QuoteThere are no extra games being proposed.
Am generally in favour of the principle, just much smaller groups...with less games/football.
13 extra games in two years is about 5 too many IMO.
There are no extra games being proposed.
Author of Never Felt Better (History, Film Reviews).
If you strip out all the needless friendlies and scratch out all the teams that Ardee doesn't consider to be real countries, we'd only have about one game a year.
Hardly. Since when did 4=1?
And not about extra games. We play far too many already.
Four friendlies/NL games per calendar year is more than enough.
How did you arrive at this magic figure?
By the fact have been to more sh*t internationals than I care to remember. How about you?
Clearly you think everything UEFA/FIFA propose is wonderful?
It isn't and they're not.
So the number of games a team should play has a direct relation to the number of games you're willing to watch?
Nothing to do with - ooh, let's say - what the manager wants? Or what the FAI (and their coffers) want?
Right you are so.
Yeah but what algorithm do you use? Do you notice by the fifth game of a season the quality drops, or are they just half as good?Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
I didn't say that(nothing to do with me or most fans for that matter), but most clubs/players want there to be less international football...so where do you fit say more than ten games into an increasingly congested calendar?
Right you are so, indeed.
Well UEFA certainly isn't going to reduce the amount of games nations play overall, not if they can help it.
Has somebody suggested playing 10 of these games a year? Or do you mean over two years, when we play around 12 friendlies anyway?
Author of Never Felt Better (History, Film Reviews).
I don't use any, but even you must be familiar with the adage 'quantity over quality'?
They will if the clubs ask...the CL is their ultimate baby.
So you reckon scratch teams play better when they have less playing time together?I don't use any, but even you must be familiar with the adage 'quantity over quality'?
So, why haven't they already?
Author of Never Felt Better (History, Film Reviews).
Maybe many of those internationals were crap because they lacked context? Or because we have been crap? That's the whole idea though, to have better and more meaningful games.
But I do have an open mind on the number of games we play. In general if we're winning I like them more! The August friendly was ridiculous, in particular. And most friendlies under Trap were snooze fests, but under Jack, Mick and Kerr I couldn't get enough of them.
Actually, you did. "Four friendlies/NL games per calendar year is more than enough", you said, and when asked to back this up, you said "By the fact have been to more sh*t internationals than I care to remember."
Back on topic, presumably the time around now - the first half of even-numbered years, when there aren't any qualifiers left - would see more games than other times. Again, not a bad idea. Probably the plan is to scrap the playoffs (when most countries play friendlies) and free up another international date there as well.
the CL is run by UEFA. The clubs have a strong voice at UEFA via the European Club Association. UEFA made concessions to ECA on international dates and windows and injury compensation etc. I believe further change to the qualification calendar is being discussed.
There will be a compromise but there is a limit as to how much influence the clubs can wield and both "sides" have just extended their cooperation agreement.
I think we may see something like the rugby calendar with distinct blocks of dates bunched together for internationals (rugby has November, spring and end-season. Is there a pre-season date too?) and uninterrupted runs for club competition. I'm not sure we'll necessarily see a reduction in international games though.
I wouldn't be so sure about that. The rugby clubs don't like the blocks because it's a long stretch without a home gate, hence why there are off-weeks in the Six Nations. Having said that, soccer players can play twice as many games as rugby players so the windows wouldn't have to be so long, plus the big clubs are a lot less reliant on matchday income.
(There's no pre-season date, except when the World Cup is played.)
Martin Samuel in today's Mail would beg to differ
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/art...esnt-care.html
Funny how he missed the bit about the new nations League though.
I think Samuel is a good writer but he is an unashamed apologist for all the EPL's extravagant excess and hence sees UEFA as an interfering foreigner. He's almost like the Nigel Farage of English football. Not to mention that his antipathy towards Platini seems personal.
I was a bit sketchy before Stutts, but now that I know Samuel doesn't agree I'm sure!
I don't think his article contradicts what I said though. You can see why Platini would like a block of time where all the focus is on international football, but the clubs needed coaxing to get on side.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks