What our opponents' fans are saying about us 18/19

[littlewilly]

Down at the Mac:

Eriksen playing testimonial football. Gazza soon to come on sporting comedy breasts.

Read more: http://downatthemac.proboards.com/thread/112006/tottenham-embarrassing?page=11#ixzz5l1LJBiQx

The one I like:
F**k me Moura just stole a kid.

 

[Croftwoodspurs]

The one I like:
F**k me Moura just stole a kid.

Some funny comments in that, I like the one where he should be banned for coming on to the pitch...

Then someone said that was unfair on hamer.

One fan was optimistic they could have been 3-2 up after a couple of chances.. Soon got put in his place that it could have been 7 0 before they had a chance. Lol

 

[Col_M]

My fav.....(extra points for using “Have” but missed the apostrophe

Tottenham could have had Mouras son playing and would have beaten us

 

[slartibartfast]

I do agree with this, but the smaller clubs haven't helped themselves, they all set up the same way against the top 6, defend in numbers and try to nick something they hardly threaten, they have the mindset of not getting a tonking I really don't understand why they don't just go for it. I watched Newcastle against the gooners and if they were a bit more adventurous and I think they could have got something from that game.

I think the answer is in the question.
That Huddersfield fan is bang on imo.
And FFP wont make a jots difference no matter how strictly its regulated. The bigger clubs would still have an enormous gulf in spending power.
There will always be bigger clubs and smaller clubs but the problem is the gap is too large making the whole thing far less competetive.
You only have to look at the top 6 results and see how many games those teams lost out of 38 (ok not us this season but we've won way more, only 1 draw) and how many points teams are now getting relegated with, less and less, while the winners are getting more and more.
The only thing that could change this imo is a cap on total transfer spend over a season. £200million max per club. You can buy 1 player or 10 but thats your lot. The bigger teams still offer more wages so would get the cream but it would make the likes of Pep have to actually show us what a genius he is rather than for any shit buys just go get another one (lets put him in charge of Cardiff or Huddersfield and we'll see what a fkin genius he is then).
It would slow players jumping ship for wages as the smaller clubs would have money to keep them.
This idea of course would NEVER EVER happen because the PL want our teams to compete in Europe and huge transfers and ridiculous wages help sell the product world wide so in the end it just is what it is.
The likes of Huddersfield, Cardiff etc just cannot and will not ever be able to compete and win a title, the same as we have little hope while simply being out spent.
Football fans live on hopes and dreams.
Money buys success and history shows us that.
It is a bit shit.
The championship, thats what it should be like for competitiveness.
If the EPL arent careful they will kill the golden goose. Take a look at the SPL, thats where we are heading. There will be 4 or 5 monster teams, if the money ever pulls out of Chelsea or Man City there will be less (God I wanna see that but I'll settle for a transfer ban for now).

 

[TheChosenOne]

I'm still seeing a few Arsenal fans moaning on Twitter about us .
.
I can't find one from a few hours ago but it was along the lines of "How can the FA allow Tottenham to play most of their remaining matches at their own ground?"

 

[double0]

I'm still seeing a few Arsenal fans moaning on Twitter about us .
.
I can't find one from a few hours ago but it was along the lines of "How can the FA allow Tottenham to play most of their remaining matches at their own ground?"

They are truly pathetic how about all the home games they played while we played away twice including wembley. I just hope we follow through and cement CL, still all to play for.

 

[spurslenny]

Imagine, just imagine, their meltdown if we manage to win the CL.

Makes me shiver just to think about it.

 

[rez9000]

I think the answer is in the question.
That Huddersfield fan is bang on imo.
And FFP wont make a jots difference no matter how strictly its regulated. The bigger clubs would still have an enormous gulf in spending power.
There will always be bigger clubs and smaller clubs but the problem is the gap is too large making the whole thing far less competetive.
You only have to look at the top 6 results and see how many games those teams lost out of 38 (ok not us this season but we've won way more, only 1 draw) and how many points teams are now getting relegated with, less and less, while the winners are getting more and more.
The only thing that could change this imo is a cap on total transfer spend over a season. £200million max per club. You can buy 1 player or 10 but thats your lot. The bigger teams still offer more wages so would get the cream but it would make the likes of Pep have to actually show us what a genius he is rather than for any shit buys just go get another one (lets put him in charge of Cardiff or Huddersfield and we'll see what a fkin genius he is then).
It would slow players jumping ship for wages as the smaller clubs would have money to keep them.
This idea of course would NEVER EVER happen because the PL want our teams to compete in Europe and huge transfers and ridiculous wages help sell the product world wide so in the end it just is what it is.
The likes of Huddersfield, Cardiff etc just cannot and will not ever be able to compete and win a title, the same as we have little hope while simply being out spent.
Football fans live on hopes and dreams.
Money buys success and history shows us that.
It is a bit shit.
The championship, thats what it should be like for competitiveness.
If the EPL arent careful they will kill the golden goose. Take a look at the SPL, thats where we are heading. There will be 4 or 5 monster teams, if the money ever pulls out of Chelsea or Man City there will be less (God I wanna see that but I'll settle for a transfer ban for now).

You're spot on, slarti.

What's depressing about the situation is that there's a group who simply refuse to understand that surely the point of a league is for it to be competitive?

You're wrong in one aspect, though: we're not heading for the SPL, we're already there, albeit with a slightly larger number of 'competitors'.

I'd love to see a League whereby any team has the chance to win it at the beginning of a season and not just as a once in a century fluke, but every year, for there to be genuine uncertainty about who could win it.

But, then I may as well wish to have my own fully functional Transformer...

 

[TheChosenOne]

You're spot on, slarti.

What's depressing about the situation is that there's a group who simply refuse to understand that surely the point of a league is for it to be competitive?

You're wrong in one aspect, though: we're not heading for the SPL, we're already there, albeit with a slightly larger number of 'competitors'.

I'd love to see a League whereby any team has the chance to win it at the beginning of a season and not just as a once in a century fluke, but every year, for there to be genuine uncertainty about who could win it.

But, then I may as well wish to have my own fully functional Transformer...

Nobody has told Wolves how it is meant to work.

They have a right go at the top big clubs but manage to get stuffed by the lower ones.

 

[Hotspur_Hero]

You're spot on, slarti.

What's depressing about the situation is that there's a group who simply refuse to understand that surely the point of a league is for it to be competitive?

You're wrong in one aspect, though: we're not heading for the SPL, we're already there, albeit with a slightly larger number of 'competitors'.

I'd love to see a League whereby any team has the chance to win it at the beginning of a season and not just as a once in a century fluke, but every year, for there to be genuine uncertainty about who could win it.

But, then I may as well wish to have my own fully functional Transformer...

If that’s what you want in a league then go watch the MLS! Not the highest quality, but in terms of parity across the league, its unparalleled. There’s pros and cons of both systems, but the premier league would not be the best league in the world (or even close to the stature it is today) if there was complete parity.

 

[Dillspur]

You're spot on, slarti.

What's depressing about the situation is that there's a group who simply refuse to understand that surely the point of a league is for it to be competitive?

You're wrong in one aspect, though: we're not heading for the SPL, we're already there, albeit with a slightly larger number of 'competitors'.

I'd love to see a League whereby any team has the chance to win it at the beginning of a season and not just as a once in a century fluke, but every year, for there to be genuine uncertainty about who could win it.

But, then I may as well wish to have my own fully functional Transformer...

Can you name any team sport where all the teams have the same chance of winning?

 

[rez9000]

If that’s what you want in a league then go watch the MLS! Not the highest quality, but in terms of parity across the league, its unparalleled. There’s pros and cons of both systems, but the premier league would not be the best league in the world (or even close to the stature it is today) if there was complete parity.

With all respect, can you point to where I asked for "complete" parity?

 

[rez9000]

Can you name any team sport where all the teams have the same chance of winning?

And likewise with all respect, can you point to where I said the "same" chance of winning?

 

[rez9000]

And to both @Hotspur_Hero and @Dillspur my hope is that we won't end up with the "this is the way it's always been done" argument, for a couple of reasons:

A) because it's not a particularly strong argument; and

B) it's actually not the way it's always been done.

 

[Dillspur]

You're spot on, slarti.

What's depressing about the situation is that there's a group who simply refuse to understand that surely the point of a league is for it to be competitive?

You're wrong in one aspect, though: we're not heading for the SPL, we're already there, albeit with a slightly larger number of 'competitors'.

I'd love to see a League whereby any team has the chance to win it at the beginning of a season and not just as a once in a century fluke, but every year, for there to be genuine uncertainty about who could win it.

But, then I may as well wish to have my own fully functional Transformer...

I wasn't disagreeing with you, I was just trying to point out that it really doesn't happen in any other sports.

 

[Hotspur_Hero]

With all respect, can you point to where I asked for complete parity?

I think asking for a league where every single team to has a legitimate chance to win the league at the start of the season implies at least some level of parity. Every team having a chance to win seems to be prefaced upon all teams being close enough to equal (or the system being completely random I guess). Otherwise outside teams winning the league would be the fairytale situation you specifically used to qualify it. Obviously league wide equality is a sliding scale, but the MLS is about as close to completely equal as you’re likely to find while the Prem is at the other end (though not as bad as some). Not sure why you took umbrage with it. I didn’t mean if condescendingly. I unapologetically love the MLS!

 

[rez9000]

I wasn't disagreeing with you, I was just trying to point out that it really doesn't happen in any other sports.

Well, that would be a fundamental misunderstanding of my point.

My point isn't about every team having the same chance of winning, it's all teams having a realistic chance of winning. And that's not far-fetched, nor is it unrealistic. Realistic doesn't necessarily mean strong, it just means it wouldn't be considered unprecedented.

When Huddersfield were first promoted, there was all this media guff about how they were historical English league title winners (I believe winning it three times on the trot at one point). What was unsaid, but perfectly obvious, was that that was never going to happen to them.

So what's the point for them? The issue is that some fans will never have the opportunity of seeing their club lift a title, because the field has been so tilted, so skewed that it's not really a competition.

That is fixable. But you're right in that the likelihood of it being fixed in our lifetimes is slim to none.

 

[Hotspur_Hero]

And to both @Hotspur_Hero and @Dillspur my hope is that we won't end up with the "this is the way it's always been done" argument, for a couple of reasons:

A) because it's not a particularly strong argument; and

B) it's actually not the way it's always been done.

I wasn’t making any arguments “about the way it’s always been done”. I was just plugging a league that i truly enjoy because you seemed to be interested in a league with more uncertainty in it. No need to read into it any more than that.

 

[Dillspur]

@rez9000 I'd say the PL is still the most competitive in Europe, yes it's split between the same 3/4 clubs, but look at the top leagues in Europe, PSG dominate the French league, Juventus the Italian, Munich the German, even the "lower leagues" are generally dominated by 1 team, only the Spanish come close to the competitiveness of the PL.

 

[rez9000]

I think asking for a league where every single team to has a legitimate chance to win the league at the start of the season implies at least some level of parity. Every team having a chance to win seems to be prefaced upon all teams being close enough to equal (or the system being completely random I guess). Otherwise outside teams winning the league would be the fairytale situation you specifically used to qualify it. Obviously league wide equality is a sliding scale, but the MLS is about as close to completely equal as you’re likely to find while the Prem is at the other end (though not as bad as some). Not sure why you took umbrage with it. I didn’t mean if condescendingly. I unapologetically love the MLS!

And apologies for falling on semantics, but you said 'complete' parity, not 'some level of parity'. Some level of parity is achievable and would not detract from the quality.

Your example of the MLS is a false argument because the quality of the MLS is not due to the parity of the teams but becuase of the fact that football is not a particularly popular sport or one that sits close to the American cultural heart.

However, American sport is a good example. The NFL has a levelling system in place with the draft system and the number of teams who have won their respective titles and the Superbowl has varied far more greatly than the teams who have lifted the League or FA Cup in this country in recent times.