balaks
Full Member
I'm not even going to get into this - I've said nothing controversial at all here yet you are determined to be antagonised.Part of what makes it so special to you*
I'm not even going to get into this - I've said nothing controversial at all here yet you are determined to be antagonised.Part of what makes it so special to you*
You said it was a shadow of its former self yet nothing to the actual game has changed instead from a rule change that won't have any significant impact. Such statements are just bizarre to me, but if you really really think that it's actually a shadow of what it used to be, then okay, no issues with that.I'm not even going to get into this - I've said nothing controversial at all here yet you are determined to be antagonised.
The game has literally stayed exactly the same, unless you consider more subs and no fans the heart and soul of "football as we knew it".
So it hasn't, in fact, stayed exactly the same.
It is the end of football as we knew it (for the time being). You have actually just confirmed this to be correct by your own post.
Or unless you're someone who actually goes to matches as opposed to being an armchair fan.You were being a fecking dramaqueen. Maybe your experience of football is a shadow of its former self, but like others said, don't be overly dramatic. It's still very much the same game, unless you tuned in for the crowd noise before the crisis.
Of course it has an impact, but it's still the best solution the Premier League as an institution and the clubs as a whole could have hoped for. Yet you still have people nitpicking about it, just like they would've been moaning about other stuff if another solution had prevailed instead of finishing the season. Every single one of the "it's not fair", "how is this acceptable or normal" and other arguments would be reasonable and valid if they just randomly decided to alter the rules mid-season, but given the circumstances, the changes are minor and not insurmountable, surely even you should be able to see or admit that. No solution would've been completely fair without flaws.The fact some see losing fans, home and away advantage and changing the substitution rules as irrelevant and without any impact is truly mind boggling. Perhaps it's further evidence of the 'I'm alright Jack" mentality many have shown here rather than considering the rest of the league as a whole. Who knows.
That's not the discussion though is it. The discussion is around accepting that it has an impact and has compromised the season. I know yourself and a number of other Liverpool fans firmly have the blinkers up on this as the suggestion somewhat taints the league win (asterix etc) but it's an undeniable fact.Of course it has an impact, but it's still the best solution the Premier League as an institution and the clubs as a whole could have hoped for. Yet you still have people nitpicking about it, just like they would've been moaning about other stuff if another solution had prevailed instead of finishing the season. Every single one of the "it's not fair", "how is this acceptable or normal" and other arguments would be reasonable and valid if they just randomly decided to alter the rules mid-season, but given the circumstances, the changes are minor and not insurmountable, surely even you should be able to see or admit that. No solution would've been completely fair without flaws.
Again, given the circumstances and putting it all in context, I do consider no fans for a few home games and 2 extra subs as minor, yes. That's just a matter of opinion, and fine if you disagree with that.That's not the discussion though is it. The discussion is around accepting that it has an impact and has compromised the season. I know yourself and a number of other Liverpool fans firmly have the blinkers up on this as the suggestion somewhat taints the league win (asterix etc) but it's an undeniable fact.
I agree that the PL are doing what they can to treat everyone equally and under the circumstances. That's not up for debate really but burying your heads in the sand about the impact of the changes and telling anyone it's 'minor' and 'irrelevant' shows a total of of understanding and empathy to the rest of the league who it will clearly impact.
It’s only temporary. It wouldn’t have a big enough impact on fairness to argue bringing the league back is unfair. Minor and temporary impact.The fact some see losing fans, home and away advantage and changing the substitution rules as irrelevant and without any impact is truly mind boggling. Perhaps it's further evidence of the 'I'm alright Jack" mentality many have shown here rather than considering the rest of the league as a whole. Who knows.
Again, given the circumstances and putting it all in context, I do consider no fans for a few home games and 2 extra subs as minor, yes. That's just a matter of opinion, and fine if you disagree with that.
I've already said and explained that I think the subs rule change won't have any impact on any team bar City and will only be used when games are already decided. And yes you lose your home advantage but your opponent also loses its home advantage when you play away games. So basically it comes down to "I've already played at Selhurst with fans where the atmosphere is great but now I gotta go to City without fans which will not impact the experience whatsoever, while another relegation contender goes to Selhurst without fans so they have an advantage over me". Again, I think in the grand scheme of things that is very minor, yes.
Again, given the circumstances and putting it all in context, I do consider no fans for a few home games and 2 extra subs as minor, yes. That's just a matter of opinion, and fine if you disagree with that.
I've already said and explained that I think the subs rule change won't have any impact on any team bar City and will only be used when games are already decided. And yes you lose your home advantage but your opponent also loses its home advantage when you play away games. So basically it comes down to "I've already played at Selhurst with fans where the atmosphere is great but now I gotta go to City without fans which will not impact the experience whatsoever, while another relegation contender goes to Selhurst without fans so they have an advantage over me". Again, I think in the grand scheme of things that is very minor, yes.
Of course everyone is entitled to an opinion but what I'm saying is fact. It has an impact and it does mean the league rules and fairness has been compromised. How much or little is again subjective but to deny it point blank is laughable.It’s only temporary. It would have a big enough impact on fairness to argue bringing the league back is unfair. Minor and temporary impact.
Yes, changing any part of the rules midway through a season does compromise it in some way, however small. Nevertheless, I guess this is as close as they can get it so trust in the brand is maintained. I hate a new introduction in tennis if a final set tie breaker at 12-12 at Wimbledon, just hate it, but that’s permanent! Essentially supporters of teams who get what they want from the rest of the season will be fine with it, the others will moan, because most fans are very simple.Of course everyone is entitled to an opinion but what I'm saying is fact. It has an impact and it does mean the league rules and fairness has been compromised. How much or little is again subjective but to deny it point blank is laughable.
It's the failure to grasp and understand that which baffles me.
I was strictly talking about finishing this season, of course.
Totally agreeYes, changing any part of the rules midway through a season does compromise it in some way, however small. Nevertheless, I guess this is as close as they can get it so trust in the brand is maintained. I hate a new introduction in tennis if a final set tie breaker at 12-12 at Wimbledon, just hate it, but that’s permanent! Essentially supporters of teams who get what they want from the rest of the season will be fine with it, the others will moan, because most fans are very simple.
The damage to the PL of an incomplete season can’t be overstated, they work so hard to get fans to buy into “the narrative” that a failed season may well lose a lot of viewers long term.
Yes.I was strictly talking about finishing this season, of course.
Although the chance is quite realistic that we'll start the new season without fans and will see a (gradual) increase of fans over the course of the season. Does that mean the entire 20/21 season is already compromised before it's started then? Just accept it for what it is and move on, there's nothing you can do to change about it anyway. The constant need for people to complain about something, anything, is annoying.
I knew you hold that opinion, thanks for answering anyway. You should just give the new season a hard pass in that case then.Yes.
Thanks for the advice although unsure why you're giving it. You being so defensive about it all is really odd. I don't know why it seems to trigger you.I knew you hold that opinion, thanks for answering anyway. You should just give the new season a hard pass in that case then.
Most of the times it's your posts that trigger meThanks for the advice although unsure why you're giving it. You being so defensive about it all is really odd. I don't know why it seems to trigger you.
I'll still watch it and will hopefully enjoy it but it simply will not be the same in it's current form and as a result I view it differently - it will lack something and winning the league next season will be viewed by myself - rightly or wrongly - as lesser than a normal league win. This is just my own view but I'm sure I'm not the only person to feel this way about it. Losing the impact that fans make on a game is pretty massive in my view - home advantage basically gone overnight which can turn certain grounds into a fortress just won't exist in the same way. It is a big deal even if you don't think it is.I knew you hold that opinion, thanks for answering anyway. You should just give the new season a hard pass in that case then.
I'm a bit too old to rant, but thank you. Plus, whilst a Liverpool fan for over 40 years, i'm from Grimsby originally - we tend to be a little more stoic over thereJust seen a couple of your posts here which seem quite clear, calm and balanced. People may not agree with them entirely but no rants.
Are you SURE you're a Liverpool fan?
I don't wanna sound or come across as defensively, I'm not acting on behalf of the PL or defending Liverpool in here or anything. I think I'm just very tired (and should better just avoid this thread) about the black and white views that quite a few posters hold about the return of football. The "but this", "but that", "this is not fair" arguments are repetitive and tiresome to argue against because it will never be good for some people. Every solution would've had its flaws, and I'm in no way saying that this is the perfect one but what's the point of still going on and on about integrity, fairness and stuff?Seriously though Robin I'm not quite sure why you are so defensive. I think pretty much everyone agrees that's it's the best option given the circumstances, but I'm not quite sure why you're holding this stance that it's "minimal" or something. Obviously changing subs rules and the fans aspect is a massive change to football, it's not being a drama queen to say that.
Except that it isn't. The notion that "grounds" or "fans" create a fortress is just wrong. What creates a fortress is the team playing in that home ground. Anfield was by no means considered a fortress between '10-'15, I'm not gonna look up the stats but we lost plenty of games at home. Then Klopp came around and we haven't lost at Anfield in the league in almost 3 seasons or so if I'm not mistaken. Yet we still have the same ground and the same fans. Stamford Bridge was a fortress under Mourinho and then wasn't when he was gone and replaced by a lesser manager, yet it remained Stamford Bridge. It's the team that plays in the ground that will make the difference.I'll still watch it and will hopefully enjoy it but it simply will not be the same in it's current form and as a result I view it differently - it will lack something and winning the league next season will be viewed by myself - rightly or wrongly - as lesser than a normal league win. This is just my own view but I'm sure I'm not the only person to feel this way about it. Losing the impact that fans make on a game is pretty massive in my view - home advantage basically gone overnight which can turn certain grounds into a fortress just won't exist in the same way. It is a big deal even if you don't think it is.
If they do then it just confirms that Liverpool have won the poorest PL in yearsI am still looking forward to seeing if we can end up with Liverpool, Leicester, Chelsea and Wolverhampton as the four CL teams for next season. That would be quite something.
I strongly disagree with this statement. I hold up my own national team as a great example of this - we are at best a below average ability international side but at home with the incredible atmosphere we generate as fans we are also one of the toughest sides to beat at home in Europe. A huge part of that is down to the connection the players have to the fans and they raise their game. If you lose that connection and atmosphere then we are nowhere near the same team.Except that it isn't. The notion that "grounds" or "fans" create a fortress is just wrong. What creates a fortress is the team playing in that home ground. Anfield was by no means considered a fortress between '10-'15, I'm not gonna look up the stats but we lost plenty of games at home. Then Klopp came around and we haven't lost at Anfield in the league in almost 3 seasons or so if I'm not mistaken. Yet we still have the same ground and the same fans. Stamford Bridge was a fortress under Mourinho and then wasn't when he was gone and replaced by a lesser manager, yet it remained Stamford Bridge. It's the team that plays in the ground that will make the difference.
So we’re agreed- null and void is funniest for allWhat's that based on? If anything, Germany shows that it's perfectly possible to wrap up the season.
This whole idea that they're just restarting because of Liverpool is laughable in itself. Why would they restart in Spain where they have a tight title race if declaring a champion is all that the leagues are after? Same goes for Italy.
The idea that everything will be clearer in terms of places is based on nothing as well, you could have a much tighter top 4 and relegation battle after 32 or 33 games than right now. Also the notion that teams would all of a sudden be happy with the league being curtailed if they're "probably going down" instead of "potentially going down" is laughable too. There's no way Norwich wouldn't sue if they go down when not mathematically certain, and any argument in the mould of "but they are 7 points adrift" doesn't make any more sense than the "they are X points adrift" right now, from a legal point of view.
They wanna finish the leagues because of £££ and nothing more than that, you'd have to be a different kind of stubborn to argue otherwise after all that we've seen up to this point.
Do you have any other examples of club football where a team consistently performs way better at home than away? Genuine question. I would think it might be the case for the likes of Burnley or Palace who are more likely to take points off the big teams at home than away, but generally I disagree that fans have a big impact on football or results of a team. I certainly don't think it will impact Liverpool's performances in the league at home.I strongly disagree with this statement. I hold up my own national team as a great example of this - we are at best a below average ability international side but at home with the incredible atmosphere we generate as fans we are also one of the toughest sides to beat at home in Europe. A huge part of that is down to the connection the players have to the fans and they raise their game. If you lose that connection and atmosphere then we are nowhere near the same team.
Really? Almost all the clubs have better home record than away record and coming to Liverpool, are you downplaying Anfileld factor in the European games where the team plays at much higher level and smash most of the teams in the first 20-30 mins?Do you have any other examples of club football where a team consistently performs way better at home than away? Genuine question. I would think it might be the case for the likes of Burnley or Palace who are more likely to take points off the big teams at home than away, but generally I disagree that fans have a big impact on football or results of a team. I certainly don't think it will impact Liverpool's performances in the league at home.
It's not about it having a big impact or not - it's about whether we agree on whether it does has an impact - I believe it does have an impact and as a result when you lose that aspect of the game then many clubs (particularly the smaller clubs) will lose out hence making the league that little bit more unfair towards the smaller sides. This is why I think it is important and does diminish the league.Do you have any other examples of club football where a team consistently performs way better at home than away? Genuine question. I would think it might be the case for the likes of Burnley or Palace who are more likely to take points off the big teams at home than away, but generally I disagree that fans have a big impact on football or results of a team. I certainly don't think it will impact Liverpool's performances in the league at home.
Re: bolded part - yes, but to the point they're looking like a completely different team at home rather than away? Balaks was talking about "fortresses", I don't think there's any team apart from Liverpool which has a home record that warrants that word at the moment. As for Liverpool, I specifically mentioned "performances in the league" because our atmosphere is average (at best, unfortunately) there. On European nights it can play a part. Or let's say the last day of the season is Chelsea-United which would decide top 4, then yes fans in attendance could make a difference. But all in all I still consider it as a minor impact in the grand scheme of things.Really? Almost all the clubs have better home record than away record and coming to Liverpool, are you downplaying Anfileld factor in the European games where the team plays at much higher level and smash most of the teams in the first 20-30 mins?
I don't think I've denied that it could have an impact (but could be wrong)? I just defended my opinion that the subs rule change and no fans in attendance will have a minor/minimal impact on the top 4 race and relegation battle.It's not about it having a big impact or not - it's about whether we agree on if it has an impact - I believe it does have an impact and as a result when you lose that aspect of the game then many clubs (particularly the smaller clubs) will lose out hence making the league that little bit more unfair towards the smaller sides. This is why I think it is important and does diminish the league.
Yes, Jose went around 8 years without losing at home. There was a time when Fulham getting a point away from home was a miracle and at home they were completely different team.Re: bolded part - yes, but to the point they're looking like a completely different team at home rather than away? Balaks was talking about "fortresses", I don't think there's any team apart from Liverpool which has a home record that warrants that word at the moment. As for Liverpool, I specifically mentioned "performances in the league" because our atmosphere is average (at best, unfortunately) there. On European nights it can play a part. Or let's say the last day of the season is Chelsea-United which would decide top 4, then yes fans in attendance could make a difference. But all in all I still consider it as a minor impact in the grand scheme of things.
But isn't it just Mourinho who has an extremely impressive home record throughout his entire career? So was that streak due to Mourinho and his team/set-up at home games, or due to the fans? I don't consider Chelsea as an extremely good home team or anything.Yes, Jose went around 8 years without losing at home. There was a time when Fulham getting a point away from home was a miracle and at home they were completely different team.
This article is the first Google search result and indicates that it plays less of a factor than people would like to think, although it still exists. But even in the hypothesis that the home team has a better chance of winning a game, that's (at least to a certain extent) cancelled out by the higher chance to win away games, isn't it? E.g. Norwich loses its advantage as the home team vs Villa but has a higher chance to win their next game at Bournemouth? In that case it would basically come down to remaining strength of schedule to see who (and to what extent) ultimately gains or loses out by having no fans in attendance.Home and away makes a big difference in football, Liverpool might be too strong this season but for every club the home game matters as they have more chance of winning that than away game.
Maybe first time I'm seeing these arguments, that home or away shouldn't matter. One of the mysteries, why Pep had such a poor away record in CL compared to his home record.
You don't think Liverpool's famous European nights have anything to do with the atmosphere created by the crowd? Where do you think the crowd being the 12th man comes from.Do you have any other examples of club football where a team consistently performs way better at home than away? Genuine question. I would think it might be the case for the likes of Burnley or Palace who are more likely to take points off the big teams at home than away, but generally I disagree that fans have a big impact on football or results of a team. I certainly don't think it will impact Liverpool's performances in the league at home.
See my previous post, I specifically mentioned "Liverpool's performances in the league at home". Our home crowd in the league has been average at best in the last decade.You don't think Liverpool's famous European nights have anything to do with the atmosphere created by the crowd? Where do you think the crowd being the 12th man comes from.
As recently as a few days ago Andy Hinchcliffe was still pushing the null and void narrative. He said "if the league can't be finished it should be null and void. I'm not saying that because I'm an ex-Everton and Man City player". We believe you Andy - you're totally impartial.So we’re agreed- null and void is funniest for all
Fair enough. Maybe you'll be less convincing at home but a bit stronger in away games due to no home fans attending in both cases though?@RobinLFC I can't really speak for any other teams but Everton get by on our home form. We have had numerous seasons in the last decade where we only have like 1 to 3 defeats at home each season and then lose the majority of our away games. I think the way Goodison Park is with how close the fans are to the pitch plays a part in that.
There is no plan b. If someone gets sick, tough cheese1 I'm not sure you can judge the level of unfairness from the front end of the project.
2 They ought to just about get through. They have put footy in a bubble and infection levels won't, in theory, increase so rapidly over the next 8 weeks to make it look untenable.
3 If it gets inside the bubble though...
4 What are they gonna do if 1 team has an outbreak of virus or odd games get cancelled, maybe even just affected - hope it's nothing too crucial?
5 the optimists might be having the best of the debate atm, but we haven't actually started yet have we?
Remove Chelsea, add Sheffield (if don't want United), and it'll be great.I am still looking forward to seeing if we can end up with Liverpool, Leicester, Chelsea and Wolverhampton as the four CL teams for next season. That would be quite something.