- Mar 9, 2006
- 6,379
- 7,734
Americans polluting good sports with bullshit phrases from their terrible sports is what's tiresome.
Give him a break, he's only a rookie?
Americans polluting good sports with bullshit phrases from their terrible sports is what's tiresome.
yeah, but you knew what the guy meant (or at least do now) so being a twat about it doesn't really accomplish much. As for polluting good sports with bullshit phrases...I'm kind of with you on that although again it's just easier to appreciate the differences in language. There are a lot of fine sports in America by the way. If you don't like them...that's cool. I don't really get Cricket or Rugby and don't get me started on Australian rules football. But that's cool...I don't begrudge fans of these sports.We're not a fucking franchise, that's the point.
I think talk of him being on 350k after tax is slightly irrelevant. If he leaves Madrid he isnt getting near that anywhere from any club in the world (that he would want to go to) and if he is told he is surplus to requirements he doesnt strike me as the type to stay for the wages.
As for who he would replace (if by some miracle he signed) I would like to see Eriksen drop back deeper.
Interesting that you should comment on my linguistic exposure without knowing a thing about me. As an Englishman living in America and working with languages on a professional level, I feel I'm quite well placed to judge whether something is only used in the UK, America or both. I'm not saying I'm the leading authority on all things English language but given my exposure to both I feel I'm able to make a fairly educated judgement without having to "trawl through soccer forums" as you put it.
I'm fully aware that language changes over time. As you pointed out, using "literally" in the way I did has now become fairly commonplace. But that's just it. It's now so commonplace that who is anyone, including yourself, to say it's wrong. Calling a football/soccer player in Europe a "franchise player" on the other hand is not at all commonplace. In fact, as I mentioned, I've never heard anyone use that term outside of talking about North American sports. Presumably because, as I already pointed out, football teams in Europe are not franchises so the term doesn't make even the least bit of sense.
Feel free to trawl through forums but I'm afraid you'll find very little evidence to back up your claim, except perhaps for a few Americans who are new to football and so they fall back on the terminology they know because they haven't yet picked up on the vernacular of football in Europe, which is what I suspect you are..? There's nothing wrong with that at all. But just admit that you made a mistake rather than floundering about trying to save a sinking ship by trying to make out like it's a perfectly normal phrase to use.
The phrase you're probably looking for is "star player". Honestly, you can call it what you like as long as it makes sense. But you can't talk about someone being a "franchise player" when they don't play for a franchise.
When bales transfer leaked I'm sure there was a clause that if Madrid accepted an offer we had the right to match it.
So I guess technically it is in our hands.
yeah, but you knew what the guy meant (or at least do now) so being a twat about it doesn't really accomplish much. As for polluting good sports with bullshit phrases...I'm kind of with you on that although again it's just easier to appreciate the differences in language. There are a lot of fine sports in America by the way. If you don't like them...that's cool. I don't really get Cricket or Rugby and don't get me started on Australian rules football. But that's cool...I don't begrudge fans of these sports.
That has to be the worst clause ever.
So just to clarify...Nike are paying to bring Bale to Spurs Franchise™ to advertise Adidas and be our new Awesome Soccer MVP all star, because Levy is a tight bastard?
No, Adidas are paying Bale to wear Nike. Keep up.
*and Poch is leavingSo just to clarify...Nike are paying to bring Bale to Spurs Franchise™ to advertise Adidas and be our new Awesome Soccer MVP all star, because Levy is a tight bastard?
Just did a double dribble. Not done that since 1993wow not sure where to start . . As far as Barkley is concerned I 've been told nothing agreed. Like Breezer I was told something about Bale back in May but refused to believe it until it was explained that the financials could work. Bale would not be sold for anywhere near what we sold him for he is with Nike so large sponsorship deal I.e. personal image rights bonus and a load of other spin offs. Not saying it will get done but not totally put of the realms of possibility.
Bale will be 29 by the time we move into the new stadium, if his injury record doesn't improve this year we could get him on the cheap (relatively speaking) and he may be willing to give us a discount on his wage demands (unlikely but you never know). But would it be worth it, big money for an injury prone 29 year old
What a load of bollocks, Bale loves the club and would play for £30k a week and he'd give half of that to the Tottenham Hotspur Foundation.
I don't know - but I do know this is not the thread to discuss it...Does this article have a valid point about our transfer viewpoint ??
http://www.football365.com/news/spurs-are-playing-a-different-transfer-game-to-the-rest