A Beautiful Thread for the Beautiful Game

Last year, both Manchester City and PSG were supposed to get hit with transfer sanctions or some sort of hefty punishment for their own outrageous transfer debts under Financial Fair Play bylaws, but then UEFA relaxed FFP's debt restrictions, which means City received a slap on the wrist and got to continue spending more silly money even this summer while clubs that have been taking measures to abide by FFP's previous terms were doing it for almost nothing.

There's a lot more to the whole issue and explaining the current significance of FFP. The short of it, though, is that a club in Arsenal's position has every reason to spend, spend, spend.

edited 22nd Aug '16 12:38:44 PM by SeanMurrayI

Sporting Clube de Portugal (the Sporting Lisbon is a common misconception - imagine if Arsenal were suddenly called Arsenal London).

So that's why it's so often referred to as just "Sporting". I presume the "Lisbon" is added because there are other clubs around the world with the same name? (Incidentally, there are a couple of Arsenals around the world, named after the London original, but I think when they're mentioned it probably comes with the city where they're located.)

"Sporting" and "Atletico" (or "Athletic") are kind of boring names - as are "FC [City]", "[City] United" and "Real [City]". Arsenal aren't my favourite club because of their name but I'm happy that they have a fairly unique and interesting name. (Most London clubs are named after the part of London they're from, which is also boring. At least the Spurs have "Hotspur" in their name, so it's not just Tottenham.)

Arsenal began in the late 1880's as "Dial Square", named after the center of the Royal Arsenal complex in Woolwich, South East London. A month after they were founded, they became "Royal Arsenal F.C.", then a few years later, "Woolwich Arsenal". After the relocated to Highbury, they became "The Arsenal", then finally just "Arsenal".

The coolest club name in the world not associated with a home city or location is The Strongest

edited 22nd Aug '16 2:59:40 PM by SeanMurrayI

Woolwich Arsenal was actually named after the place - including the Arsenal bit - but they retained the name after the move to North London, so the name no longer refers to the club's location. Still, if you're going to have a place name as your name it's nicer (IMO) if it at least means something.

My point was that the original intent of the name Arsenal was supposed to signify a location, no matter how much that meaning gets lost after relocating to a different corner of London.

It's a bit comparable Wimbledon FC calling itself Milton Keynes Dons after their own relo.

Oh, and Gervinho was shown a straight red card in a Chinese Super League game earlier today for this.

I'm sure he tried explaining to the ref that he did get the ball, but it didn't seem to do him any good.

He got the ball on the second try but to be honest it does look more like he's just kicking the other player. I think that's a red card. If you want to be very generous you could say it was just reckless, but really it was probably more.

And yeah, I concurred with the point about Arsenal's original names signifying a location and just meant to provide additional info about how even the word Arsenal refers to a location. It's cooler now, what with the club taking on an identity involving the nickname "Gunners" and a gun in the logo and so on, but of course it all refers to the actual arsenal near where the club got its name.

Oh, and I actually think some of the teams in the MLS have cool/interesting names. Obviously not NY Red Bulls (named after the company that owns them), NY City, DC United, Real Salt Lake (I mean, WTF), Sporting Kansas City, or the various [city] FC's.

Instead, look at San Jose Earthquakes, Chicago Fire, Philadelphia Union, and New England Revolution. All of these are neat historical references, and in some ways surprisingly dark ones. (Well, I'm not sure if there's been a famous earthquake in San Jose but it's definitely in the sort of area where you'd expect it, and I'm sure that's what the name's referring to.)

Dry humor. Very, very dry humor.

As for MLS/NASL team names, anyone calling the new Man City-owned franchise out of Yankee Stadium "New York City" does so after the city the team is based in. The full name is New York City FC, or NYCFC. And let's not forget Houston Dynamo.

Various long-forgotten NASL team names from the 1970's and early 80's were pretty far out, too. Detroit Express, Las Vegas Quicksilver, San Diego Jaws (no way related to the box office hit of the time [Part Two]), Chicago Sting (no way related to the box office hit of the time [Part One]), New England/Jacksonville Tea Men, Caribous of Colorado (never the Colorado Caribous), Washington Diplomats...

And lest we forget the "legendary" San Diego Sockers, who made the full-time transition to indoor play by the 1980's...

edited 22nd Aug '16 5:20:43 PM by SeanMurrayI

Unsettling Hologram of the Day: Virtual Bill Shankly

It's like he's really there and enjoying everyone's company!◊

It looks like a character from an average 90's action video game (but that might be the camera and the way the hologram was designed).

Anyway, more Champions League play-offs tonight and tomorrow. Tonight, the big game is Roma - Porto (1-1 on aggregate). Roma will go through on away goals rule, unless Porto scores and wins (or gets a 2-2 draw in this match).

A big game that will determine the future of Nuno Espírito Santo's season at Porto.

edited 23rd Aug '16 10:14:48 AM by Quag15

Roma down to 9 men and Szczczczczesney fails as "sweeper keeper". They're practically handing this match to Porto.

EDIT: "...And another!"

edited 23rd Aug '16 1:28:59 PM by SeanMurrayI

It took a fair lot to see Porto score more than one goal, but so it happened in the end - they definitely need to be more aggressive, especially against big teams. Serie A fans (and especially Roma supporters), on the other hand, must be feeling embarassed at Roma's performance (it's not the first time De Rossi did something stupid and ended up getting a red, but it's still a bit surprising, considering his age).

Here's the face of a man that says: "I'm surrounded by idiots".

Meanwhile, there will be an Irish team in the Europa League (Dundalk), while there will be a return of a Polish team (Legia Warsaw) to the Champions group stage for the first time in... 20 years, iirc.

Also, Ludogorets Razgrad are back. Third time a Bulgarian team has reached the group stage.

edited 23rd Aug '16 1:53:23 PM by Quag15

Saw one source call this De Rossi's 11th red card of his career.

Browsing through his stats some more season-by-season, game-by-game ...only once was he sent off while already on a yellow card, yet I can't verify if even that match's dismissal didn't involve a straight-red atrocity.

edited 23rd Aug '16 2:42:43 PM by SeanMurrayI

Liverpool get back to winning ways by thrashing Burton Albion in the league cup 5-0.

I'd love to see a proper title push from Liverpool this season. Out of all the clubs in the league - other than Arsenal, obviously - Liverpool are probably the one I want most to win it.

Klopp is brilliant, he's got a wonderful squad that has the potential to do amazing things and really leave a mark and sort of define a generation of Premier League football, the club's been out of the top for too long, and their fans are usually great, or at least look and sound so on TV.

It'd be fantastic to have Liverpool as a constant title challenger again.

I do think it's entirely plausible, as well. As I said I rate the manager and squad very highly, and with the league quite fluid at this moment I feel that anyone with some fire in them can run for it and have a decent shot at the trophy. Why not Liverpool, one of the best teams in the league?

(I'm not an actual Liverpool fan, though, and I would be about equally thrilled to have Everton make top-4 - or even win the whole thing - because of the quality they have. Liverpool maybe a bit more because they're more likely to establish something more permanent, rather than just one good season or two.)

The team I want to win the most is still Arsenal, obviously. It's just that Arsenal don't want it right now, so it's no more plausible than Leicester retaining the title or, you know, Bournemouth taking it.

So, Claudio Bravo is joining the Manchester City. Any thoughts on that?

And, since next week we are back the qualifiers for the world cup, how are the bets going? Specially interested in the South America ones.

What are your own thoughts?

I'm not a betting man on CONMEBOL World Cup qualifiers, but Joe Hart's gotta find a new club and fast.

Bravo is a world-class goalkeeper and definitely an improvement over Joe Hart. I feel a bit bad for him because by now he's a club legend at Manchester City, but if your form drops and doesn't come back up in a long time what can you expect? I'm sure he'll be better when/if he gets a chance again (you know, cup competitions or if Bravo is injured).

Barcelona have a fantastic 'keeper in Ter Stegen, and while I was kind of impressed with the way they rotated him and Bravo so successfully I suppose it was clear that the players weren't going to be happy with it forever. One had to go, and the club chose to think ahead more than one or two seasons. I don't suppose it was a particularly hard decision to make, either.

Good piece of business for everyone involved - except Hart, probably.

I'm not a betting man, but I think Ecuador and Brazil are gonna draw while Argentina, Chile an Colombia are gonna win. Dunno much about Bolivia vs Peru to make a guess.

As for us, our first qualifier is gonna be against Switzerland (at their home, so, it's gonna be fairly difficult), while a few days earlier there's gonna be a friendly match at home against Gibraltar. I'm curious to see how we (mentally) deal with the qualifiers in the post-Euros phase.

No, you see, this is a very big deal because Hart is already playing backup keeper in EPL matches to Caballero. If Guardiola already values Caballero more than Hart, then bringing in another starting-calibre keeper could potentially make Hart the third-choice keeper at City, if he can't find a new club before the transfer window shuts.

And that is shocking because, no matter how poorly Guardiola regards Hart at the moment, he's still England's #1, and Sam Allardyce & Co. could not be pleased with the player they regard as their first-choice goalkeeper potentially not even finding a place on his subs bench at club level. Either Hart finds a new club quick, or he gets left in a deep, dark hole that could stagnate his match fitness and readiness and further threaten his standing with his national team, which wouldn't have anything to do with Hart's form—just Guardiola heartlessly killing a player's high profile and downgrading his career.

It's outright insulting to Hart. As a title-winning starting-calibre player in the one position most trusted to a single person at one of the biggest teams in the biggest league in the world, as a player with the exact same standing (minus the "title-winning" part) with his country's squad, and as one of the highest paid players at his current club for his past services, Hart doesn't deserve to have all of this totally disrupted by a new manager at his club with little time (and little help from his club's new management) to orchestrate a move to somewhere that can give him what he needs.

Hart is deserving of respect, no questions, and if any of this was about some long-standing issue concerning a "drop" in his form, the right thing Guardiola should have done is to let Hart know what he was planning for him from the moment Pep first arrived at the club this summer. It's not right in any sense to only cut Hart from the team's starting lineup just before their season opener and then keep him in the dark over the following week, leave him off the starting lineup for a second time, then suddenly let word leak about bringing in another player in his position. Any kind of basic communication with Hart on these issues could have helped Hart reach a decision regarding his future much sooner and with more than just a week to find a new place to get steady playing time on the pitch.

Guardiola not doing anything to offload an unwanted, soon-to-be-totally-unused player on Hart's wages is also a staggeringly irresponsible waste of well over £100k-a-week. Although some are theorizing that this level of treatment Hart is getting is a scheme on City's part who didn't want to sell him early, risk showing their hand, and face higher market prices for any new goalkeeper. Perhaps this bullshit did save them a couple mil on Bravo?

(EDIT: If David Luiz was dubbed the "Playstation Defender", after Gary Neville's scathing comparison to a 12-year-old playing an annual FIFA game title, this is a close approximation of the "Playstation Manager"—deeply irrational and borderline sociopathic)

edited 23rd Aug '16 9:45:14 PM by SeanMurrayI

I assumed Guardiola was going to sell Caballero, not Hart. Hart's done so much in the past to prove his quality that it would make more sense to upgrade the alternative, rather than getting rid of him.

Of course I don't know whether Guardiola has actually talked to Hart about any of this. Not everything is made public.

If the scenario you described is what's happening I absolutely agree it's very disrespectful.

the same thing happened to Casillas who was ten times the GK Hart was at his best.

At the moment, what's being reported and repeated from Joe Hart's camp is what's driving the narrative. Naturally, there are still several sides to a story like this one, and people can reach all sorts of different conclusions, but this situation is not being handled well.

You don't fork out £17mil for an upgraded backup keeper. Although this is City we're talking about, Bravo's transfer in this situation is without question an upgrade for the Starting XI.

Even if, by default, Hart would be an improved backup keeper, it's not the role a goalkeeper of his stature, warts and all, should expect at his club. When Mourinho in his last few months at Real Madrid dropped Iker Casillas from his starting lineups, it generated the same sorts of ugliness we're suddenly seeing between Hart, Guardiola, and England now. Whether or not Mourinho had a point about Casillas's own declining form, as Spain's trusted #1 and team captain, demoting him to a bench role was troubling situation from certain perspectives, and had Mourinho remained at Real, instead of returning to Chelsea, Casillas would have likely forced a move as soon as that summer transfer window opened. Yet it was Mourinho who left, and Casillas immediately returned to his starting role upon Ancelotti's arrival, and Casillas's later move to Porto thereafter was handled as smoothly and as respectfully as any club legend's departure should.

However, in this case, with Guardiola's decision to drop and replace Joe Hart coming so late in the summer and just as a new season is beginning, the disruption this causes a valuable commodity could do far more damage to a younger goalkeeper and his national team.

edited 24th Aug '16 7:37:22 AM by SeanMurrayI

Neither Guardiola nor the emirs care one bit about either the English national team or City's history. And why should they? The former is not their job, and the latter is virtually nonexistent outside of England (and even in England, it is overshadowed by the history of many, many teams). Hart is virtually a monument in a wasteland, so you might as well raze and try to build something significant instead of trying to preserve it at all costs.

Guardiola might have been more respectful when he managed Barcelona or Munich, but in both cases, he was taking care of some of the greatest teams in football history. Here, he has to manage the Nouveau Riche of the PL.

edited 24th Aug '16 8:42:46 AM by Julep