Chelsea v Manchester United FA Cup Match Thread k/o 19.45 BBC.

Giggsy11

Andersonisgod wrote: »

That's work if Sky or BBC compiled such a list. But they haven't. You have, and, due to your agenda, are an untrustworthy source. As I say, because your figures come from a variety of sources and, considering your agenda, your research is open to question.

Also, since you keep talking about trust and such, both Sky and The Guardian (2 sources you used to compile your data) posted articles stating Man Utd to be the most expensive squad in football history, citing the CIES research. So now are you questioning the validity of the sources of your own research?

So, while your cursing and playing to the crowd, I'm debating, and, as you can see, I'm rather good at it.

You do know that Guardian, Sky is not a person but a big press association with many journalists working for them? It doesn't take much for an ignorant journalist to repost some of the **** articles.

You are not debating, all you are saying is you don't believe unless some papers report it. If that was the case you are fool to even ask me to post the numbers. Why did you even ask me to post it?

Still you have not debated on any numbers except that some journalist didn't compile the list.

You are acting ignorant and it's so obvious why.

Giggsy11

weldoninhio wrote: »

The CIES Football Observatory in Switzerland and Sky Sports along with many other sports sites disagrees with you. United current squad cost £623m according to them. Real was £553m and City £533m.

One more AIG? The numbers are from BBC and Sky.

CIES is a joke site.

weldoninhio

Giggsy11 wrote: »

One more AIG? The numbers are from BBC and Sky.

CIES is a joke site.

AIG?? Sky reported the same.

Giggsy11

weldoninhio wrote: »

AIG?? Sky reported the same.

1 sky journalist re-posted the article from the CIES observation.

For example CIES also reported that from their study Jones was the best U23 CB in the world in 2015, Independent, ESPN, Dailymail all reported the same news citing CIES as the source.

Smalling was rated as top 3 CB in the world, several papers including Independent reported it.

6 months later they released one more article about their rankings, in Nov 2015

Otamendi was the best CB in the world and Sakho was the 3rd best. 4th Davide Astori and 5th Aritz Elustondo

Arouna Kone was rated as the 4th best forward ahead of Aguero.

Says all about their studies.

GavRedKing

I think we can all agree that Utd are very expensive squad and arent getting enough bang for their buck which is all emphasised by the displays or lack thereof from Pogba when it really matters.

In no sense of the word should a world record signing be not up to speed with a squad or league some 7 months into the season.

I've seen excuses on twitter saying hes only 23, well hes 24 tomorrow, hes a man, this isnt some kid whos come in from the U18s, he doesnt get the excuse of being a kid or a young player, not when you've played in major tournaments for your country and UCL finals and won titles in Italy..

Utd paid well above the odds for Pogba, I still think he'll come good at Utd next year but the excuses for him have to stop.

I'd be disappointed if I was a Utd fan because whether they have the most expensive or 2nd most expensive squad, theyre not doing well enough in the league, IMO.

Nalz

Yay, comparing costs of squads! Like we all know how much players really cost and lets ignore the wages and the money they pull in from advertisements/merchanizing bla bla bla

weldoninhio

Giggsy11 wrote: »

1 sky journalist re-posted the article from the CIES observation.

For example CIES also reported that from their study Jones was the best U23 CB in the world in 2015, Independent, ESPN, Dailymail all reported the same news citing CIES as the source.

Smalling was rated as top 3 CB in the world, several papers including Independent reported it.

6 months later they released one more article about their rankings, in Nov 2015

Otamendi was the best CB in the world and Sakho was the 3rd best. 4th Davide Astori and 5th Aritz Elustondo

Arouna Kone was rated as the 4th best forward ahead of Aguero.

Says all about their studies.

Yeah, one Swiss think tank who studies football vs the word of a biased Utd fan online. Which one should I believe??

Giggsy11

weldoninhio wrote: »

Yeah, one Swiss think tank who studies football vs the word of a biased Utd fan online. Which one should I believe??

No wonder I called you AIG. Numbers that are reported by BBC and Sky are infront of you and you still are ignorant.

Nalz

GavRedKing wrote: »

I'd be disappointed if I was a Utd fan because whether they have the most expensive or 2nd most expensive squad, theyre not doing well enough in the league, IMO.

After 3 years of muck, both from a results point of view and style of play... there is obvious progress.

Its Mourinhos first season, and he's tried to change the style of play for the better and put in a brand new spine throughout the team. Bailly -- Pogba -- Miki -- Ibra. They've all had their issues and some still do.

Sure, in the League we expected more, but would we even be having this conversation if one or two of the Arsenal, Burnely, Stoke or Bournemouth drawn games had finished as victories? Where would United be?

They'd be League cup champs, quarter finalists of FA cup, Europa league well in contention and possibly 3rd or 4th in the league. The league is way more competitive this year. Spurs have upped it, City have upped it, Liverpool and Chelsea have defo upped it. Only teams not producing at the same level are Arsenal and Leicester.

I know if "ifs and ands were pots and pans" etc... but we're talking about assumming two goals go in to win any of those drawn games where they dominated. Okay, drawing those games instead of putting them to bed tells a story in itself... but I know Jose is on the right road here.

Its his first season at a giant club which needs serious surgery still. To have 2nd in the league still in their own hands plus a chance to add Europa league to the carling cup is not a bad season. Its not an amazing season, but Christ look at the players who have left or declined since the Fergie days.

sReq | uTeK

Nalz wrote: »

After 3 years of muck, both from a results point of view and style of play... there is obvious progress.

Its Mourinhos first season, and he's tried to change the style of play for the better and put in a brand new spine throughout the team. Bailly -- Pogba -- Miki -- Ibra. They've all had their issues and some still do.

Sure, in the League we expected more, but would we even be having this conversation if one or two of the Arsenal, Burnely, Stoke or Bournemouth drawn games had finished as victories? Where would United be?

They'd be League cup champs, quarter finalists of FA cup, Europa league well in contention and possibly 3rd or 4th in the league. The league is way more competitive this year. Spurs have upped it, City have upped it, Liverpool and Chelsea have defo upped it. Only teams not producing at the same level are Arsenal and Leicester.

I know if "ifs and ands were pots and pans" etc... but we're talking about assumming two goals go in to win any of those drawn games where they dominated. Okay, drawing those games instead of putting them to bed tells a story in itself... but I know Jose is on the right road here.

Its his first season at a giant club which needs serious surgery still. To have 2nd in the league still in their own hands plus a chance to add Europa league to the carling cup is not a bad season. Its not an amazing season, but Christ look at the players who have left or declined since the Fergie days.

HOW DARE YOU CITE LOGIC IN A THREAD, HOW DARE YOU.

Klopp finished in an identical position to when he took Liverpool on after his 1st season, but time had to be given. Mourinho is in the same position with clear improvements but people still leave their heads in the clouds.

weldoninhio

Giggsy11 wrote: »

No wonder I called you AIG. Numbers that are reported by BBC and Sky are infront of you and you still are ignorant.

I've no idea what AIG is meant to mean. Must be an insider joke because they are United ex-sponsors I'm presuming??

weldoninhio

Giggsy11 wrote: »

No wonder I called you AIG. Numbers that are reported by BBC and Sky are infront of you and you still are ignorant.

Had a quick look online. Phil Jones, you cite the telegraph as your source of £16.5m, yet the only story I can find, used as a citation on Wiki, states that Blackburn confirmed that the fee received was a record fee, surpassing Roque Santa Cruz who went for £17.5, and quotes from Steve Kean stating that with addons it will be above £20m.

Carpentry

Sad man.

https://twitter.com/MSPMSPMSP12345/status/841419046881021953


wonder if it was before or after fans called him a Judas.

Andersonisgod

Carpentry wrote: »

Sad man.

https://twitter.com/MSPMSPMSP12345/status/841419046881021953


wonder if it was before or after fans called him a Judas.

Getting rid of this guy and getting Conte is the best thing that could have happened to Chelsea.

Giggsy11

weldoninhio wrote: »

Had a quick look online. Phil Jones, you cite the telegraph as your source of £16.5m, yet the only story I can find, used as a citation on Wiki, states that Blackburn confirmed that the fee received was a record fee, surpassing Roque Santa Cruz who went for £17.5, and quotes from Steve Kean stating that with addons it will be above £20m.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/13754461

http://www.skysports.com/phil-jones

I missed the Kean bit. I took his fee from BBC and Sky.

The_Kew_Tour

At this rate the best thing that happened to Avram Grant was John Terry slipping on his Bollocks and not winning the Champions League.

Lucky escape!

Andersonisgod

Giggsy11 wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/13754461

http://www.skysports.com/phil-jones

I missed the Kean bit. I took his fee from BBC and Sky.

Those to sources have 2 different fees, with one using the phrase "believed to be" when describing fee. I can safely say your sourcing would certainly not meet academic standards. It seems quite shoddy and thrown together.

Giggsy11

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Those to sources have 2 different fees, with one using the phrase "believed to be" when describing fee. I can safely say your sourcing would certainly not meet academic standards. It seems quite shoddy and thrown together.

Rayne Wooney

weldoninhio wrote: »

The CIES Football Observatory in Switzerland and Sky Sports along with many other sports sites disagrees with you. United current squad cost £623m according to them. Real was £553m and City £533m.

That is completely wrong, there is no way the squad cost 200 million more than what I got this morning after looking it up and the fees being at most 5 million off. 480 million being generous with the fees in most cases, (50 million for Martial).


City squad cost 496 million. It's not hard to figure out, most of United's squad were bought in the last couple of years when fees have been a bit more transparent.

TitianGerm

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

HOW DARE YOU CITE LOGIC IN A THREAD, HOW DARE YOU.

Klopp finished in an identical position to when he took Liverpool on after his 1st season, but time had to be given. Mourinho is in the same position with clear improvements but people still leave their heads in the clouds.

Klopp finished in an identical position alright but Klopp didn't have a full preseason and came in part way through the season.

It's also worth noting the United squad before Jose came in would have been quite a bit stronger than the Liverpool squad Klopp inherited, before Jose even spent his 150m ish in the summer.

Still though you've got a cup already this season and should progress further in the Europa League and are still in a battle for fourth with 10 games to go. Not a bad start by any means.

weldoninhio

Giggsy11 wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/13754461

http://www.skysports.com/phil-jones

I missed the Kean bit. I took his fee from BBC and Sky.

You took his fee from BBC and Sky, yet cited the Telegraph in your original post.