Cybereagles

pajimoh wrote: Belgium stayed, France stayed. Look at the combined EPL players in those teams. Don't bother add the English team.

England, Belgium and co were shite in 2014. But then we didn't use national teams to measure the alleged quality of the EPL.

cic old boy wrote:

pajimoh wrote: Belgium stayed, France stayed. Look at the combined EPL players in those teams. Don't bother add the English team.

England, Belgium and co were shite in 2014. But then we didn't use national teams to measure the alleged quality of the EPL.

quit while you're behind
Espana won in 2010 and we did not stop reading how the league quality influenced their NT

Espana have been sh$t the last 2 WC's thanks to setting records on passes completed

5 games sweet o
DNA no good o

tfco wrote:
I won't even use England as a yardstick for TBL.
Belgium...and to a lesser extent France.

England is playing like Leicester or Everton

5 games sweet o
DNA no good o

The French main man is Mbappe from PSG. France has got this far due to solid defending from Umtiti and Varane - from leagues where there is no defending - allegedly. Belgium were pants in 2016 and 2014. Would you accept the EPL was shite then?

tfco wrote:


quit while you're behind
Espana won in 2010 and we did not stop reading how the league quality influenced their NT

Espana have been sh$t the last 2 WC's thanks to setting records on passes completed

5 games sweet o
DNA no good o

And in 50 years of hurt for England, you told us the national team had nothing to do with the league! Talk about trying to have your kenkey and eat it.

tfco wrote:
Please enlighten WE on which WC has 'not-been-pants'
We will wait

5 games sweet o
DNA no good o

2014, 2010, 2002, 1998, 1994, 1990, etc. I can point out the outstanding games in those WCs too. I can't think of one in this WC.

I actually think the success of Spain from 2008-2012 was due to the overlap between the Barca and national teams - from front to back of the team (Puyol, Alba, Pique, Busquets, Xavi, Iniesta, Fabregas, Pedro, Villa etc). When 3/4 of your defence, 100% of your midfield, and 2/3 of your attack play for the same club team every week, all year, good things will happen for the national team.

Egypt has the same phenomenon from 2006-2010 when most of the NT was from Al Ahly (Hadary, Gomaa, Fathi, Motaeb, Shawky, Aboutrika, Hosny, Hassan, Said, Mohammed, Barakat etc).

The USSR and Ukraine also had great success under Lobanovski when the core of their team were from Dinamo Kiev. Ditto Yugoslavia and Red Star Belgrade (Mihajlovic, Pancev, Prosinecki, Savicevic, Jugovic, Binic, Stojanovic).

tfco wrote:

quit while you're behind
Espana won in 2010 and we did not stop reading how the league quality influenced their NT

Espana have been sh$t the last 2 WC's thanks to setting records on passes completed

5 games sweet o
DNA no good o

cic old boy wrote:

tfco wrote:
Please enlighten WE on which WC has 'not-been-pants'
We will wait

5 games sweet o
DNA no good o

2014, 2010, 2002, 1998, 1994, 1990, etc. I can point out the outstanding games in those WCs too. I can't think of one in this WC.

Oga..

Argentina v France
Belgium v Japan
Belgium v Brazil
Argentina v Croatia
Portugal v Spain
Spain v Morocco
Iran v Portugal
Germany's games...

We have seen some good games o.

cic old boy wrote:

tfco wrote:


Quit while you're behind. Singling out one player to make your crap point.

5 games sweet o
DNA no good o

When England went home early in tournaments, WE said England wasn't an indication of the quality of the EPL. Now they have stayed beyond expectations (thanks to beating mighty Tunisia, Panama, Colombia and Sweden), WE are now using it as a yardstick for the greatness of OUR league.

Uhm, Chief.... the converse has also been stated by the Anglophobes as the reason why England has regularly gone home early: "the weakness of their league and the lack of quality players".

So now they've got to the semis, its a little disingenuous to now quote the We Brigade, as if their opinion wasn't stoutly contested back then in the way I've mentioned above.

Rather than look at a single factor (English National team's S/F placing) as an indication of EPL strength, it is the other incontestable factors that should hold sway:
1. For the last two (probably even more) World Cups, the EPL has had the greatest number of players (represented in the WC - 108 of them in Russia, 30 more than 2nd placed Spain.
2. It has had the largest number of clubs represented in the WC (20 v 15)
3. An even higher percentage of EPL players are still standing in the WC semi-finals - the 'business end' of the tournament.
4. The England national team is the only country which has ALL squad members playing in its domestic league. If all of their players were removed from the equation, the EPL would still have the highest number of players in Russia.
5. The Championship - junior brother to the EPL - itself has 21 players in Russia.

These are facts only the frivolous would argue with as being a very strong indicator of league strength.

The 'best league in the world' is itself a nonsense.
What does 'best' even mean anyway, and how is it objectively measured?

I'd like to see anyone dismantle and dismiss these checkable facts that have held sway for at least 2 WCs.
Meanwhile, I am thoroughly enjoying the discomfort of the ABEGars with the England team's success - almost as good as the football itself!

Damunk wrote:

cic old boy wrote:

tfco wrote:


Quit while you're behind. Singling out one player to make your crap point.

5 games sweet o
DNA no good o

When England went home early in tournaments, WE said England wasn't an indication of the quality of the EPL. Now they have stayed beyond expectations (thanks to beating mighty Tunisia, Panama, Colombia and Sweden), WE are now using it as a yardstick for the greatness of OUR league.

Uhm, Chief.... the converse has also been stated by the Anglophobes as the reason why England has regularly gone home early: "the weakness of their league and the lack of quality players".

So now they've got to the semis, its a little disingenuous to now quote the We Brigade, as if their opinion wasn't stoutly contested back then in the way I've mentioned above.

Rather than look at a single factor (English National team's S/F placing) as an indication of EPL strength, it is the other incontestable factors that should hold sway:
1. For the last two (probably even more) World Cups, the EPL has had the greatest number of players (represented in the WC - 108 of them in Russia, 30 more than 2nd placed Spain.
2. It has had the largest number of clubs represented in the WC (20 v 15)
3. An even higher percentage of EPL players are still standing in the WC semi-finals - the 'business end' of the tournament.
4. The England national team is the only country which has ALL squad members playing in its domestic league. If all of their players were removed from the equation, the EPL would still have the highest number of players in Russia.
5. The Championship - junior brother to the EPL - itself has 21 players in Russia.

These are facts only the frivolous would argue with as being a very strong indicator of league strength.

The 'best league in the world' is itself a nonsense.
What does 'best' even mean anyway, and how is it objectively measured?

I'd like to see anyone dismantle and dismiss these checkable facts that have held sway for at least 2 WCs.
Meanwhile, I am thoroughly enjoying the discomfort of the ABEGars with the England team's success - almost as good as the football itself!

The problem you have is thinking CIC is interested in facts when it's easy to sit in front of pounded yam, getting your "beer parlour" gist that is devoid of facts. Hating requires no facts just the subject of hate

Damunk our resident EPL haters will struggle to shoot down your points
Whats more, as it stands Harry Kane is taking the golden boot , more misery for some

When you don’t have anything substantive you start reaching? What kind of K leg logic is this?

Truth is under no subsantive measurement is the EPL the best league. Not by UEFA coefficients and not by trophies. Nada, zero, zilch.

The only thing this shows is that the EPL can afgord some of the best players in the world. Now if England through some freak of nature wins it, then we can revisit this conversation. But even in this scenario, it would be up for debate.

The YeyeMan wrote: Oga..

Argentina v France
Belgium v Japan
Belgium v Brazil
Argentina v Croatia
Portugal v Spain
Spain v Morocco
Iran v Portugal
Germany's games...

We have seen some good games o.

Nna, I said "outstanding games", you said "good games"...

Damunk wrote:Uhm, Chief.... the converse has also been stated by the Anglophobes as the reason why England has regularly gone home early: "the weakness of their league and the lack of quality players".

So now they've got to the semis, its a little disingenuous to now quote the We Brigade, as if their opinion wasn't stoutly contested back then in the way I've mentioned above.

Rather than look at a single factor (English National team's S/F placing) as an indication of EPL strength, it is the other incontestable factors that should hold sway:
1. For the last two (probably even more) World Cups, the EPL has had the greatest number of players (represented in the WC - 108 of them in Russia, 30 more than 2nd placed Spain.
2. It has had the largest number of clubs represented in the WC (20 v 15)
3. An even higher percentage of EPL players are still standing in the WC semi-finals - the 'business end' of the tournament.
4. The England national team is the only country which has ALL squad members playing in its domestic league. If all of their players were removed from the equation, the EPL would still have the highest number of players in Russia.
5. The Championship - junior brother to the EPL - itself has 21 players in Russia.

These are facts only the frivolous would argue with as being a very strong indicator of league strength.

The 'best league in the world' is itself a nonsense.
What does 'best' even mean anyway, and how is it objectively measured?

I'd like to see anyone dismantle and dismiss these checkable facts that have held sway for at least 2 WCs.
Meanwhile, I am thoroughly enjoying the discomfort of the ABEGars with the England team's success - almost as good as the football itself!

Nna, the arguments for England not doing well in tournaments that I recognise include, the poor technical quality of the English game, the players being tired after a gruelling season, the fact the players are not as good as the hype, the pressure put on the players, etc. I don’t remember seeing the “weakness” of the league as an argument. The EPL is a strong and vibrant league. I think the argument is that it is too strong (physically) and it drains players. I don’t buy that particular argument. I remember England going out in the first round in Euro 88 and pundits peddling that line. They forgot that they were beaten by Ireland, with all their players playing in England.

The fact is that the reasons why England failed in previous tournaments still exist today, regardless of this semi appearance. Since 1966, England has never knocked out a major footballing power at the WC. They still haven’t.

The numbers of EPL players at WCs just proves one thing – it is the richest league in the world. No one ever disputed that. The money available means it attracts the greatest number of players. It doesn’t always translate to better technical quality. Lukaku for e.g. is a WC semi-finalist, earns megabucks in England, very strong and very effective. But a lot of more technically gifted strikers than him went home early.

You are probably unaware that during England’s many years of failure that the fact that all their players were based in England was used as an excuse. It was argued that if they played abroad, they would have learned to play the continental way and that the hurly burly of the EPL was ruining their chances of international success. This England team is not fundamentally different from the rest. They are organised, run a lot, work hard, well drilled at set pieces, good in the air, a lot of perspiration and hardly any inspiration. There is still zero fantasy in their game. I said to my brother last night while we were watching Belgium v France, imagine if Hazard were English. They don’t produce players like him and if they managed it, they would have told us that he is the greatest player to ever play the game. Rooney was meant to be the “the White Pele”. Harry Kane is now the best striker in the world - WC top scorer (4 pens, one shot deflecting off his foot and one header from a corner against Tunisia).

I’m not sure why you have gone into these “strong” league arguments. Nobody every disputed that the EPL was “strong”. In fact, we were always told that the power of money in attracting so many foreigners was destroying England’s chances of success since many English players couldn’t get into top clubs. I even agree with the Ghananese troll that England is like a mid-table EPL club.

There is actually an objective measure for which league is the best in Europe. It is the Uefa coefficient, which measures performances of each league in European club competitions over about five years. Spain has been topping the coefficient table for several years.

blueangel wrote:There are more players from the EPL in the World Cup semi-finals than from any other league.

So what does that say about the EPL.

Players from EPL who are in the semis of the Russia 2018 World Cup:
Manchester United:
1.Lingard
2.Rashford
3.Young
4.Jones
5.Linderlof
6.Pogba
7.Lukaku
8.Fellaini
Tottenham:
1.Kane
2.Dier
3.Trippier
4.Rose
5.Vertonghen
6.Toby
7.Dembele
8.Dele Ali
Manchester City:
1.De Bryune
2.Sterling
3.Stone
4.Dephy
5.Kompany
6.Mendy
7.Danilo
8.Walker
Chelsea:
1.Kante
2.Hazard
3.Batman
4.Cahill
5.Loftus cheek
6. Thibaut Courtois
7. Giroud
Liverpool:
1.Anord
2.Henderson
3. Lovren
4. Mignolet
Arsenal:


Belgium, Croatia, England and France.

On a serious note, this na YEYE world cup
The worst so far in my life time

So the two EPL-heavy teams got bounced into third place loser's medal...care to interpret how this reflects on the EPL, football experts?

lionga wrote:So the two EPL-heavy teams got bounced into third place loser's medal...care to interpret how this reflects on the EPL, football experts?

You dey find trouble.

Even when the best players look so tired and are gone home, leaving the turf for the best league in the world, thats the FINAL tally?

juventuss wrote:

Kai. Englishman arrogance leads to another stupefying thread fail. Na Chief EPL zombie Pa Jimoh don jumble matters again

EPL no be am




BTW make una enjoy the Bronze match EPL edition

lionga wrote:So the two EPL-heavy teams got bounced into third place loser's medal...care to interpret how this reflects on the EPL, football experts?

Loser bowl

EPL we hail thee