis Suarez will be a failure at Barcelona.

Seem to remember a lot of people said that about Bale going to RM