alpal78

What about the fan club thingy that was supposed to buy out the club?

which is really the best way in business. Once one business starts subsidizing another, you get into all sorts of financial mess/trouble.

You are correct there, too - it HAS gone over my head and, I suspect, over everyone else's who is reading this. Sorry to have to labour the point but football at the top level is ALL about results. Its not really. You watch football to enjoy yourself, thats why you started watching it. Theres not much use winning in a sport you're no longer finding enjoyable to watch in the first place. At that point you're just tied in through loyalty due to when you previously enjoyed it or the hope that in the future it will once again become enjoyable. In my point i took relegation out of the equation, which you then randomly took as me saying it didnt matter. To get the most out of football for a viewer there has to be a balance between enjoying what you watch & getting the results. So say finishing 10th yet having a season full of end to end high scoring games that you're sometimes on the losing end of, may actually end up being a far more enjoyable season for a fan....than finishing 8th with a load of 1-0's. Can't believe you had to explain that, it was clear the first time.

Why shouldn't he? Never said he shouldn't! I just think at the moment our best chance will be with three in midfield, and I think it might be too much responsibility to ask Carroll to play upfront alone. Ideally we sign a good striker to partner him, as well as a really good dynamic central midfielder that would improve us in a 4-4-2. The odds of these signings though? Not so sure. Very low odds. Any more signings will probably be more defenders and/or CMs. I am thinking we'll only get two to three more players in. Boy you're optimistic, I'll be surprised if we get more than one in!

Let's cast the net even wider: Baggio > Zidane? Discuss. And maybe even Bergkamp > Zidane? Discuss. Waste of time, nothing to discuss, not even close

Hahah let's start comparing Zidane, Xavi, Figo and throw in Messi for good measure I give up, I mean for me Xavi is a brilliant player but he has not even been acknowledge as the best player of the year, let alone his generation. How can he even be considered as one of the legends like Zidane. It seems to me that most of those who are putting him on this pedestal as to be equivalent to the likes of Zidane are Barca/Spanish fans. Such blatant biasness gives very little credence to such views. I will just say that if you ask an average football fan without any affiliation to any of Barcelona, Madrid, Spain or France, I'm confident that most would say that Zidane is the better player.

If that was your response to my post on Xavi's assist rate in this World Cup, then I have no idea what you are on??? The number of assists he made at this WC is completely irrelevant as he played brilliant the whole tournament and Spain went on to win it. Sorry you're not getting away with that. Yes Spain won and Xavi was a vital team member, but how much he contributed to the team's success is the best indicator if you want to assess Xavi as an individual player. So I take it you concede that Xavi was not able to produce his Barcelona form for Spain? Or was he in playing in a different position for Spain? Again genuine question.

If that was your response to my post on Xavi's assist rate in this World Cup, then I have no idea what you are on???

What about his thoughball for Torres in the Euro 2008 Final, or his pin point cross to Messi in the Champions League Final? Frankly you don't have a clue what you're talking about and should quit while you're behind. Well that would simply mean that he was unable to reproduce his Barcelona form for this World Cup (at least in terms of assist). This again puts the comparison with Zidane into perspective who had no problems reproducing his Madrid form for France.

Congrats then at least you have a sense of perspective. On my part, I never said that Xavi wasn't good. In this thread alone, I've called him best midfielder currently, best passer, brilliant....etc. It's only when posters like Messi and Village Idiot, funnily enough two Barcelona/Spanish fans (correct me if I am wrong) argues that Xavi is as good as Zidane, that the debate becomes silly.

Genuine question how many assists did he get for this World Cup? I'm asking because I don't know.

You make it sound like Zidane is just a brilliant individual player and not a team player. Granted unlike Xavi, Zidane played further up and was not at the base of the midfield, but when Zidane was playing for France, most of French attacks went through him, whether that be through a simple pass, taking on players at ease or his trademark roulette. When he beats players, it opens up room for the other players which is why Zidane was a both a brilliant individual and team player. Yes Xavi has the highest passing rate, but whilst those were important to retain possession, how many of them created meaningful attacks let alone goals? I also disagree with Messi's assertion that Xavi's close control is unmatched. Messi has as good if not better ball control especially when taking on players and if the comparison extends to previous players, then Zidane's ball control was also superior.

Wullie I can see your point and indeed there is more to Zidane than the 2 headers he scored in the final. But equally I don't think it is fair to refer to them as just "headers from corners". Are you suggesting that headers from corners are easy to score from? I would disagree because during corners, players are usually tightly marked and it takes movement, excellent timing and perfect execution to score the way he did....twice. Moreover, many brilliant players freeze when it comes to playing in the WC (English players are testament of this) let alone the WC final, to score two goals in the finals requires loads of confidence, nerves of steel and incredible match temperament at the highest level. Whilst the two goals do not adequately describe Zidane, it is a good representation of the type of player that he is, one of the legends of world football. Xavi needs to do more to enter this bracket. Xavi is a vital/indispensable piece of the Spanish/Barcelona masterpiece which includes the likes of Iniesta and Messi. France and Madrid (admittedly to a lesser extent) were synonymous with Zidane.

True not his fault but that means we can't say that he can individually win a game the way Zidane can. There is a difference between being immense and winning the world cup final for your team. Xavi has not done that. Anyway if you want to believe that Xavi is as good as Zidane, please go ahead, but outside of blinkered fans of Barcelona and Spain, very few will agree with you.

david may has many more medals than alan shearer. Xavi has been a cornerstone of the teams he's won those medals with. First of all depends on your definition of what constitutes "major titles". But more importantly more medals simply mean that Barcelona has been a better team than Madrid, though we are comparing two different time period. Regardless it is safe to say that the titles that Xavi won has been more of a team effort which is the ethos for both Barcelona and Spain. When Xavi single handedly wins Spain a World Cup Final, then he can be placed in the same bracket with the likes of Zidane. Till then he is the inferior player.

I'm with you on this, I mean Xavi is probably the best passer in the world right now. But there is no way he can be compared to Zidane, the man is just from a different planet and one of the few players that delivers at the highest level (finals of WC and CL). In Madrid, they use to say "silent the orchestra is playing" in reference to Zidane.

I agree with you to a certain extent. Yes a kung fu kick like De Jong's would have been condemned even in the premiership. But there were many late tackles and reckless challenges that were condemned in the finals that would have been condoned in the Premiership as just physical play. If someone broke a leg, it would have been unfortunate but not premeditated. The tackle on Aaron Ramsey comes to my mind. It was a lunging tackle, studs up at high speed, worse then many tackles in the final which were condemned, yet were seen as part of the Premiership by most pundits.

From Arseblog. Some good points. What total rubbish. That Arsenal fan can cry as much as he wants about tackling, soak up the Wenger bullshit that they are targeted and refs do fuk all against them but those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Arsenal are and always have been a snide and dirty team, playing any kind of underhand tactics to win a game. There's a nasty side to Arsenal, he's clearly forgetting about that when spewing all that poor me bollocks there. You are right yet you are missing the point. Yes Arsenal have 'dirty' players but they are not a dirty team like some others or like the Dutch played in the finals. For the record, Spain is not all beauty either, players like Puyol, Ramos and Xabi can give as good as they get. Most of Spain's yellow cards were deserved. The real point the Arsenal fan is making is on the hypocrisy of pundits, the idea that Arsenal is a clean team is merely implied and not the point of his post. His claims are spot on for 2 points. 1) When Spain play passing football, most pundits say it's ball control and how football should be played. When Arsenal do that, it's typical Arsenal, all pass and no cutting edge yet their style of play is very similar to Spain's (maybe one notch lower in terms of quality) 2) When British/premiership players go in with a reckless challenge that can potentially break a leg, most pundit defend it as the British/premiership way or phrase like "football is a physical game" or "it was not premeditated". But yesterday there was almost unanimous condemnation of both Van Bommel and De Jong and the Dutch team in general. My view is that I like both Spain/Arsenal style of play and there is no place for reckless challenges (be it premeditated or not) in both the Premiership and international football. I hold a consistent view on both accounts. If you hold different standards for Spain and Arsenal, then of course you come across as a hypocrite!

Kind of shit then, he doesn't even have a face!

I guess it depends on wha you are looking for. If your thing is ball possession and cute passes, then Spain takes it but the French team was lethal on the attack, so much penetration. For me it is the latter. Plus the French team had a more solid defence. Don't get me wrong, I like the way Spain played but to me they just didnt have the cutting edge of the French team.

He just loves attention doesn't he? I bet he thinks himself as more important than some Presidents/Prime Ministers.

I voted France because I think they were the better team. But how the hell are we supposed to vote now based on what we might think 50 years later?!

Overall pretty average but a few games really stand out and upgraded the world cup standard to decent. Don't think we'll ever get a game with so many mixed emotions and drama as the Uruguay vs Ghana match. Other outstanding games were the Uruguay vs Germany, Uruguay vs Holland, Holland vs Brazil, Germany vs Argentina and of course Germany vs England (though I zone out for the last 10 minutes of that one).

9...I have no faith in Hughton tactically or even to get the right players (assuming money is available).