Premiership 'Second Rate'

[DmanDmythDledge]

CTID's post has some merit. In the late 70's/early 80's, it was possible for mid table teams to launch an assault on the title. Also, more importantly, the likes of Nottingham Forest etc were able to succeed in European competition, although obviously some parameters have changed since then.

Yeah but he's saying that it's **** because 4 teams have pulled away from the rest and raised the standard. Makes sense...

of course CTiD's statement was that no one outside MU, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool was going to WIN the EPL and nothing at all about them being the top 4 teams for the next five years.

For what it is worth I think he is spot on - yes, newcastle or spurs could break into 3rd or 4th but the jump required to win the league is not one that I feel could be taken within the next 5 years. Just look at Liverpool - they have been in the top few places for nearly a decade now and still look no closer to winning a title.

Very few, if any, leagues have 4 teams capable of winning the title. The top leagues in Europe- the Premiership, La Liga and Serie A- usually only have 2 or 3 teams capable of winning the league. It's the same in Germany and Portugal as well. Presumably CTID you think every league is crap if apply the same reasoning to them as you do to the Premiership?

[CollegeTillIDie]

So because 4 teams have pulled away from the rest and dramatically improved the standard that means it's worse now.

And I wouldn't even expect a 5 year old to come with something like your second post.

In answer to your first point... yes because it's too predictable, and in terms of skill level Anglo centric football is far behind Europe, it's all high speed low skill.
All the best players in the Premieshi* are not from England, Scotland , Wales or Ireland... FACT!
Throwing money at something doesn't necessarily improve the standard . Take this on board another FACT!
Between 1977 and 1985 the following English teams won the European Cup/Champions League 1977 Liverpool 1978 Liverpool 1979 Nottingham Forest 1980 Nottingham Forest 1981 Liverpool 1982 Aston Villa 1984 Liverpool..... that will NEVER happen again.
Since 1992 when the premiershi* was founded the following English teams won the Champions League 1999 Man United 2005 Liverpool. Need I say any more? Spanish and Italian teams have dominated the Champions League and I expect that to continue.

In answer to your second point.... I was having a laugh jeez louise... sure it was a cheap shot but hey why not?

I think our League here is more interesting to watch , because it is possible for more than 2-3 teams to win the League and is unpredictable. ( If Arsene Wenger leaves Arsenal they're Fcuked for a few years ).
It is also always possible for the likes of Galway United to beat one of the League favourites, on any occasion they meet.
I know now that Derby County will never win the Premiership again ( 2 equivalent First Division titles in 1972 and 1975).
I cannot say that for example, in this country, about Dundalk ( they were white shirts and black shorts hence the comparison) in our League. Their day could well come in a few short years. I know they are still in our '' First'' Division but that won't last long.
In Spain for example in recent years Valencia and Sevilla have challenged the big two and Deportivo La Coruna won the League this century. In Italy both Milan clubs, Lazio and Roma have all won the League, despite the recent dominance of Juventus.

[DmanDmythDledge]

In answer to your first point... yes because it's too predictable

Most people thought the league was between Chelsea and Liverpool this season, nobody could have seen West Ham do so poorly or Reading do so well.

All the best players in the Premieshi* are not from England, Scotland , Wales or Ireland... FACT!

That's absolutely ridiculous and miles from the truth. Wayne Rooney, Ryan Giggs, Paul Scholes, Steven Gerrard, Steve Finnan, Jamie Carragher, John Terry, Frank Lampard, Shay Given, Michael Owen, Gary Neville, Rio Ferdinand. Do you want me to keep going?

Throwing money at something doesn't necessarily improve the standard. Take this on board another FACT!

It does improve the standard. Look at how much the Premiership has improved since the Sky TV deal. Look at Chelsea when Abromovich took over, look at Gretna. Money means being able to afford better players, which improves the standard. Another one of your FACTS that are well off the mark.

Since 1992 when the premiershi* was founded the following English teams won the Champions League 1999 Man United 2005 Liverpool. Need I say any more? Spanish and Italian teams have dominated the Champions League and I expect that to continue.

Wrong again. Look at the seeding for this year's competition. All 4 English teams in the top group of seeds. 3 out of 4 teams in last year's semi-finals, a team in the last 3 finals, 04-05 2/4 semi finalists and the winner.

I think our League here is more interesting to watch , because it is possible for more than 2-3 teams to win the League and is unpredictable.

There isn't. It's been a two horse so far this year, and would have been a one horse by now if Drogheda didn't have half their squad injured. Last year it was a two horse race, as was 2005, 2004 and 2003.

It is also always possible for the likes of Galway United to beat one of the League favourites, on any occasion they meet.

The same in the Premiership.

Arsenal lost to Fulham, Sheffield United, Man City and West Ham twice last season.

Chelsea lost to Middlesborough, Man Utd lost to West Ham twice, Liverpool last to Fulham. Wolves beat Man Utd a few years ago after being promoted.

[CollegeTillIDie]

dmand said :Most people thought the league was between Chelsea and Liverpool this season, nobody could have seen West Ham do so poorly or Reading do so well.

Well Man United were always in the frame. West Ham did a Reading the year before. Not exactly refuting my point that the next 15 years the League will be won by one of four if not three teams.
dmand said
That's absolutely ridiculous and miles from the truth. Wayne Rooney, Ryan Giggs, Paul Scholes, Steven Gerrard, Steve Finnan, Jamie Carragher, John Terry, Frank Lampard, Shay Given, Michael Owen, Gary Neville, Rio Ferdinand. Do you want me to keep going?

Ok look at Arsenal there isn't one player from that club on your list... how many English players do they have for example? They have no Irishmen , no Scots and no Welsh. Back in the 1980's your list of the top players from Ireland and Britain would have been 5 times as big. My basic point is still valid.

dmand said:
It does improve the standard. Look at how much the Premiership has improved since the Sky TV deal. Look at Chelsea when Abromovich took over, look at Gretna. Money means being able to afford better players, which improves the standard. Another one of your FACTS that are well off the mark.

England are sh1t which was in fact the point I was trying to make here.

dmand said:
Wrong again. Look at the seeding for this year's competition. All 4 English teams in the top group of seeds. 3 out of 4 teams in last year's semi-finals, a team in the last 3 finals, 04-05 2/4 semi finalists and the winner.

You're the very person that accuses me of changing the point when it doesn't suit my argument and you have done the same thing.
My point was English teams have won the European Cup/Champions League twice since 1992 that's not wrong it's a fact. And as a matter of interest where is the European Cup at the moment? I think you'll find it's in the AC Milan Trophy Room ! Semi-finals are all very well but if you have three semi-finalists and don't bring home the cup that says something in it's own way

dmand said There isn't. It's been a two horse so far this year, and would have been a one horse by now if Drogheda didn't have half their squad injured. Last year it was a two horse race, as was 2005, 2004 and 2003.

Bohs are not out of the race yet and themselves and Pat's were muck as regards the title race last season that is the point I was making . Not the same teams all the time here at home.

dmand said: The same in the Premiership. Arsenal lost to Fulham, Sheffield United, Man City and West Ham twice last season.
Chelsea lost to Middlesborough, Man Utd lost to West Ham twice, Liverpool last to Fulham. Wolves beat Man Utd a few years ago after being promoted.

Those results, were freakish and did not have an effect on the eventual League positions. There was never any chance of Man United not being in the top three or Liverpool failing to make the Champions League spots or Arsenal or Chelsea for that matter. Galway might well stay up this season, and are far more likely to beat a top team than their English equivalent standard team are. ;Wolves still got relegated despite taking that impressive scalp.
Sheffield United got relegated, Man City came close to being relegated and West Ham would have been docked points in this League for their transfer irregularities and would have ended up relegated.

The fact remains that the majority promoted Championship teams go straight back down all the time.
It happens occasionally here too but it's not written in stone.

I said something to an Italian friend of mine last season. It's amazing that even a rigged Serie A season ends up more interesting than the English Premiership. You have not done anything to disprove that view!

[DmanDmythDledge]

Well Man United were always in the frame. West Ham did a Reading the year before. Not exactly refuting my point that the next 15 years the League will be won by one of four if not three teams.

Your point was that it was too predictable (which was the bit I quoted). United were always in the frame but most people would have thought they would finish third.

Ok look at Arsenal there isn't one player from that club on your list... how many English players do they have for example? They have no Irishmen , no Scots and no Welsh. Back in the 1980's your list of the top players from Ireland and Britain would have been 5 times as big. My basic point is still valid.

No it isn't because it's still wrong, one team doesn't change that.

England are sh1t which was in fact the point I was trying to make here.

And what does that got do the with money?

You're the very person that accuses me of changing the point when it doesn't suit my argument and you have done the same thing.

The part where you said Spanish and Italian teams have dominated the CL was quoted.

My point was English teams have won the European Cup/Champions League twice since 1992 that's not wrong it's a fact. And as a matter of interest where is the European Cup at the moment? I think you'll find it's in the AC Milan Trophy Room ! Semi-finals are all very well but if you have three semi-finalists and don't bring home the cup that says something in it's own way

One team isn't reflective on all that country's representatives.

Bohs are not out of the race yet and themselves and Pat's were muck as regards the title race last season that is the point I was making. Not the same teams all the time here at home.

Weren't you giving out about Chelsea getting into the title race because they got money? Same as Bohs and Pats, but as usual the same logic only applies when you're wearing your anti-Premiership glasses.

Those results, were freakish

So what. You said those type of results never happen, I've given loads of examples. Your point has nothing to do with anything and you're just trying to make up excuses because you are wrong.

The fact remains that the majority promoted Championship teams go straight back down all the time.

Reading, Wigan, West Ham, Ipswich, West Brom...the list goes on.

I said something to an Italian friend of mine last season. It's amazing that even a rigged Serie A season ends up more interesting than the English Premiership. You have not done anything to disprove that view!

Enjoy the exciting title race this year?

Any chance of responding to my question on the UCD stats thread?

[cullenswood]

Of course not. Getting 3 teams to the CL semis does not prove there is quality throughout the league though

That is a argument that a load of people use, but the lower teams in Italy and Spain can be pretty poor also. I would say all in all the three Leagues (Spain, Italy and England) would all be about the same level. People just get their back up because they hear Sky telling us its the best league in the world all the time, but I'm sure that the Italian and Spanish equivalents tell their viewers the same things.

[OwlsFan]

4 out of the 8 seeded teams in the CL are from the Premiership.

As for strength in depth, outside of Real M and Barcelona, how often is la Liga won by other sides? Two horse race for the most part there.

Italy not much better. Juve and the two Milans have dominated there.

Do you judge a league on his best teams or mid ranking teams? If on its best, I'd say the PL is tops but with Spanish middle ranking teams being superior to their English counter parts. Swings and roundabouts.

[Cymro]

4 out of the 8 seeded teams in the CL are from the Premiership.

As for strength in depth, outside of Real M and Barcelona, how often is la Liga won by other sides? Two horse race for the most part there.

Italy not much better. Juve and the two Milans have dominated there.

Do you judge a league on his best teams or mid ranking teams? If on its best, I'd say the PL is tops but with Spanish middle ranking teams being superior to their English counter parts. Swings and roundabouts.

Valencia won the Primera a few years back

Also competition for the European spots is a lot less predictable in Spain.

[NeilMcD]

Yeah the man is after playing an important role in his team winning La Liga , clearly has no substance whatsoever.

Did I say that he has no substance. What I said that it is rich coming from Lalas having a go at the Premiership and then signing a player who is the personification of the things he talks about. Beckham is lucky if he is in the top 25 players in the world yet he is the most famous, not for his footballing ability but for far more other things.

[jebus]

In the last ten years the Premiership has been won by Man United, Arsenal and Chelsea, and I think its fair to say that Chelsea wouldn't have joined that list had the Russian takeover not happened.

In the last ten years in La Liga the title has been won by Real Madrid, Barcelona, Deportivo and Valencia, with Atletico winning it 11 years ago.

In the last ten years Chelsea, Liverpool, Leeds, Man Utd, Arsenal, Newcastle and Everton have all qualified for the Champions League from the Premiership

In the last ten years Barcelona, Real Madrid, Deportivo, Osasuna, Valencia, Villareal, Real Betis, Real Sociedad, Celta Vigo, Mallorca, Bilbao and Sevilla have all qualified for the Champions League from La Liga.

So to say they are the same in terms of the competition at the top if just a lie to be honest

[DmanDmythDledge]

Also competition for the European spots is a lot less predictable in Spain.

That because the top 4 teams in England are better than the top 4 in Spain.

If it's of interest to anybody there's a programme on Sky One tonight called "How TV changed football forever", which is basically about how Sky started showing live games etc and started pumping money into football, contrasted to the early days of black and white.

[NeilMcD]

Is it not mad that Sky are showing a show about how great they are. its going to be the biggest load of self congratulating rubbish ever.

[DmanDmythDledge]

on what do you base that statement?

This, recent European results and that they have better players IMO.

[Cymro]

That because the top 4 teams in England are better than the top 4 in Spain.

Or because the teams outside the top in England aren't as good?

When Valencia last won the title ('04 I think though I may be wrong) they finished 7th the year after. Can't see Man United finishing 7th next year and it goes to highlight the strength in depth of the Spanish league.

To say that the top 4 in Spain aren't as good as the top 4 in England over a reasonable period of time is pretty baffling when you think about the European records of the top Spanish sides.

[jebus]

To say that the top 4 in Spain aren't as good as the top 4 in England over a reasonable period of time is pretty baffling when you think about the European records of the top Spanish sides.

Tell me about it, England do better than Spain in the Champions League for one year and people start foaming at the mouth about how brilliant they are, I'd say they must all be Sun readers, but that would probably get me banned for using unneccessary evil words in my replies

[CollegeTillIDie]

Tell me about it, England do better than Spain in the Champions League for one year and people start foaming at the mouth about how brilliant they are, I'd say they must all be Sun readers, but that would probably get me banned for using unneccessary evil words in my replies

You're not wrong there ....

[Steve Bruce]

If English football was as rubbish as people like to think/say, then why is it the most viewed and richest league in the world.(includes all sports)

[galwayhoop]

If English football was as rubbish as people like to think/say, then why is it the most viewed and richest league in the world.(includes all sports)

not doubting you but have you any way of backing this up? i would have thought that la liga had serious viewing figures also.

and just cause it's the richest and most watched doesn't necessarily make it the best. i don't think that anyone here says that it's crap merely overhyped.

btw saying which league is the best is an unquantifiable thing much the same as saying what player is the best of all time. it is really a matter of opinion.

for example:
for those who love end to end fast paced games - the premiership is the best
for those who love techinical football and tactical nous - seria a i would think is what they want
for those who love flair and trickery from skillful players - then it has to be la liga

there is no mathamatical equation for what is the best league, how to judge which is or even what time span do you use - weeks, months, years, decades... until there is then the debate will rage and rage and us as unfortunate lapdogs of the british media will continue to be brainwashed into believing that the EPL is the best league in the world - regardless of whether it is or isn't.

why does it matter anyway, watch whichever league you find most entertaining!!

[osarusan]

why does it matter anyway, watch whichever league you find most entertaining!!

League of Gentlemen it is.

[Steve Bruce]

not doubting you but have you any way of backing this up? i would have thought that la liga had serious viewing figures also.

and just cause it's the richest and most watched doesn't necessarily make it the best. i don't think that anyone here says that it's crap merely overhyped.

btw saying which league is the best is an unquantifiable thing much the same as saying what player is the best of all time. it is really a matter of opinion.

for example:
for those who love end to end fast paced games - the premiership is the best
for those who love techinical football and tactical nous - seria a i would think is what they want
for those who love flair and trickery from skillful players - then it has to be la liga

there is no mathamatical equation for what is the best league, how to judge which is or even what time span do you use - weeks, months, years, decades... until there is then the debate will rage and rage and us as unfortunate lapdogs of the british media will continue to be brainwashed into believing that the EPL is the best league in the world - regardless of whether it is or isn't.

why does it matter anyway, watch whichever league you find most entertaining!!

I'm not saying English football is the best, I'm not saying it isn't either. Just merely pointing out to those who are anti-english football, that hundreds of millions of people cannot be wrong.

I'll also see if I can find proof of the viewing figures. I did read it a month or so ago, so I know it's right. Also Premiership football covers more countries than any other league as well.(over 200 countries as far as I remember)