gordoncharles

He spent all of last season in a relegation battle. It was in a different country, but the basic requirements of players in that situation are still the same, and the experience of it is valuable.

In the recent African Cup of Nations only 4 of the 16 coaches were black. What is the reason for that, because it certainly can't be racism? Tends to suggest that jobs are awarded on the perceived merits of the individual doesn't it? Edit: I should also point out that Burkina Faso's coach is the notorious former Cambodian dictator, Paul Put.

Of course it's uncompetitive. 53 participants, 23 of which qualify, and the non-qualifying 30 will include the likes of Kazakhstan, Andorra, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Georgia, Gibraltar, Estonia, San Marino, Faroes, Moldova, Malta, Azerbaijan, Armenia. Even Leichtenstein are currently in with a chance of qualifying for the play-offs. 23 of the 53 nations in it didn't even exist as FIFA or UEFA members more than 25 years ago. Most of the matches are Championship standard at best.

In sharp contrast with premier league football which is a sophistication reserved for the measured and realistic. I'd love to hear your justification for how the patronage of any top level professional football isn't a waste of time, energy and money, without a healthy degree of foolish delusion. I'm not sure what you're so smug about basically, such that you can call me, because I like going to international football, foolish. If you like it, good for you, but I don't because unlike you I don't consider the qualification process for any of these competitions to be top-level. they're way, way behind, and fundamentally uncompetitive. The time was that international football was the highest level of football, but that was an era in which, apart from a handful of stars, everyone pretty much played in their own country. Bringing together the cream of the talent of domestic leagues automatically raised the standard. But that's all changed now as all the world's best players play for Champions League sides and any half-decent pro from anywhere in the world plays in a major European League. In the 1970 World Cup Finals only 8 players in the entire tournament played outside their own land, in 1978 it was still only 22. In last year's World Cup (albeit the number of teams has doubled) there were 462 foreign players. As for the Euros, there's the splitting of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavian teams into about 20 independent nations and the arrival onto the scene of Conference North standard nations like Andorra, San Marino, Faroes and Gibraltar. This is quality?

Absolutely not, except in special circumstances - the exception to that is Iniesta who will usually be applauded on any ground.

"He's scoring goals in the Premier League and now he's doing it at international level" said Rooney. Except as far as these qualifiers are concerned "international level" is some way short of Premier League level, the same as it's short of the standard of every major European league, and several times 1.6km short of "Champions League" level. I admit that I have given up entirely on international football except for the knock out rounds of the major competitions as the rest of it is a giant waste of time, energy and money; a delusion for the foolish. Still, there is going to come a time, simply by the law of averages, when the next-big-thing actually lives up to the hype (remember the outrage in the press when Guaradiola suggested Barcelona had players as good as Jack Wilshere in their B team? Turned out Guardiola underplayed his hand), and so I have some sympathy with OutbyEaster's post. It's perfectly valid to suggest that we wait and see about Kane before declaring him to be the latest saviour as nobody can be sure if he can repeat his current success over time or whether he's going to be the new Michu.

I saw some hack on Sky's "Sunday Supplement" come up with that line as well. The reason English clubs can't do well in Europe at the moment is because the league is so strong. Please. I always end up defending the honour of Spanish cannon-fodder in those regular discussions about how supposedly more competitive the Premier League is, but the reality is that Granada, Rayo, Elche, Almeria etc often (not always) get on the end of good-hidings is simply that Real Madrid and Barcelona are better sides than those at the top in England, and with ridiculous arrays of attacking talent, such as if they get it right on the day they will run riot. In the last two seasons this is the record that England's CL contingent has had against the top three in Spain: P8 W0 D1 L7. If the elite English sides, Chelsea, Liverpool and City are getting beaten practically every time against the best Spanish teams then what does anyone really think Madrid or Barcelona would do on their own ground to QPR or Burnley? There's all sorts of other crackpot theories now being given an airing in the press. There should be a winter break, reserve teams need to be in the Football League ,squads are too small, and for all I know, not enough attention is paid to astrology, but there's a much simpler reason - at the moment the top English teams aren't quite good enough. There is an unwarranted arrogance about the assumed strength of the PL over other leagues which is masking this simple truth.

Completely agree with this. I cant enjoy la liga myself, seems tackling has all but been outlawed especially in the case of messi and ronaldo, all they have to do is look at a ref after they've been tackled to immediately get a freekick/pen. Also the amount of last minute soft fouls given by refs bending over backwards to hand the big sides wins seems ridiculously corrupt to me. Why I can't see Messi ever leaving La Liga, all too perfect for him there imo. Spanish referees are usually over-fussy and wildly inconsistent. I laugh when English supporters bemoan refereeing standards as it is still one area where the Premier League is the best, for all its faults. There is plenty of hard tackling in Spanish League games, has no one ever watched Sergio Ramos, much less David Navarro? Or this one on Gareth Bale recently which was only given as a yellow..... http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2hupiz With regards to Messi leaving Barcelona, where could he go that a ) isn't a step down? b )where any club can afford his 20m annual salary and £200m transfer fee without breaking UEFA FFP?

I would most sincerely doubt that. Apart from Messi and Ronaldo the only other strikers who have managed more than 25 goals in the Spanish League in the past five years are Higuian, Falcao and Diego Costa and they only managed it once each.

In recent seasons so have, for example, Valencia, Sevilla, Atletico and in fact every team in Spain other than the obvious two. That is an economic fact of life for all Spanish clubs. A club like Elche, Almeria, Cordoba, even Depor cannot even dream about signing a player for 5 million, regardless of how much he might become worth. This is the model that Sevilla have made very successful over many years and they're still doing it. It's a separate issue but it's one area where for all its money the Premier League fails drastically - huge sums are spent on players whereas some of that should be re-directed to scouting and coaching. Villarreal also has to comply with FFP which is why a couple of years ago the owner converted 150 million of debt into capital. He did that by selling shares in the family business to his brother. As a club, for all it's admirable qualities, it has not had to operate on the same basis as any of the others in La Liga. I am not saying this is wrong, just that it needs to be taken into consideration

They always bang on about Villarreal being such a small town (it is) without ever mentioning how it is an oddity in Spain, a bank-rolled club. Not that I have anything against that, nor the commitment the owner has shown to it, nor the big investment made in coaching at all levels. However, they are able to spend more than double than half of the teams in the league, which helps explain why they're able to attract and retain players other teams can't. As a routine hater of all football commentators and pundits there are actually some on Sky's Spanish coverage that I like - Terry Gibson, Gaizka Mendietta, Ossie Ardiles - and a couple of their commentators should be doing more games (Kevin Keatings, Jon Driscoll) instead of Sky's "Tyldesley/Townsend" axis of Rob Palmer and Gerry Armstrong.

It was, but Sky Sports love for Villarreal annoys me. "Marcelino continues to perform wonders with the budget at his disposal" was I think the quote tonight, a sentiment that they regularly trot out. Villarreal has (comfortably) the 7th biggest budget in the league and they are in 6th position. The only side below them with a bigger budget is Athletic and they have their own unique problems putting a squad together. So strictly in terms of money, they aren't over-performing. That said, they do usually put together football which is good to watch.

I've always thought that too. Actually I think he's a very good player but he receives an avalanche of hype from pundits, so in that sense - he's overrated. I like to compare him with a player the British media usually consider a liability - Sergio Ramos - as both are almost exactly the same age, ball-playing, aggressive centre backs who take risks. I firmly believe that Ramos is one of the most underrated players in the modern game (not outside the UK, he makes the FifPro team every year), but the difference is that Ramos has been an integral part of teams that have won every honour it's possible to win (which he has done playing both at full back and centre half) including 124 caps for the best international team in the modern era, whilst Kompany has won next to nothing.

And borne out by Yaya's miserable efforts today. Like all football pundits Carragher (assuming he had anything to do with that column apart from having his name on it) is entirely reactive, saying the first thing that comes to mind after any incident or result. I see in that link he has a go at City's squad players for being unable to cope with cup games, for which we can immediately just answer "Bradford City" and ask where does that leave Chelsea? I love the way that he (or his ghost writer) bemoans City's squad top-heavy with players in their late twenties and then lauds Chelsea for buying Diego Costa and Fabregas (players in the late 20s) with money raised from selling young players De Bruyne, Lukaku and Schurrle. The situation regarding Courtois is a fluke. It's not just City who have been failing in Europe, it remains to be seen what Chelsea do this time, but last season this club with the supposedly great long term plan got their behinds firmly spanked by Atletico Madrid. In fact in the last 12 months, the top three sides in the PL have come up against the top 3 in Spain on 7 occasions with this lamentable record . Pl 7 W0 D1 L6 F3 A13.

Carews (&Hanoi), Every lesser Spanish side that has played against Barcelona for the last three years has set themselves up pretty much to an identical template. That is - back four strung across the 18 yard line, full backs tucked in to the corner of the box. 4 midfielders, sometimes 5, immediately in front of the back four. Occasionally this gets a result so it always amuses me when media pundits - including those on Sky Sports La Liga - then pronounce that "the coach got his tactics spot on" as if somehow this approach is revolutionary. In fact, they all do the same thing. Manchester City, however, are not a lesser side. They aspire to be part of the European elite and as champions of England and the only challenger to Chelsea this season should be considered as such and despite the FFP regulations they have a wage bill of over £200m a year. Having come off the back of a 5-0 league win that could have been more, and against opponents who lost their own previous domestic league game, I don't think it's right to expect that a side that relies on its attacking capabilities should just try in their own home leg to be compact and play on the break. Manchester City is not a counter-attacking side. They defended their way to a comprehensive defeat over two legs last season, and in any case it's cowardly. 4-4-2 won Atletico Madrid the Spanish league last season with much inferior individual players to the two sides they finished ahead, and they're still playing with two (different) strikers now. Three weeks ago it was enough to thrash the best team in Europe 4-0. I'm old school enough to believe in the odd Clough-ism - players lose matches, not tactics.

yet they combined to win all 3 English domestic trophies last season ahead of the media super coaches Mourinho and Rodgers Yet both of those coaches have been found out time and time again in Europe over the past 10 years. Shows how poor the Premier League was last year, coupled with the fact 'that' United team won the league the season before. ...and again tonight. Against Barcelona, he plays 4 in midfield. This is a man paid millions each year. He thinks he can play a 2 in cental midfield against Barcelona. Nevermind the fact the two are Fernando and Milner (sorry Jimmy) This guy is a clown and he is stealing a living. 4-4-2. Both Malaga and Celta Vigo are very modest sides and both have beaten Barcelona at the Camp Nou this season (Malaga as recently as last Saturday). Both played 4-4-2. Atletico Madrid routinely play 4-4-2 against Barcelona. Real Madrid play with only three in midfield against them. 4-4-2 has nothing to do with it. It should be perfectly valid for a team with Manchester City's players.

The % of Spanish players in La Liga is usually around 60%, has been around that mark for a number of seasons. I'm not sure what point you are making there, Paul? If you believe that the PL teams in general are stronger than their La Liga counterparts I would disagree - pretty strongly too.

He's great to watch. I just really don't understand how Valencia saw nothing in him... Surely a player like him would flourish in La Liga? Apologies to those who have already seen me write something very similar before, but Valencia only have so many places available in their squad and they already have a number of similar players for his position. They'd previously had him out on loan so knew what they could expect of him. Effectively they sent Fede Cartabia out on loan instead this season to make room for Carles, this being before their new backer was confirmed. Valencia are now signing from a different pool of players and I also imagine they would think, like I do, that Fede Cartabia is a better player. He would no doubt have flourished in La Liga. But not at that level.

Elche you say. Sign him up. Not one you would want! There are a couple, though, better IMHO than the two you've already got.

Thats true, but in recent weeks they've been steamrolling teams. Mind you viilareal gave them a great game. They had the 3-1 win against Atletico also. When's the next el clasico? Yes, they have Paul, as they have changed their way of playing somewhat - most of their goals in recent weeks have been on the counter attack, which has not been the Barcelona way. Those three forwards, with space to work in, will be unstoppable. Their next meeting with Real Madrid is 21/22 March.

It also means that the most under-performing mediocre players will be impossible to move on (known to me as "Arsenal Syndrome") until their contracts run out. This will be to the great detriment of most clubs as anyone who thinks this additional money will not be blown on increased salaries is deluded, and certainly no student of football economics. I don't agree about ticket prices though, a lesser reliance on gate receipts should mean the prices go down.

It won't happen unfortunately as the other two are now too strong and Atletico will trip up against lower table sides more often than either behemoth. Meanwhile, apropos nothing, a goal I enjoyed from tonight! via Imgflip GIF Maker

In theory they are, in practice they haven't been. The main reason for that is that I think the whole Madrid attack has more ways of scoring - for example Cristiano, Benzema and Bale are all good in the air, they have always been quick on the break and they have several players who can score from distance. Their midfield is also more incisive. Meanwhile Barcelona have been a hostage to their own boilerplate style which has needed modifying for at least two years. In the last few weeks that has changed somewhat and they are now playing much faster on the break instead of allowing sides to regroup in front of them. Frankly that front three is ridiculous, when you compare it with, say, what either Chelsea or Manchester City have got - reliant as both are on one top class striker. If they get it together over a sustained period, as now it seems they might, they will be impossible to contain.

The Sky commentators on that game were Rob Palmer and Gerry Armstrong. I wouldn't pay too much attention to what they say as they've been doing it too long and are lazy and under prepared imho, I don't think there's a single match he covers where Rob Palmer doesn't make a basic factual mistake and Gerry Armstrong is the very definition of an amiable old duffer. He got that gig on the basis of two unsuccessful seasons with Mallorca in the 80s and it's the biggest pet peeve I have that he is simply unable to pronounce Iniesta's name correctly. [/rant off] All players at Real Madrid get booed, they've recently done it to Ronaldo and Casillas as well, so that means nothing. Bale has done well there although there are some realistic noises in the Spanish press that he fails to get involved in the game enough. For Suarez there is the problem of fitting into a very distinct style of play and also one that means he has far fewer touches in a game than he is used to. I expect him to come good - for example they seem to be breaking much quicker in the last few matches, the previously ignored Rafinha helps with that - at which time their forward line will be practically unstoppable. At the moment though, Madrid still has the more powerful attack, it's also much more varied.

Thanks for mentioning it, I'd only just got over it. Strangely I was quite happy with things for the first 55 minutes until the penalty and sending off, then it will went kind of... well. This video works for me but there's a chance it's blocked, this has all his goals for Elche I don't think he scored as many as he should, but these are all good finishes - what do they say about not a great goalscorer but a scorer of great goals? Goal 2 is in a local derby, you can probably guess the opponents in goal 4, and goal 5 is with the right foot.