Setenza

May 30 2011, 12:23 PM

Going into the game with the attitude that it's all pointless is the problem they had. All I'm saying is that another approach might have done better.

Setenza

May 30 2011, 12:23 PM

Against another team, they could wll have won the CL this year and the premier leagyue, not a bad set of plaeyrs.

The Eggman

May 29 2011, 09:19 AM

So, Findus, about that 50/50...

findus

May 30 2011, 11:15 PM

The Eggman

May 29 2011, 09:19 AM

So, Findus, about that 50/50...

C'maaaaaaaaaaan! My 60-40 was reliant on Man U making a game of it, which they clearly didn't. As noted elsewhere, it was as if Ferguson sent them out with little in the way of a detailed plan. The midfield was horribly flat (shape-wise), making it easy for Barca to penetrate, Carrick and to an extent Giggs are passengers when Man U don't have the ball, not what you want in the middle of the park. Park was the opposite - plenty of vim, but not much on the ball. Evra and Fabio were bombscares on a number of occasions, caught wildly out of position. Vidic was excellent.

The main problems for Man U I thought were, firstly, that they utterly failed to get Valencia into the game (I made a mental note that it was the 61st minute before he was given possession on the wing in a 1-on-1). That's criminal. Probably as much his fault as the rest of the team. Nani was introduced far too late, and even then Valencia kept his place. Secondly, Busquets was allowed to dictate at the break-up of play. The increasing frustration apparent in both Rooney and Hernandez when their running was easily dealt with by knocking loose balls to Busquets tells me that Ferguson had told his midfield to make sure Busquets was marked when the front two pressed, something they again utterly failed to do.

The Eggman

May 31 2011, 11:04 AM

findus

May 30 2011, 11:15 PM

The Eggman

May 29 2011, 09:19 AM

So, Findus, about that 50/50...

C'maaaaaaaaaaan! My 60-40 was reliant on Man U making a game of it, which they clearly didn't. As noted elsewhere, it was as if Ferguson sent them out with little in the way of a detailed plan. The midfield was horribly flat (shape-wise), making it easy for Barca to penetrate, Carrick and to an extent Giggs are passengers when Man U don't have the ball, not what you want in the middle of the park. Park was the opposite - plenty of vim, but not much on the ball. Evra and Fabio were bombscares on a number of occasions, caught wildly out of position. Vidic was excellent.

The main problems for Man U I thought were, firstly, that they utterly failed to get Valencia into the game (I made a mental note that it was the 61st minute before he was given possession on the wing in a 1-on-1). That's criminal. Probably as much his fault as the rest of the team. Nani was introduced far too late, and even then Valencia kept his place. Secondly, Busquets was allowed to dictate at the break-up of play. The increasing frustration apparent in both Rooney and Hernandez when their running was easily dealt with by knocking loose balls to Busquets tells me that Ferguson had told his midfield to make sure Busquets was marked when the front two pressed, something they again utterly failed to do.

Well, I'll reiterate that it was more that Man United couldn't stop Barca, whatever they did, or whoever they chose to play.

whatsthatonyourback

May 31 2011, 11:40 AM

The Eggman

May 31 2011, 11:04 AM

findus

May 30 2011, 11:15 PM

The Eggman

May 29 2011, 09:19 AM

So, Findus, about that 50/50...

C'maaaaaaaaaaan! My 60-40 was reliant on Man U making a game of it, which they clearly didn't. As noted elsewhere, it was as if Ferguson sent them out with little in the way of a detailed plan. The midfield was horribly flat (shape-wise), making it easy for Barca to penetrate, Carrick and to an extent Giggs are passengers when Man U don't have the ball, not what you want in the middle of the park. Park was the opposite - plenty of vim, but not much on the ball. Evra and Fabio were bombscares on a number of occasions, caught wildly out of position. Vidic was excellent.

The main problems for Man U I thought were, firstly, that they utterly failed to get Valencia into the game (I made a mental note that it was the 61st minute before he was given possession on the wing in a 1-on-1). That's criminal. Probably as much his fault as the rest of the team. Nani was introduced far too late, and even then Valencia kept his place. Secondly, Busquets was allowed to dictate at the break-up of play. The increasing frustration apparent in both Rooney and Hernandez when their running was easily dealt with by knocking loose balls to Busquets tells me that Ferguson had told his midfield to make sure Busquets was marked when the front two pressed, something they again utterly failed to do.

Well, I'll reiterate that it was more that Man United couldn't stop Barca, whatever they did, or whoever they chose to play.

That's quite a level of certainty you have in Barca's quality & Man U's lack of it.

The Eggman

Apr 15 2011, 08:25 AM

findus

Apr 15 2011, 07:37 AM

So in essence, Italian football (economically/strategically) stood still after the dominance of the mid-nineties and early noughties while the rest of Europe's big guns waved as they zoomed ahead? It's strange to hear that Juve are getting their own 41,000 (Sheffield Wednesday, Aston Villa, Everton-sized) stadium, and only now.

(M)Any potential Maldini's or Baggio's coming through?

Italy's dominance in the late 80s and 90s came at a cost - massive debt. That had to be paid off at some time, and they started paying back large amounts in the 2000s, so not only did England and Spain earn more, but Italy was paying back more as well.

Even if those three were starting from a zero debt basis, England and Spain still has more income, and can afford to attract better players. In general, there's a bigger global market for English and Spanish football than for Italian football - it's more attractive for most fans than Serie A.

But Italian clubs are now having more to spend, since much of the debt has been paid off, and at least they can start using what income they do get to buy players, spend on wages, etc.

The rich benefactor (Berlusconi, Moratti, de Laurentiis etc) issue is a red herring, as even if they both wanted to spend 300 million of their own cash on the club, they couldn't, as Serie A now has tight regulations on sustainability, which are becoming harder to get round (Milan and Inter have already tried - there's a system of player valuation that can get round it to an extent, but even with clever manipulation of that, you can only get away with an increase of maybe 20-30 million of 'sugar daddy' money).

So Italian clubs are now pretty much having to spend only what they earn. Unlike in England and Spain, where there are no such rules. Barca are 350 million in debt, for instance. Real likewise (even more, I think). Chelsea and Man City have spent far more than their club income.

UEFA's plans on sustainability rules would have an impact, if they were to be implemented, but....

So England and Spain have zoomed ahead in terms of debt levels as well. We'll see how that pans out in a few years. Barca and Real will probably get some cushy government arrangement to buy a training ground for 300 million, or something...

That said, and despite Serie A's (relative) austerity, in the last decade they've still managed CL wins in 2003, 2007 and 2010, compared to La Liga's 2006 and 2009 wins, while the Premier League has 2005 and 2008. Granted, probably La Liga will get 2011 as well. Overall though, in terms of co-efficient, Italy has lost its 4th CL place to Germany. Some of that comes down to performance in the UEFA Cup, as the points gained are almost identical. The strength in depth in Serie A isn't really there. The clubs are too flaky. Udinese shit one season, great the next, then shit. I can see the bigger clubs becoming more consistent, soon enough. Napoli seem to have reasonable stability, with an excellent manager. Roma have cleared most of their debt with the sale. Juventus are pulling it together as well. So I do expect a much stronger Serie A in 2015, say, with Milan, Inter, Juve, Napoli and Roma all reasonably strong now that debt isn't so much of an issue.

There are no budding superstars, although there are some excellent players. There are a few very good players like Rossi. But he's already 24, and Quagliarella is 28. Balotelli has a lot of ability, but he's still not even close to those two mentioned, and he's an idiot as well.

The most worrying thing is the lack of strong defenders. Inter's Santon is the only one with real promise, and his career has stalled. The other young defenders like Ranocchia, Bonucci, Criscito and Astori, aren't close to the defenders of old. And Chiellini is just pish.

Quote:

 

The Nerazzurri sacked Gian Piero Gasperini after he failed to win any of his first five matches in charge, replacing him with Claudio Ranieri.

Inter have fared a little better since then, winning three games, but successive defeats at home to Napoli and Catania have left the club in 17th place in the Serie A table, outside the relegation zone on goal difference alone.