• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** English Football Season 2020-21

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
Generally enjoy the sentiment, but some of the finest feelings in sport tend to result from either of the aforementioned failing. So... wouldn't want to give that up.
 

JOJOXI

State Vice-Captain
Also am intrigued as not really heard this answered in reports - is this EFL money being shared evenly between the clubs or at least between the clubs in the same division? Is it an application basis where clubs have to apply to the EFL for money?

I ask because whilst I think the new proposals are awful - I actually had some sympathy for the PL before the most recent proposals - people mention the PL spent X million on transfers but whilst my club spent hundreds of millions not every club spent much. It comes at a time when the governement have stopped an income source of not just EFL clubs but PL clubs (although to a far greater extent with EFL clubs who don't have a massive TV deal) and then the government look to the PL to effectively make up for the financial shortfalls - when some PL clubs will be losing money themselves without splashing cash in the transfer market I can understand why they might think given government legislation is hitting our own finances too its a bit of a double whammy that you are limiting our revenues whilst expecting us to pay for you limiting others revenues. Of course you have some clubs that spent massive money in the transfer window and this argument doesn't really apply to clubs that have spent close to and over £100mil as you can't really cry poverty in such cases.

Also if the money is being given to every EFL club I can understand why say a Palace/Burnley may be thinking why should we give money to Birmingham (Who have made money from selling Bellingham) or Exeter (who have made a rumoured £4mil or so from Watkins sale) when they aren't spending much on their own squads and will be losing money themselves during this pandemic whereas looking online a couple of sources seem to suggest Exeter's wage bill is just over 1.6mil a year. If that's the case Exeter are receiving over twice their annual wage bill.

On the other hand I can understand why an Exeter or Birmingham might think why should we lose out because of our transfer business, effectively they've invested in youth - especially Exeter and because of that and doing good transfer business it means they don't get money every other club gets but given this is a situation of financial need rather than a question of giving EFL clubs more money generally, I can understand why some PL clubs may be opposed to handing out money to all EFL clubs (if that is what the EFL plan on doing) - especially when looking at Wikipedia (not the most reliable source but better then no source) it looks like Birmingham's owners are substantially wealthier then Burnley's owners about 7 times wealthier.

Given a loan was being mentioned before these new proposals how does it get paid back? If/When the PL ask for their money back, if some clubs that have benefitted from loans either can't repay or don't exist anymore due to financial issues who makes up the shortfall. The PL would hopefully forfeit the money that can't be repaid but I wouldn't bet on them doing that, especially if they weren't getting something in return...

That isn't to say the PL shouldn't help but do think its more complicated then made out perhaps
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Harry Maguire needs a long rest from football. I was going to mock him for his red card but he looked mentally fried walking off.
 

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
He's probably not the only one tbh. Bound to be loads of other players out there who are just not in the zone.
 

grecian

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Well thank **** international week is over.

Just one thought on it though, not quite sure why all the fuss about Southgate leaving out Grealish, when he left out probably the best English player in the country too.

Ho-hum.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I was a bit confused by the criticism because it looks to me like Southgate has been picking players based largely on managing their ridiculous workloads, with maybe a bit of experimentation too. So his best players not being in the team doesn’t mean much.

But also, being an international manager is primarily about picking the best players, which most don’t manage. I remember realising Southgate was decent at it when he unhesitatingly binned Hart for Pickford, which Hodgson never managed. Pickford still being in the team despite being so obviously worse than several other keepers is a sign that Southgate isn’t so good at the job any more. Maybe he’s reached that late stage Del Bosque place where he’s become too close to players who performed for him in the past to make the right decisions.
 

grecian

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I was a bit confused by the criticism because it looks to me like Southgate has been picking players based largely on managing their ridiculous workloads, with maybe a bit of experimentation too. So his best players not being in the team doesn’t mean much.

But also, being an international manager is primarily about picking the best players, which most don’t manage. I remember realising Southgate was decent at it when he unhesitatingly binned Hart for Pickford, which Hodgson never managed. Pickford still being in the team despite being so obviously worse than several other keepers is a sign that Southgate isn’t so good at the job any more. Maybe he’s reached that late stage Del Bosque place where he’s become too close to players who performed for him in the past to make the right decisions.

In the end Southgate's great thing has been trying to build a club type feeling in the side which clearly didn't exist in his and other generations. So maybe he thinks the likes of Pickford and Maguire are key to that. I dunno, Coady was very effusive about being welcomed into the dynamic, and he was a big plus.

Yet it should be reminded we have a lot of good players ATM, who, because we have a solid academy system nowadays, do not lack the technical side that previous generations did, and are generally more adept at keeping the ball than previous generations, was always our Achilles heel. He now needs to get the best out of a pretty good hand. I just don't see how you keep out world-Class players like Sancho and TAA. In fact I don't think you leave them out because they don't fit in the system, but you build the system around them.

Anyway, this is why I wonder why all the hype has been about a 7/10 creative mid, like Grealish.

Personally Kane plays deep, with Sterling and Sancho ahead of him and wide, hard on Rashford and the like, but that is what I'd do.
Think it's how Kane will be playing at Spurs with Bale and Son ahead of him.
 

wpdavid

International Coach
I don't think the covid-related changes to the domestic game have made Southgate's job at all easy, so I'll forgive him if he makes a few wrong calls. The level of disruption means that class > form is an even bigger factor than normally. And I can think of a few players from the 2018 WC who he's let go. Perhaps that's easier when they aren't even regulars in their club team, which I suppose won't happen to Pickford.

Regarding Sancho, is he quite what being being cracked up to be just yet? Granted I don't see much of his club games. But from what I've seen at international level, he doesn't leap-frog Rashford at this stage. If Kane is playing deeper, I want players ahead of him who are confident in front of goal.
 

Top