General Premier League Thread 2023-24 Mod Note in op 27/6/23 And 21/05/24

Fitz*

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120926649#Comment_120926649

I was talking about managers in general, some who have to balance the books or have their hands tied when they first move to a club. Kane this summer being the prime example Ange is going to spend a lot of money but it's unfair to judge him completely on that as he will be trying to recover from selling their teams main player. Moyes is going to be in the same boat this summer, although he is at the club a lot longer and could somewhat plan.

I think it would be unfair to compare ETH to Ange for example if both spend £200m this summer. Ange has a rebuild on his hands, ETH is furthering his spend without losing someone. Likewise it's unfair to compare Moyes to Emery if both spend £150m.

Or Di Zerbi selling 2 midfielders. Is it fair to judge him on spending £100m this summer? versus some like Arteta spending big money and losing nobody.

As for Klopp, there have been a few examples of having to sell to buy and ended up being harmful to the squad such as selling Lovren to buy Tsimikas etc but that is derailing from the point. Do I think Klopp wanted to keep Fabinho this summer (after Henderson was said to be leaving)? Yes. But Klopp's motto has always been if a players asks to go, then they are gone. No point keeping them. Now, Klopp has to go and buy an extra midfielder on top of what he originally needed and adds to the cost. Do you judge him on spending £130m on midfielders or do you say he is rebuilding his team without the players who started multiple CL finals. Ideally, I think Klopp would still have one of Fabinho or Hendo in the side and still buy McAllister, Szobolai and a young DM to learn from and eventually replace Fabinho/Hendo before next summer and re-evaluated.

doc_17

My point wasnt anti Ten Hag….Pep came into City and got rid of nearly everyone. Yet he’s hailed a as great coach.

doc_17

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120925637#Comment_120925637

You can’t believe a single transfer figure from City. And certainly not the money they claim to spend on wages.

Drumpot

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120926269#Comment_120926269

https://www.spiegel.de/international/manchester-city-exposed-bending-the-rules-to-the-tune-of-millions-a-1236346.html

I was under the impression Uefa and EPL didn’t start their investigations because they had caught city but that they were shamed/forced to investigate because of the whistleblowing from the German newspaper. Why did a newspaper know more about how to make sure the regulation is being followed than the regulation body?

It’s the same with banking regulations. Many of the regulations are there to protect the banks , not the consumer. Banks know how to cross T’s and dot I’s to fulfill their regulations but if the regulator properly investigated, they’d find all sorts of dodgy breaches. I can say that from first hand experience working in a bank and having clients coming to me for investment advice.

doc_17

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120927139#Comment_120927139

Many of the regulators end up working for the entities they regulate. Watch Dopesick

Drumpot

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120927229#Comment_120927229

Thanks, I’ve not watched that, is it cringe painful ? Or just like “ah FFs”?!

DM_7

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120926755#Comment_120926755

The right way to judge a coach is by looking at all aspects of their performance not spend.

Looking at spend, especially net spend alone, is not useful. Like looking at goal difference to judge a league season - it is just one part of the story. Leicester did better than 4 teams not relegated last season on GD.

theoneeyedman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120927237#Comment_120927237

It's very good actually.

~Rebel~

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120927139#Comment_120927139

Yeah, the investigation began with the report - though it wasn’t really by a newspapers work, it was as a result of the football leaks released by hacker Rui Pinto.

UEFA ultimately went halfhearted and quick to make a show of doing something in the immediate aftermath, and obviously made a total haims of it. The PL on the other hand did a far more thorough investigation over a far longer time. Those leaks had basically lost all momentum as a call for action, but they kept building their case to make it thorough and strong, and so years later we’ve gotten a case that’s built on specifics, with over 100 charges.

None of this feels to me like the actions of an organisation intentionally setting themselves up to fail. They could’ve gone with limited charges and hit City with a fine, but instead they’ve publicly put themselves in a position where they’ve got to win or look absolutely terrible - the media impact of levelling them with 100+ charges is huuuge. They made the decision to do that. So in this instance I think the PL deserve some credit.

Drumpot

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120927768#Comment_120927768

Thats a decent synopsis to be fair.

Im afraid the cynic in me cant concede. (That doesn’t imply you are wrong , just that my default stance with those sellouts at the top of the sport is that football integrity can be bought by the highest bidder).

I can think of ways that works for the EPL, particularly if city get it wound up in delays for years.

You look at serie A relegating Juventus and really going after its top clubs when there were massive scandals. I don’t believe we’d ever see the EPL relegate a top team.

You look at Barca paying the head ref in Spain (who organised who reffed games) and nothing much will come of it.

I guess I’ve zero faith in the sport regulating itself because there’s very few examples of it addressing corruption on multiple levels.

kowloonkev

I think FIFA need to make a law against players getting off the books payments from clubs. If they are caught a ban similar to drugs ban should apply. Of course catching them would be very difficult but rule should be there nonetheless.

Widdensushi

Fifa are good with the payments....

doc_17

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120927237#Comment_120927237

Ah it’s a brilliant 6 part TV show based on the fentanyl crisis in America. Big Pharma got their product through the regulatory process and then the guys that allowed it through get big jobs in the pharma companies. Regulation is weak all around the world in nearly all walks of life due to money.

doc_17

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120928436#Comment_120928436

It’s an awful pity that we are relying on fifa for this….I can only imagine Infantino “Today I am regulator”

McFly85

I think at worst City will get a points deduction and a transfer ban, both of which are fairly mild punishments for the amount of charges.

We’ve seen teams get around transfer bans too by appealing and then using that time spending to prepare for when they can’t spend, and one season where they might have to play in the EL is easily a price worth paying for a decade of success.

With Saudi Arabia in the league now and Qatar a possibility, the punishment really needs to be a deterrent to these clubs from following the same process.

While I think the appropriate punishment is points deductions in the seasons they are found guilty in and removing the titles from the official records, but there’s not a hope that happens.

I just don’t know how interested I’ll be in the league if City get no real punishment. As much as it will be advertised that having these rich clubs will make the league competitive, you will have a subset of teams playing by different rules.

tinpib

Have to say I am savouring Pep's saltiness here, I'm loving it actually. Some really positive steps by the PL authorities for once which will help the game I think, and most commenters on there agree.

I was half watching the game yesterday, didn't realise why Arteta got his yellow card for, he can be one of the worst offenders for all this as well. I think it might take a while for Pep and Arteta to modify their behaviour so there could be loads of wonderful punishments/sanctions and complaints from them over the coming season.

I'm a Liverpool fan so I'm sure Klopp will be on the receiving end at some stage too.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/66423028

DM_7

Pep is not alone though.

https://twitter.com/raphaelvarane/status/1688461768991932416?t=4hm4ojsV7OCfRFzs_wNChg&s=19

I don't share concerns about enforcing rules to book players who kick a ball away for example but the added on time route is not the solution.

Adding on time does not discourage stoppages at all. It won't be good for players; fans going to games and people watching on TV. They should encourgage faster play and restarts, discourage stoppages instead of accepting slow play/stopping the game.

Mushy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120948566#Comment_120948566

The whole point of more added on time is to discourage those stoppages, and it has worked. Playrs/managers moaning about the extra time with all the games, there's 1 quick solution...don't waste time. Kind of mad the players/managers don't realise this and adjust accordingly.

hawaii501

Newcastle vs Villa next week will seem like a cup game in ET considering they are 2 of the worst offenders of the time-wasting

Drumpot

We should have bets on what will be the max injury time in a game over the coming month as I’d say the first few weeks will be nuts.

My prediction is max time added on in a half will be 22 minutes. Max time with combined half add ons will be 31 minutes

DM_7

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120948611#Comment_120948611

As a fan do you want to see longer games with lots of slow play; stoppages and managers directing everything or would you prefer to see a faster game where players have to think fast with less time for coaches to organise and over coach teams?

I know I prefer the second option but I think that the current solution is only going to aid in option one.

Players are not asked to stop or slow down the game to run the clock down alone.

Slow play disrupts the rhythm of the game which is the best reason for a team that is ahead to engage in slow play.

Players going down injured provides a chance for teams to refuel; make tactical adjustments - the whole team can go to the coaches. Teams can now take longer and longer to talk and prepare their set pieces. They can benefit teams behind or looking to score a goal as well.

The changes should have addressed how long it is taking the game to be restarted when the ball goes out or play or into keepers hands. They should have done something more significant to discourage players going down injured.

The current change will see managers and coaches develop plans to take advantage of the acceptance of slow play and stopping the game. It is a pity the changes did not see the game speed up and have those people looking at ways to take advantage of quick play that will improve excitement for fans.

machiavellianme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120948653#Comment_120948653

If a player is injured, they should of course get the treatment they require. A temporary substitution would sort that out. That'd discourage play acting and only genuine injuries would need to be treated.

If they wanted to speed things up, they could always have a rule that the other team gets an "advantage" (whatever that is) for the amount of time that play was stopped for treatment.

A 10s limit for free kicks, throws, corners, goal kicks would help too. If they can't get the big lads up from the back in 10s, tough!

TitianGerm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120948617#Comment_120948617

It'll be in a Newcastle match anyway.

I think they should just make the game 70 mins and just stop the clock every time the ball is not in play.

DM_7

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120948670#Comment_120948670

Stopping the clock does not encourage fast play either.

The current issues with game time are a result of coaching; planning and how players have been conditioned to play the game. Players generally want to play, want to compete. It is the coaches and tacticians that enforce patterns of play and systems.

If IFAB want to see changes then they need to make changes that make the coaches not see slow play to be to their teams benefit. The current changes or a stopping clock accepts slow play and the game stopping as something that is now engrained into the play. It does not force change in the right direction, it will foce and provide a basis for the coaches to plan more stoppages to benefit their game.

citytillidie

If a player goes down "injured" a stretcher is called for right away and player is not allowed to return to the pitch for 5 minutes. If it is genuine then the treatment is needed anyways and a sub can be made if needed, but if you're play acting then your team is down to 10 players for 5 minutes, you would think it would cut out the play acting.

The new 30 seconds where you're not allowed onto the pitch after treatment is too short.

As for the added time as we saw during the World Cup players twigged on about the added time and as the World Cup went on the time went back down to the 4 and 5 minutes

Mushy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120948653#Comment_120948653

Slow play and slowing down play are 2 very different things. The games will only be longer if players/managers decide on slowing down the play I.e., time wasting. Matches won't be longer than before if time wasting doesn't happen. If managers find tactics to take advantage of actually adding on time, then they can't also complain about longer matches.

doc_17

I’m really looking forward to see if the keepers will still be allowed to fall to the ground after they catch a harmless cross and hold on to the ball for 30 plus seconds.

DM_7

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120948738#Comment_120948738

I.e time wasting does not actually apply.

A player getting injured 20mins into the second half is not time wasting if the player is going down so the team can have energy gels while receiving a team talk. Most players going down injured in the second half are more worried about handing out drinks and other goodies from the physio bag than running down the clock.

A goal keeper spending an age to get the game moving throughout the match is not wasting time, they are slowing the game down to suit their own team to get into their positions.

It looks like IFAB have looked at the outcome (lack of ball on play) and decided the solution is adding on time but they have not looked at factors contributing to the lack of play time

Necro

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120948775#Comment_120948775

There's no perfect solution to any of the issues really bar less games (which isn't going to happen, with the CL changes next season there's going to be even more games before we even factor in this Club World Cup nonsense).

Honestly though I think we'll see mad injury times in games for about 3 rounds then players/coaches will see there's no point in time wasting as much any more and it'll go back to normalish times like we saw in the World Cup.

DM_7

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120948855#Comment_120948855

I did not watch much of the world cup so I don't know if the added time in early games forced any changes.

This is a good note from last season re playing, VAR and extra subs have not helped the game either. I just think speed of restarts are too slow and teams benefit from the game stopping or slowly reatarting but those benefits to coaches are not good for supporters.

https://theanalyst.com/eu/2023/01/how-long-is-a-football-match-added-time/

TitianGerm

So Newcastle have the ball in play for a little over 45 minutes in a 90 minute game. City the best at 54.9 minutes.

This is why they need to punish teams for time wasting. The game is meant to be 90 minutes long and the best we have is 55 minutes.

pjohnson

Yeah Keepers need to be regulated more. Martinez and Pickford especially are skilled at utterly killing a game, dramatically collapsing in stages after a catch before teetering back to their feet like an 89 year granny waiting for hip ops. And being utterly bamboozled as to how to actually kick a ball when it comes time for a goal kick.

Not to mention the new trend of keepers having a sudden invisible injury. Pickford (again) last year did it, Earps today at the World Cup and even Nicky Quaid in the Hurling.

Keepers have copped they, unlike outfielders, wont be sent to the sideline so get a free pass.

Necro

Nkunku rumoured to be out for a few months

https://twitter.com/CFCBlues_com/status/1688554543728996352?t=BwUOJU60CXKQiZLehQp-YQ&s=19

I sense a panicked Neymar purchase from 'The Todd'

doc_17

And another thing that needs to be dealt with harshly is that rubbish Arteta was at least year, the huddles in the middle of each half when Ramsdale was faking an injury. That’s absolutely gotta go.

y0ssar1an22

they need to decide how long for a restart, and start issuing yellow cards 2 mins into a game.

it's on the ref's for not enforcing their own rules.

i'd also bring in a rule stating the player closest to the ball has to take a throw in. sick of the full backs strolling over to take a throw

djan

I'm not sure if taking such steps is the right way to go about getting more play time. I'd say have a max amount of time for certain actions but use a ball in play clock of 60min. It's not really feasible to have 90 odd minutes of active play time as don't think the players would hack that on a regular basis.

Irish Aris

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120951539#Comment_120951539

I was actually thinking it on the same lines if I get you correctly.

A couple of basic examples would be:

Keepers taking the piss restarting the game: give them an early yellow. If they do it again a final warning. After that second yellow is on.

Restart on throw ins: you take forever to do it, the throw in goes to the other team.

Not sure if something can be done about faking injuries. Ref would never be sure if it's fake or not. I like the idea of not allowed back in immediately - I think it was 30 seconds in the community shield, But it could go up to 1 or 2 minutes. A bit more management for the refs, but something that the 4th official could do.

I believe that simple things like the above could easily add 5-10 minutes to the actual playing time. Not holding my breath that they will happen though...

pjohnson

The problem with holding an "injured" player back from entering is will it include Keepers?

If not the Pickford/Ramsdale/Martinez will become gentle wee flowers that are near fatally wounded if they feel a breeze near them.

AdamD

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120950543#Comment_120950543

I'm guessing this new 30 seconds rule is an attempt to stop that, but does it apply for keepers?

doc_17

The fear that FIFA with a 60 minute clock is that then teams would absolutely stop every chance they get in order to disrupt the flow of the opposition. The Guardian Football Weekly did a podcast about this topic last summer.

Booking Martinez and Pickford in the 88th minute is useless, as someone else said, it should be done earlier. Warning, booking and another booking. And the first player to pick up or touch a ball after a throw is awarded had to take it. And only allow keepers to have the ball in hand for 10 seconds. And theatrically falling to the ground to waste time should be a yellow.

doc_17

I see it reported that Nkunku is out until December. Bad blow for Chelsea. Another £50m will be spent soon!

Irish Aris

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120951661#Comment_120951661

Yeah, good point.

Very difficult to implement for keepers I guess. You have to start from somewhere though and in field players can be a good start.

The Big Easy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120948653#Comment_120948653

I think extending the time added on does help eliminate slow(ing) play.

You see Pep and Varane's response, the players do not want to be on the pitch for another 10/15 minutes. They're tired, they want to recover, same for managers.

Forcing them to effectively work longer is a huge disincentive and will result is less time wasting/ slowing the action.

If you had to work 5 minutes later for every time you opened boards, you might stop opening boards so often 😄

Fitz*

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120952172#Comment_120952172

Keepers are meant to be only allowed to have the ball in hand for 6 seconds. Elongating it to 10 ain't going to help matters!

I remember Suarez used to be counting out loudly 1,2,3,4,5,6 and on his fingers when keepers had the ball in their hands. In full eye/ear shot of the referee too. The refs didn't blow back then, even though they should, but it sometimes forced keepers into kicking earlier as they were fearful.

Fitz*

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120952283#Comment_120952283

Players / managers complaining is a bit rich now. They are the biggest problem with timewasting. Pep/Varane might not be blatantly at it themselves but I'm sure they have done something of the sort throughout their careers. It's festered into something too big now. Varane is lumping in timewasting alongside players having to play extra games completely and I think that he is not correct to do that. One is a valid concern, and one is just a very rich boy complaining about an extra 10 mins work. They are not really the same.

It's plain to see the teams / players / managers who employed it the most last year. When teams / individuals like Newcastle / Pope / Pickford / Emery / Arteta conceded late goals / equalizers in added time, they had nobody to blame but themselves. It was great to see. Referees have to start booking and then booking again, not this warning - warning - booking - warning crap.

I read that the average added time on a PL game last season was 8 mins. No harm if it is 15 mins this year. it will teach the timewasters.

artanevilla

Red cards might change it, but extra added time doesn't. Only a small part of time wasting is actually wasting time, it's also about disrupting the flow of the game and frustrating your opponent.

Fitz*

The Premier League are going to also investigate Chelsea into their financial dealings instead.

The article mentions using 6 different offshore companies to hide transfer payments (in their millions of £s) for players. The previously mentioned payments to fathers of youth players are also set to be investigated.

These of course breach FFP rules, which Chelsea have admitted to falsifying accounts for just recently.

https://twitter.com/TimesSport/status/1688935043941421056

Necro

Lopetegui gone before the season even starts.

https://twitter.com/FabrizioRomano/status/1689009442455797760?t=6QPT_oKf1ugjLATW4qLcJQ&s=19

~Rebel~

Wow, bloody hell - Wolves instant favourites for the drop you'd imagine so. He's what kept them up last year.

ShamoBuc

Not sure that the theory/plan to wait until now is ever a good one. Give him a month or two at this stage would have been better surely- unless their Dream Manager just became available.