After tonight's Barca PSG game

Got to thinking about all the diving and cheating that goes on. Great game tonight for the neutral, but Suarez and Neymars diving antics were embarrassing.
Not sure if anyone else will agree with this, but the greats of the past such as George Best, Pele, Maradona etc, always tried to stay on their feet and score, even with defenders pushing and trying to take them down.
Ok Maradonas hand of god moment was cheating, but they always seemed to have the desire to stay upright and get the last word by scoring. So many others would go down if you so much as blew on them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

Got to thinking about all the diving and cheating that goes on. Great game tonight for the neutral, but Suarez and Neymars diving antics were embarrassing.
Not sure if anyone else will agree with this, but the greats of the past such as George Best, Pele, Maradona etc, always tried to stay on their feet and score, even with defenders pushing and trying to take them down.
Ok Maradonas hand of god moment was cheating, but they always seemed to have the desire to stay upright and get the last word by scoring. So many others would go down if you so much as blew on them.

---

PS you can add Messi to that list. He always tries to stay on his feet.

A couple of years ago jordi alba went down as if an arsenal player had kicked him when there had been no contact.

It always seems much worse when a big team does it against a smaller side, and they don't come much bigger than Barcelona.

It just comes down to what constitutes a foul. Years ago it would have had to have been a sufficient contact to have impeded you or brought you down. Nowadays it's seems as though if you're touched, however lightly, you have to hit the deck in order to display to the ref that you've been fouled.

IMO if the tackle isn't hard enough to bring you down, then it's not a foul anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barry Shitpeas

It just comes down to what constitutes a foul. Years ago it would have had to have been a sufficient contact to have impeded you or brought you down. Nowadays it's seems as though if you're touched, however lightly, you have to hit the deck in order to display to the ref that you've been fouled.

IMO if the tackle isn't hard enough to bring you down, then it's not a foul anyway.

---

if paris st germain had been chasing a four goal deficit at home, you can bet your bottom dollar that they would have been playing the referee as well as barcelona, it would not have been allowed to happen .

the champions league is very much like the premier league the top sides will always get key decisions go for them. its all to do with tv and viewing figures and how much money they can make.. :thumbup:

they want all the top sides playing against each other in the major finals , even though most of the country or neutrals want a david v goliath scenario which is more entertaining than watching the same teams win everything.

they do not realise that they are boring most of the country to death :hehe:, and that if football becomes a closed shop many people will just simply switch off if you do not support any of the top sides:thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chris

they want all the top sides playing against each other in the major finals , even though most of the country or neutrals want a david v goliath scenario which is more entertaining than watching the same teams win everything.

they do not realise that they are boring most of the country to death :hehe:, and that if football becomes a closed shop many people will just simply switch off if you do not support any of the top sides:thumbup:

---

We might like to think this is true, but it's absolutely not. David v Goliath is great if David wins, but most of the time it's Goliath with a comfortable 2-0 without even trying. Look at the FA Cup finals since the famous Wimbledon win. I'd count a dozen where there's a big club against a 'smaller' one. The only David to win was Wigan.

What you're saying doesn't really make sense anyway. First, they're concerned about viewing figures so they make sure the big teams go through. Then many people will simply switch off if it's only the big sides left? How can both be right?

Still, everyone seems to have been bored to death by the Barca game tonight :thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

Still, everyone seems to have been bored to death by the Barca game tonight :thumbup:

---

Yeah and we got the Monaco v Man City game to come. Yawnsville!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

We might like to think this is true, but it's absolutely not. David v Goliath is great if David wins, but most of the time it's Goliath with a comfortable 2-0 without even trying. Look at the FA Cup finals since the famous Wimbledon win. I'd count a dozen where there's a big club against a 'smaller' one. The only David to win was Wigan.

What you're saying doesn't really make sense anyway. First, they're concerned about viewing figures so they make sure the big teams go through. Then many people will simply switch off if it's only the big sides left? How can both be right?

Still, everyone seems to have been bored to death by the Barca game tonight :thumbup:

---

its very simply to explain, how many finals have been contested by the biggest clubs in the country in the last 15 -20 years ?

name me a final that does not include the following teams, man utd, chelsea, arsenal, liverpool, man city, arsenal, spurs, etc. the only one was portsmouth v cardiff, this year will be exactly the same. :thumbup:

unless you fancy lincoln to get there. :hehe:

You were just talking about David V Goliath. Now it's "very simply to explain" but you're talking about something else.

For what it's worth, I don't think much of the country gave a shit about our final.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

Got to thinking about all the diving and cheating that goes on. Great game tonight for the neutral, but Suarez and Neymars diving antics were embarrassing.
Not sure if anyone else will agree with this, but the greats of the past such as George Best, Pele, Maradona etc, always tried to stay on their feet and score, even with defenders pushing and trying to take them down.
Ok Maradonas hand of god moment was cheating, but they always seemed to have the desire to stay upright and get the last word by scoring. So many others would go down if you so much as blew on them.

---

It's part of the game now ,don't ever see it changing , if our promotion hinged on a blanted dive and resulting penalty that won us the game ,would we boo or moan , I guess not , we would chuckle and move on ,.

Its an unfortunate side effect to a great sport that has so much to lose, on a single decision or act , and until they video reference the game retrospectively on this matter and punish known cheating harshly with point reductions, we have to accept it , or watch another clean upright morale sport, such as cycling , athletics, boxing ,horse racing 😅

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

You were just talking about David V Goliath. Now it's "very simply to explain" but you're talking about something else.

For what it's worth, I don't think much of the country gave a shit about our final.

---

most of the country are sick to death of the same six or seven clubs ruling the roost FACTAMUNDO :thumbup:

go back to before sky tv came along and see how many clubs contested an fa cup final then , southampton , coventry, wimbledon, sunderland, fulham, ipswich, brighton, sheff wednesday, the list is endless. it as become a closed shop now and the fa cup is basically the same as the premier league now, dominated by the clubs with all the money :thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chris

most of the country are sick to death of the same six or seven clubs ruling the roost FACTAMUNDO :thumbup:

go back to before sky tv came along and see how many clubs contested an fa cup final then , southampton , coventry, wimbledon, sunderland, fulham, ipswich, brighton, sheff wednesday, the list is endless. it as become a closed shop now and the fa cup is basically the same as the premier league now, dominated by the clubs with all the money :thumbup:

---

Care to name a decade when there weren't six or seven dominant clubs? Name any decade and I'll tell you who the dominant half dozen were at that time :thumbup:

By the way, since 2000 (about the same timescale as your list) Southampton, Millwall, West Ham, Portsmouth, Cardiff, Stoke, Wigan, Hull, Villa and Palace have all been in an FA Cup final.

yeah, how many won though ? :hehe:

im talking about winners not somebody making the numbers up . :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

Care to name a decade when there weren't six or seven dominant clubs? Name any decade and I'll tell you who the dominant half dozen were at that time :thumbup:.

---

The 1890s?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chris

yeah, how many won though ? :hehe:

im talking about winners not somebody making the numbers up . :hehe:

---

You think Fulham, Brighton and Wednesday won?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

You think Fulham, Brighton and Wednesday won?

---

they were more underdogs won the fa cup, than there as ever been since before sky tv came along, and that wont change anytime soon. whilst the priveleged few clubs have all the money period. :thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chris

they were more underdogs won the fa cup, than there as ever been since before sky tv came along, and that wont change anytime soon. whilst the priveleged few clubs have all the money period. :thumbup:

---

You've got the makings of a good point in there somewhere but I'll help you get it out. There's no point using FA Cup finals as a benchmark because you don't need to be a huge club to get there. The last seven finals have had Wigan, Villa, Stoke, Hull, Portsmouth and Palace in it.

There's also no point looking at the top end of the Premier League. For about a decade, only Man Utd and Arsenal won it - and they were so far ahead it looked like they would dominate for another decade. Then Abramovich came along and now the top of the league is as open as I have ever known it to be.

What you need to be looking at is the bottom end of the PL. That's what can become a closed shop as the teams that get relegated have a strong chance to bounce back straight away and it becomes ever more difficult for other clubs to get promotion (as Leeds will testify). But the top of the league doesn't prove your point at all because there are half a dozen clubs who have a very realistic chance of winning it this season, and even the current champions aren't in that list. Next season it will be just as open.

Now you can thank me for helping your argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyclops

The 1890s?

---

Blackburn, Wolves, Sheffield Utd, Preston, Villa, Sunderland

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

Got to thinking about all the diving and cheating that goes on. Great game tonight for the neutral, but Suarez and Neymars diving antics were embarrassing.
Not sure if anyone else will agree with this, but the greats of the past such as George Best, Pele, Maradona etc, always tried to stay on their feet and score, even with defenders pushing and trying to take them down.
Ok Maradonas hand of god moment was cheating, but they always seemed to have the desire to stay upright and get the last word by scoring. So many others would go down if you so much as blew on them.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

PS you can add Messi to that list. He always tries to stay on his feet.

---

Plus, Jimmy Greaves :thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

Got to thinking about all the diving and cheating that goes on. Great game tonight for the neutral, but Suarez and Neymars diving antics were embarrassing.
Not sure if anyone else will agree with this, but the greats of the past such as George Best, Pele, Maradona etc, always tried to stay on their feet and score, even with defenders pushing and trying to take them down.
Ok Maradonas hand of god moment was cheating, but they always seemed to have the desire to stay upright and get the last word by scoring. So many others would go down if you so much as blew on them.

---

I'm giving up my Sky and BT subscriptions next month, so will have to rely on Match of the Day, Channel 5's Football League coverage (I know), You Tube and Cardiff City World for my football "fix" from then on. I'm looking forward to it in many ways because it's a bit like going back to my roots in the 60s, 70s and 80s when I first became a football nut. However, the one doubt I have in the back of my mind is that I'm not appreciating how the game, and the way it is covered on television, has changed since those days.

Yes, you'd always have analysis of foul play (I can remember the BBC having a field day with their coverage of the Francis Lee/ Norman Hunter and Billy Bremner/Kevin Keegan punch ups forty years ago), but so much of the modern Match of the Day coverage mirrors what you get from Sky whereby a lot of time is spent analysing possible penalties to see if they were dives or not. In a five minute package of highlights of any game these days, there is very likely to be two or three "incidents" where penalties are claimed.

I don't blame the television companies for this really, because they're only reflecting what the game has become - nowadays, it's very rare to come across a professional football match that can be said to have been won on superior footballing ability alone.

I'm glad they got through and didn't care how they done it. I wanna see atleast one of the big 3 in Cardiff. If it's a real Madrid Barca final, it could turn out to be the most watched club game ever, but I'd take one of them 2 against Bayern

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

Care to name a decade when there weren't six or seven dominant clubs? Name any decade and I'll tell you who the dominant half dozen were at that time :thumbup:

By the way, since 2000 (about the same timescale as your list) Southampton, Millwall, West Ham, Portsmouth, Cardiff, Stoke, Wigan, Hull, Villa and Palace have all been in an FA Cup final.

---

And Leeds?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cwhris

yeah, how many won though ? :hehe:

im talking about winners not somebody making the numbers up . :hehe:

---

Usually the better teams win. The better teams are usually those higher up the league. Next you will be telling us the Pope prays for peace

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimmy the Jock

And Leeds?

---

This thread is about teams who've made it to the fa cup final and not some shitty 3Rd world backwater

:thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

Got to thinking about all the diving and cheating that goes on. Great game tonight for the neutral, but Suarez and Neymars diving antics were embarrassing.
Not sure if anyone else will agree with this, but the greats of the past such as George Best, Pele, Maradona etc, always tried to stay on their feet and score, even with defenders pushing and trying to take them down.
Ok Maradonas hand of god moment was cheating, but they always seemed to have the desire to stay upright and get the last word by scoring. So many others would go down if you so much as blew on them.

---

People are saying that was neymar's best ever performance.

I thought he was complete and utter turd.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordKenwyne

People are saying that was neymar's best ever performance.

I thought he was complete and utter turd.

---

Let's look at the facts.

88 mins gone - Barca 5-3 down on aggregate and on their way out.

Full time - Barca win 6-5 on aggregate thanks to 3 late goals (2 goals and an assist by Neymar)

Perhaps he was utter turd for the first 87 minutes?

Apart from when he won the penalty for Barca's third goal.

If he's utter turd when he gets 2 goals and 2 assists in the greatest comeback of a generation then god help the opponent when he has a stormer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr Lecter

Let's look at the facts.

88 mins gone - Barca 5-3 down on aggregate and on their way out.

Full time - Barca win 6-5 on aggregate thanks to 3 late goals (2 goals and an assist by Neymar)

Perhaps he was utter turd for the first 87 minutes?

Apart from when he won the penalty for Barca's third goal.

If he's utter turd when he gets 2 goals and 2 assists in the greatest comeback of a generation then god help the opponent when he has a stormer.

---

Ye I accept he did the business. Taking a pen when king cheat suarez also did what was required of him.

PSG sat back and allowed the onslaught. He had so many chances to run at the defence. He was dire for majority of his attempts.

I like him as a player though I think he'll be a ballon d'or contender. Messi wasn't as involved last night so it was down to Neymar too much

Chris, you just said that you wanted 'David v Goliath' finals :hehe: it's been pointed out that there have been lots of them in the FA Cup since 2000 :hehe: but now it's not relevant as the 'David' teams didn't win :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordKenwyne

Ye I accept he did the business. Taking a pen when king cheat suarez also did what was required of him.

PSG sat back and allowed the onslaught. He had so many chances to run at the defence. He was dire for majority of his attempts.

I like him as a player though I think he'll be a ballon d'or contender. Messi wasn't as involved last night so it was down to Neymar too much

---

I agree that he was garbage for 87 minutes and i put that on here at the time.
What i like about Neymar though is his bravery to keep trying things when it's not going for him.

He's no Messi and Iniesta cos his option choices are often poor whereas the other two tend to pick the correct option 9 times out of 10.

Kadeem Harris is similar to Neymar (not in ability) but in mentality in that when he's losing the ball all the time, the next time he picks it up he'll go at the defender again and if this results in one or two goals a game then his job is done like in the Burton game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

You've got the makings of a good point in there somewhere but I'll help you get it out. There's no point using FA Cup finals as a benchmark because you don't need to be a huge club to get there. The last seven finals have had Wigan, Villa, Stoke, Hull, Portsmouth and Palace in it.

There's also no point looking at the top end of the Premier League. For about a decade, only Man Utd and Arsenal won it - and they were so far ahead it looked like they would dominate for another decade. Then Abramovich came along and now the top of the league is as open as I have ever known it to be.

What you need to be looking at is the bottom end of the PL. That's what can become a closed shop as the teams that get relegated have a strong chance to bounce back straight away and it becomes ever more difficult for other clubs to get promotion (as Leeds will testify). But the top of the league doesn't prove your point at all because there are half a dozen clubs who have a very realistic chance of winning it this season, and even the current champions aren't in that list. Next season it will be just as open.

Now you can thank me for helping your argument.

---

the top end of the premier league as been a closed shop for years, barring leicester winning it last season, the top four virtually picks itself every season, barring a miracle chelsea have already won it and we are only at the beginning of march :hehe:

as for the teams coming down and going straight back up again, where are villa and norwich this season ? :hehe: the championship is a far more open league than the premier league will ever be simply because the top five or six command most of the money especially from sky tv, champions league, gate receipts, sponsorships etc.:thumbup:

As uncomfortable as it is, I have to agree with Chris. The Prem and especially the Champs league are practically cabals and were designed to be so. So when I watch a game like last night's I feel the quality but the edge is taken off by knowing that the same teams from the same countries will be back again next year and virtually every year unless they cock it up big time (rather than a consistent resurgence of other teams/countries).

I agree there are anomalies and there have always been dominant teams but the 'giants' are given a far greater chance these days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chris

the top end of the premier league as been a closed shop for years, barring leicester winning it last season, the top four virtually picks itself every season, barring a miracle chelsea have already won it and we are only at the beginning of march :hehe:

as for the teams coming down and going straight back up again, where are villa and norwich this season ? :hehe: the championship is a far more open league than the premier league will ever be simply because the top five or six command most of the money especially from sky tv, champions league, gate receipts, sponsorships etc.:thumbup:

---

The top four was a closed shop, but since Man City forced their way in it's become more open. Spurs are genuine contenders every year now.

Chelsea will probably win it this season. They finished 10th last season. Man Utd's last three finishes are 5th, 4th and 7th after being 1st or 2nd nearly every season for two decades. It definitely doesn't pick itself any more. Again, I'd like you to tell me a time when you couldn't have a very accurate stab at who would finish in the top end.


As for the Championship, Norwich bounced back in one season last time they came down. Maybe they won't this season but Newcastle will. Villa are a badly run club, so it's no surprise they are struggling. The three promoted teams last season were Burnley, Hull and Middlesbro - Burnley and Hull have both been promoted three times in less than a decade, while Middlesbro were an established PL team for over a decade themselves, until they slumped.

In fact, since we got promoted, Bournemouth is the only 'new' team to go up. It would be amazing if Brighton and Huddersfield both manage it this season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

The top four was a closed shop, but since Man City forced their way in it's become more open. Spurs are genuine contenders every year now.

Chelsea will probably win it this season. They finished 10th last season. Man Utd's last three finishes are 5th, 4th and 7th after being 1st or 2nd nearly every season for two decades. It definitely doesn't pick itself any more. Again, I'd like you to tell me a time when you couldn't have a very accurate stab at who would finish in the top end.


As for the Championship, Norwich bounced back in one season last time they came down. Maybe they won't this season but Newcastle will. Villa are a badly run club, so it's no surprise they are struggling. The three promoted teams last season were Burnley, Hull and Middlesbro - Burnley and Hull have both been promoted three times in less than a decade, while Middlesbro were an established PL team for over a decade themselves, until they slumped.

In fact, since we got promoted, Bournemouth is the only 'new' team to go up. It would be amazing if Brighton and Huddersfield both manage it this season.

---

i agree over newcastle going up: , but this season two teams out of brighton, huddersfield, leeds, sheffield wednesday, reading or maybe even fulham are going to join them:thumbup:. none of them sides have been in the premier league for donkeys years , in fact some have never been in the premier league at all .:thumbup:

the point i am making is there is far more variety in the championship and chance of promotion, i could hazard a guess already who will finish top four in the premier league next season :thumbup:, me and many others including probably yourself, would not have a clue with any certainty who will be top six in the championship next season. :thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluebirdman Of Alcathays

As uncomfortable as it is, I have to agree with Chris. The Prem and especially the Champs league are practically cabals and were designed to be so. So when I watch a game like last night's I feel the quality but the edge is taken off by knowing that the same teams from the same countries will be back again next year and virtually every year unless they cock it up big time (rather than a consistent resurgence of other teams/countries).

I agree there are anomalies and there have always been dominant teams but the 'giants' are given a far greater chance these days.

---

The Champions League is like a cabal, now, yes. The PL title was for a while - around 2000, we were 90% sure Man Utd would win it and if they didn't it would be Arsenal. Now you're looking at four or five clubs with a genuine chance (not counting one-offs like Leicester). To go back to chris' post earlier, six or seven clubs ruling the roost is actually very competitive. I don't see that in any other big league.

But with each year that passes, it's the midtable teams who move further away from Championship level, clubs like West Brom, Stoke, Southampton, dare I say it Swansea. That's where the closed shop comes in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

The Champions League is like a cabal, now, yes. The PL title was for a while - around 2000, we were 90% sure Man Utd would win it and if they didn't it would be Arsenal. Now you're looking at four or five clubs with a genuine chance (not counting one-offs like Leicester). To go back to chris' post earlier, six or seven clubs ruling the roost is actually very competitive. I don't see that in any other big league.

But with each year that passes, it's the midtable teams who move further away from Championship level, clubs like West Brom, Stoke, Southampton, dare I say it Swansea. That's where the closed shop comes in.

---

Yeah, all good points. It's certainly more open than other leagues but open to whom? I'm not so sure Sheff Weds, Palace, Leeds, Villa, Forest, Norwich, Everton, West Ham, Southampton, Watford, Ipswich, West Brom, QPR and Derby (or teams of that ilk) would get into the top 4 now (as they did in the 20 years prior to the Prem) unless they pay the cabal fees. Mind you, Tottenham aren't paying the fees as such but they're not a provincial team and are about to move into a 60,000 seater stadium.

Anyway, I hope I'm wrong and there are more Leicester types in the coming years. Except Swansea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluebirdman Of Alcathays

Yeah, all good points. It's certainly more open than other leagues but open to whom? I'm not so sure Sheff Weds, Palace, Leeds, Villa, Forest, Norwich, Everton, West Ham, Southampton, Watford, Ipswich, West Brom, QPR and Derby (or teams of that ilk) would get into the top 4 now (as they did in the 20 years prior to the Prem) unless they pay the cabal fees. Mind you, Tottenham aren't paying the fees as such but they're not a provincial team and are about to move into a 60,000 seater stadium.

Anyway, I hope I'm wrong and there are more Leicester types in the coming years. Except Swansea.

---

the premier league goes in cycles the problem is its between the same 3 or 4 clubs :hehe: . man city, chelsea, man utd and maybe arsenal if they ever decide to spend some money. :hehe: the rest are making the numbers up, liverpool and spurs have never won the premier league and wont win it anytime soon :thumbup:

since the premier league started in 92/93 season only six teams have won it that is in 25 years , that shows how much of a closed shop it really is :thumbup:, blackburn and leicester were both one offs neither side carried on from where they left off.:thumbup:

the rest both man city and chelsea have basically spent millions to achieve a league title which previously eluded them for donkeys years, that only leaves man utd and arsenal both massive clubs who were collecting champions league revenue for years.:thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chris

the top end of the premier league as been a closed shop for years, barring leicester winning it last season, the top four virtually picks itself every season, barring a miracle chelsea have already won it and we are only at the beginning of march :hehe:

as for the teams coming down and going straight back up again, where are villa and norwich this season ? :hehe: the championship is a far more open league than the premier league will ever be simply because the top five or six command most of the money especially from sky tv, champions league, gate receipts, sponsorships etc.:thumbup:

---

In the 24 seasons since the advent of the Premier League there have been 6 different winners, in the 24 years prior, there were 7 different winners. Not a huge difference.

Turns out, the good teams just win more often than the bad ones :shrug:

This is more applicable to the post you just put up

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by City123

In the 24 seasons since the advent of the Premier League there have been 6 different winners, in the 24 years prior, there were 7 different winners. Not a huge difference.

Turns out, the good teams just win more often than the bad ones :shrug:

This is more applicable to the post you just put up

---

go back 25 years before the premier league started and i make it nine winners who have won the first division title.

man utd, everton, liverpool, leeds, arsenal, forest, derby, villa, man city. plus throughout them years it was not the same teams finishing in the top 4 every season, like it is now. :thumbup:

they was one team entering the european cup as it was then just the champions, not the top four as it is now, they was nowhere near the same amount money involved as there is today, its a different ballpark altogether nowadays:thumbup:

You have to wonder why the likes of Neymar and Suarez feel the need to dive all the time. They are both brilliant players in their own rights. Is it in their blood, or do they just do it because they know they can get away with it.
Last nights comeback was awesome, but for me it was tainted by the diving antics.