Rumours ex-Chelsea (he was sacked this week) Paul Clement is taking over from Sammy Lee. We must find a job for Ray Wilkins...
It's professional football .... so logic has little to do with it, but there's madness aplenty!Originally Posted by golightly
Rumours ex-Chelsea (he was sacked this week) Paul Clement is taking over from Sammy Lee. We must find a job for Ray Wilkins...
Rumour has it that Hiddink declined the Chelski job because Roman wouldn't let him have Wilkins as his #2. Has Sammy Lee been sacked? There's a one or two ex-Chelski staff now at Anfield .... perhaps they can get Joe Cole interested again.
Hopefully we can get Cole interested in leaving...
... along with Sammy Lee presumably.
Should there now be a link to "The Small World Of Sammy Lee" thread ?
Last edited by billy bentley; 02-07-11 at 03:05 AM. Reason: spelling mistake
A very tense but exciting 2-1 win for England's women over New Zealand at the Women's World Cup yesterday. After a 1-1 draw against Mexico the other day our girls need a point against Japan (the best team in the group) to qualify for the next round.
Lets see if Ridsdale can do his magic in reverse this time and take a club in serious financial difficulties and turn it into a successful concern.
BBC Sport - Peter Ridsdale to become new owner of Plymouth Argyle
Cheers Mr S.....Rosary beads at the ready......
Lets hope he can get Argyle out of League 2 (promotion I mean) for a start. I'm not sure that many of us can still afford the �24.50 admission fee that was the case last season.....now we're down a couple of leagues how about lowering the prices....
Its a bit worrying about selling off the land around the stadium as Central Park (where Home Park is situated) is rather an oasis of green in an ever expanding concrete jungle.....
See from the article they just managed to scrape together the 11 players for a warm up session out at Marjons.....Anybody on here play....
Come on Plymouth...with a city pop of 250,000 plus the numerous supporters from Cornwall that travel up (plus other parts of Devon) there's no excuse not to get good crowds.....
Green Army....
England's women have just beaten Japan 2-0 in the World Cup to win their group. A quarter-final against either Germany or France awaits them on Saturday afternoon. It'll be live on Freeview Channel 301.
The men's team should be made to carry the bags and scrub the boots of these warrior women. They might even learn how to play the game.
They played really well. They looked comfortable on the ball and the whole team moved well, not like the immobile statues who masquerade as the men's team. Both goals were well taken and the defenders were superb.
In interviews the girls seem so keen to do well and made no excuses for a dismal opening performance against Mexico ... and they certainly aren't in it for the money!
In the UK the top players earn approx �16,000 from FA central contracts plus what they get from their clubs.
In the USA, where the players are full-time, the average salary is �70,000 per year. That's less than half of what Rooney gets per week.
More than interesting, Bats.
Those statistics are humbling for us men to ponder. I remember you espoused the virtues of the women's international team in previous tournaments. I read on the BBC text coverage that the 2 goals were a deft lob and a chip over the keeper. Any highlights being shown?
Highlights later tonight on BBC2.
Cheers Bats.
I'll be watching with my Nobby Stiles sideburns, a 10 KG casey ball and my Shoot annual from 1976.
Why is that? Are you subscribing to the view that because the women's team has won they are in some way superior to the men? If so let me ask you how many women in this country (And the whole world.) are full time professionals? How much competition is there for a place in the women's team or any of the other teams in this competition? It's much harder to get in the men's team of any country because the number of professionals ensures that the standard of competition and the standard of play is higher than it is in the women's game.
If we follow the logic that any winner is better than any loser then it means that the champion of the local golf club is better than any golfer that finishes 2nd in the Open. If these "Warrior women" are such footballing heroes then why is it that so few people are paying to watch them? Why do any of their televised matches attract such small audiences?
Come off it Roger,
The mens team are boring under-achievers. How many England games have really excited you over the past number of years? Name them. It's a sad fact that women's football will never achieve the recognition it deserves because of factors that are nothing to do with their level of excellence. Yes, there are many more professionals in the men's game, but that just makes you wonder even more why they fail to excite and excel. Their level of professionalism doesn't seem to prevent them from wasting time arguing with referees or simulating fouls that haven't actually happened! To compare the winning ladies Engand team of yesterday to "the champion of the local Golf club" shows that you have the same contempt and dismissive attitude to women's sport as most of the media. Far from being less competitive there are actually far less opportunities for the women to make their mark because of lack of sponsorship etc. I reckon the women have at least as big a hurdle (maybe bigger) than the men to climb to succeed.
Stretch your imagination back to even the last world cup and tell me how proud you were of our male "professionals".
In answer to your question I would not pay to watch the England men's team but I would go and cheer the ladies.
Ironically, they have more balls.
Edward, let me say right away that I couldn't care less about the England team so regardless of what they do on the pitch I'm never excited by them. I'm an Arsenal fan, I like watching them, the Premier League and the Champions League. I find those matches exciting because football is about achieving results, that should be the main aim of any of the teams in the PL and the CL. If it can be done in an entertaining way then so much the better. If the women were playing for the same rewards as the men and with the same amounts of money at stake then their game might be entirely different. If that were the case would the accent still be on attacking and entertaining the crowd? (That's if there actually is a crowd watching them.)
"It's a sad fact that women's football will never achieve the recognition it deserves"
The recognition it gets is the recognition that it deserves. The people in the UK who want to watch women's football are the people who are doing so. If it was so entertaining and irresistible then crowds would be flocking in their thousands to watch it but they aren't.
"To compare the winning ladies Engand team of yesterday to "the champion of the local Golf club" shows that you have the same contempt and dismissive attitude to women's sport as most of the media."
I'm sorry that you feel that I have contempt for them because I don't. I wasn't comparing them to the champion of the local golf club, I was pointing out what I see as the absurdity of suggesting that the women are in some way superior because they have won a match against other women. To me this is like saying that whoever wins League Division 2 is better than the runners up in the Premier League, I simply can't see any sense in that. If there is any contempt here then I think it's from you for suggesting that the men should be carrying the women's bags and cleaning their boots. It doesn't say anything for women's football if they need to be built up by disrespecting and demeaning the men's game.
"Far from being less competitive there are actually far less opportunities for the women to make their mark because of lack of sponsorship etc."
And exactly why is there a lack of sponsorship? If people were flocking to watch women's football then the sponsorship would flow naturally. That prompts the crucial question. if it really is so good then why aren't people interested in watching it? Why aren't tens of thousands of people paying to watch them?
Roger,
If you had watched the game in question, England v Japan, instead of making dismissive comments you might think differently. And then again maybe not. Comments like "the absurdity of suggesting that the women are in some way superior because they have won a match against other women".
Even the way you say they have won a match "against other women" sounds like you are undermining the victory as it's only women and they only beat other women. Bizarre! And beyiond sexist. You don't even mention that this was a hugely important game for the team that saw them qualify for the quarter finals of the World Cup. Also enough about the local golf club - just daft.
I wasn't being disrespectful to the men by suggesting they carry the womens bags - this was tongue in cheek - but I am serious in describing many premiership players (who make up our national team - the one you don't even watch but strenouously defend ) as the often overpaid, underperforming, over-hyped let-downs that they are. Your idea that football is about achieving results is true only to a point. I take it you were wild about the Greece team that won the European Championships, then? The point here is that here is a national team that played great football, a flowing and tantrum free game, with great passing moves, solid last man (sorry, make that woman!) defending and everything capped by 2 fabulous goals. I love the game of football since my youngest days but the beautiful game we cherish as fans is deeply buried under a mass of indisciplined players and managers, a gutless and corrupt world governing body and a level of hype and sillyness in the popular media that insults our intelligence. Add to that fans who liberally swear their verdicts over the ears of any women and children within earshot.
Maybe you should actually watch one of the women's games - us men could learn a lot from it.
Edward,
"Even the way you say they have won a match "against other women" sounds like you are undermining the victory as it's only women and they only beat other women."
This isn't bizarre or sexist, this is the crucial point, the men are full time professionals playing against other full time professionals. The women are mostly part-timers playing against other part-timers. How can the two be compared? it's comparing apples with oranges.
"Also enough about the local golf club - just daft."
I mentioned the local golf club in my first post, I said nothing about it in my second post.
"who make up our national team - the one you don't even watch but strenouously defend"
I'm derfending the men's game not the England team in particular.
"I take it you were wild about the Greece team that won the European Championships, then?"
I certainly wasn't wild about them but I do think it's better to be boring winners than exciting entertaining losers. Arsenal are reputed to play the most attractive football in the PL but they finished 14 points behind Man Utd. So much for "the beautiful game"
"Maybe you should actually watch one of the women's games"
I don't want to do that thanks. If you carefully read my posts you will see that I haven't actually criticised the women's football. I criticised the way that their football is being compared to the men's game.
I noticed that you avoided the question that I posed, this question - "That prompts the crucial question. if it really is so good then why aren't people interested in watching it? Why aren't tens of thousands of people paying to watch them?"
Posting Permissions
