Players 'close' to going on strikes - Rodri

[Chipper]

Again, I cannot see where Foden or Alvarez has played 70+ games, I am still waiting for you to show me the breakdown rather than a tweet from ESPN.

Your comment about 0 rest is a lie again, like the number of games, you are just making things up to try and push this. Can you show me any player that has had 0 rest?

Footballers get minimum 3 weeks off after a season, regardless if you played International tournaments or not, during the season players all get 1/2 days off a week as well.

Right now, you mention Foden, he played alot last season, this season he has been rested by Pep and only back in the starting 11 now. So he has had whole of August and 1 /2 of September where he isnt starting games.

I like what you are doing... make things up and then ask me if I am struggling to understand. I do fail to understand false information, yes you are correct.

Alvarez did play a lot of games, however I make the numbers out to be slightly different. 72 as opposed to 75 but still 70+.

If you want a breakdown, you can click here. Not sure why it doesn't include the world cup qualifiers but it shows 54 club games, and if you count up the Copa, Olympic and International friendlies you get another 12 to put us on 66. World Cup qualifier data seperately from here. Clicked the World Cup Qualifying tab then each of Argentina's matches seperately to see if he was playing or not and got another 6 between 8/9/23 and 22/11/23 for the 72.

Minutes-wise I don't think it's necessarily that huge when you take into account he's an outlier in terms of him being one of very few players who played in the Olympics. He was subbed in and out for City a bit, and was dropped right near the end of the season. 3481 for City, 1278 for Argentina for a total of 4759. Van Dijk managed 4041 club minutes for Liverpool, 540 in Euro 2024, 585 in qualifiers and 288 in international friendlies for 5454 minutes, or the equivalent of almost 8 full matches more.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Ok so potentially 75 games is a different to "Foden played 72 games"

I am not querying that the new format of CL has more games, there is no one arguing that.

Instead of sending me talk sport links why dont you read and respond?

1. you mentioned that Foden and Alvarez played 72 and 75 games, I am just asking you to back that up, so far I have seen no evidence that shows that.
2. You said that some players get 0 days off, when that is false, there is a minimum 3 weeks they have to get off between seasons and managers tend to give players time of during the season.

Well I’m hoping that as I try to educate you with additional information via links you don’t have to hand, that’s an answer. I’m not going to copy/paste the content here, unless you really are unable to click a button?

1. “Julian Álvarez recorded a season of 1 year and 10 days long after Argentina’s defeat in the Olympics He played 57 games with Man City and 18 with Argentina across Copa América, World Cup Qualifiers and the Olympics”
57 + 18 =75

2.
English Season opens on 10th August.
English season ends 10th May.
Champions League Final 31st May.
Nations League start 4th June.
Nations League end 8th June.
Club World Cup start 15th June
Club World Cup ends 13th July.
Pre season training starts X July/August
English Season starts Friday 8th August

That’s a full year. I half expect that you’ll point out the gap between the 13th and 8th. By all means do. You can choose whether it’s time off, or pre season. It’s obviously the latter, as it always has been. But you can have the former if you like. Leaving the player unfit. Because… There are too many Fcuking games.

That whole calendar starts again as we have a World Cup. Then again as we have a Euros.

You’re just wrong mate.

Edit - gap between WC and Euros obviously. Still only one summer off out of 4.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Alvarez did play a lot of games, however I make the numbers out to be slightly different. 72 as opposed to 75 but still 70+.

If you want a breakdown, you can click here. Not sure why it doesn't include the world cup qualifiers but it shows 54 club games, and if you count up the Copa, Olympic and International friendlies you get another 12 to put us on 66. World Cup qualifier data seperately from here. Clicked the World Cup Qualifying tab then each of Argentina's matches seperately to see if he was playing or not and got another 6 between 8/9/23 and 22/11/23 for the 72.

Minutes-wise I don't think it's necessarily that huge when you take into account he's an outlier in terms of him being one of very few players who played in the Olympics. He was subbed in and out for City a bit, and was dropped right near the end of the season. 3481 for City, 1278 for Argentina for a total of 4759. Van Dijk managed 4041 club minutes for Liverpool, 540 in Euro 2024, 585 in qualifiers and 288 in international friendlies for 5454 minutes, or the equivalent of almost 8 full matches more.

There are easier shortcuts too. Gerrard made his debut at 18 and played 538 games. Milner debuted at 16 and has played 643.

Bellingham at his current rate is on track to potentially play 1200 matches. Obviously that’s a number based on perfect fitness, trotted out by a talking head on a podcast to make a point, but it’s still mad. I think they used Gerrards retirement age for their calc but could have been a little sensationalist.

 

[noodlehair]

Jesus Christ lads, it was a thirty second Google. “That’s why I want him to give me a breakdown”. Give over.





It excludes pre season matches.



Before the inevitable chirps of ‘what about this guy or that guy’… go and look it up yourself. I’m using the most extreme example as that’s what’s being quoted everywhere.

Remember the players at the top clubs are looking at last season, and the following two. Some players will have ZERO rest between seasons. Season end into Nations League into Club World Cup into Community Shield / Season opener. Then the same the following year with a World Cup.

What part of counting or calendars are you struggling with?

There’s so much info out there. Hundreds of opinion pieces by journos that have done the heavy lifting for you.

Players are speaking. FIFPRO have released studies. Hamstring injuries are up from 12% to 24% of time spent out of the game. (The Hamstring being the most common circuit breaker through overuse).

Indulge in the debate honestly. Give this a listen and see if it reframes how you think about it.

Podcast link

I’ve just skipped through it a little, it covers dates and volume, I’m not supporting everything said, but it feels like you’re running on vibes. Or a sense of ‘they’re paid enough just shut up’ or ‘It’s up to the teams’.

The calendar is full. I’d quite like the best players to be fit as I like watching football. The governing bodies and clubs want money. More games = More money. I want to watch great football. If you don’t, all good.

None of this argument explains why it isn't up to the teams to manage the welfare of their players?

Why do you think great football will suffer due to more games? This is a weird take again as a vast majority of football fans are more interested in their own team's games than whether Rodri is at 100% or only 95% while being "forced" to play in 4-0 win against Burnley.

Teams have always rested their best players. Ferguson used to do it all the time. He used to give Ronaldo holidays mid season. He played fringe players in cup games or against wear opposition. Klopp played second string teams in the league cup.

its only really Pep who has this crazed win at all costs obsession with playing his best players in every game and going full tilt with everything, and thats hardly been good for football as its involved him and Man City cheating the rules to do so and making English football, frankly, fecking boring for the past 4 years in the process. Why on earth would anyone want the governing bodies to pander to enabling this rather than encouraging competition?

The only argument simply doesn't work when one of the big drivers for that is player and player agents fees/wages. They're as culpable as the clubs who are more culpable than any governing bodies who have 0 say in anyone's wage or transfer fee.

I'm pretty sure Lampard played more than 70 games once and more than 60 multiple times. I'm not having that he didn't run or work as much as players nowadays.

How many games did the likes of Scholes and Giggs play in the late 90s/early 00s when you guys were winning everything?

20 or 30 years ago, clubs were allowed fewer subs and the sports medicine was not as good.

Rodri should have a chat with Pep before he goes on strike.

Ferguson would also rest tired players. Even in the 90s. That's why he had 4 strikers and Ole/Sheringham scored in the CL final.

If we have it how people here want that would never have happened as Cole and Yorke would have played 90 minutes every game and any fixture they might have been too tired for would have been cancelled

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

None of this argument explains why it isn't up to the teams to manage the welfare of their players?

Because the Clubs clearly can’t be trusted. They just chase money.

It’s exploitation, and the money involved doesn’t negate that.

If you’re a manager, you’re only a few bad results away from pressure, and two months away from the sack. If you’re a player, you both want to play, and further your career.

If the likes of FIFA and UEFA can’t be trusted to not add games;

Euros up from 16 teams to 24
World Cup from 24 to 48
Club World Cup - now a month(!) long 32(!) team tournament.
Champions League adding two group matches (plus more)

And the Clubs can’t be trusted;

Longer travel times in pre season
No opposition to tournament expansions
Players increasingly being traded as commodities for financial fair play reasons

What choice do the players have? There’s simply no argument for any player to expect his club to do right by them. Real Madrid have hinted at looking into it. But they’re treated like shit, beyond being paid outrageous fortunes.

This is a weird take again as a vast majority of football fans are more interested in their own team's games than whether Rodri is at 100% or only 95% while being "forced" to play in 4-0 win against Burnley.

This is a weirder take. All players are supported by someone from some club.

Look at the shit that Martial, Mount, et al get at this club. Imagine the grief a player would get if they wanted playing time relief. It’s a non starter as all involved are cnuts. Me, you, all of us.

Less games is the only sensible route. I don’t know why we’re pretending that the League Cup matters to the best footballers. Or that England going away to North Macedonia is a good watch. We need wholesale reform. We could EASILY lose 15 matches and not give a Fcuk. It’s not like we’re suggesting big ties will go. You’d only lose the run rate shite. And yes that’s a piss take towards Albania or Barnsley or whoever, but I want late stage CL matches or Euros to have fully fit players.

What else are we doing if we don’t protect the actual talent (the players) over the Balance Sheet? I support my club over any player, but the simple fact of the matter is, the club doesn’t play football, the players do.

 

[golden_blunder]

Again, I cannot see where Foden or Alvarez has played 70+ games, I am still waiting for you to show me the breakdown rather than a tweet from ESPN.

Your comment about 0 rest is a lie again, like the number of games, you are just making things up to try and push this. Can you show me any player that has had 0 rest?

Footballers get minimum 3 weeks off after a season, regardless if you played International tournaments or not, during the season players all get 1/2 days off a week as well.

Right now, you mention Foden, he played alot last season, this season he has been rested by Pep and only back in the starting 11 now. So he has had whole of August and 1 /2 of September where he isnt starting games.

I like what you are doing... make things up and then ask me if I am struggling to understand. I do fail to understand false information, yes you are correct.

From his post 57 domestic + 18 international equals 75 no? (Alvarez)

 

[padr81]

Ok so potentially 75 games is a different to "Foden played 72 games"

I am not querying that the new format of CL has more games, there is no one arguing that.

Instead of sending me talk sport links why dont you read and respond?

1. you mentioned that Foden and Alvarez played 72 and 75 games, I am just asking you to back that up, so far I have seen no evidence that shows that.
2. You said that some players get 0 days off, when that is false, there is a minimum 3 weeks they have to get off between seasons and managers tend to give players time of during the season.

Last season Alvarez played 54 times for City. 37 in the league, 7 CL, 6 FA Cup, 2 CWC, 1 CS and 1 ESC.
For Argentina he played 5 in the Copa America, 4 in the Olympics, 4 International Friendlies 67 total.

In 22/23 he played 49 for City, 31 PL, 10 CL, 5 FA Cup, 2 EFL Cup, 1 CS.
But for Argentina he played 7 World Cup, 8 World Cup Qualifiers, 6 International Friendlies so 21 internationals for a total of exactly 70 games.

137 games in less than 2 years.
Thats nearly 50% of his career appearances in the last 2 years. He's played 230ish club games and 42 for Argentina (including Olympics).

Now on top of something like that, the CL is potentially 4 games bigger, the world cup 1 game bigger, the new club world cup is 7 games etc.. 70 game seasons will become the norm for players at the top 16 clubs in Europe. With a potential well into the 80s.

 

[romufc]

From his post 57 domestic + 18 international equals 75 no? (Alvarez)

ESPN? yep, I have also put a source that shows how many games he played. . Also when its all well and good but its funny no context applied to it. Him playing for City and Argentina meant this year he was over used, that is an issue for his managers. To have a player play the Copa America and Olympics? That is more down to mismanagement.

Also, of the games he played he was a sub in games too, he averages 46 full 90 minutes last season.


https://footystats.org/players/argentina/julian-alvarez

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

ESPN? yep, I have also put a source that shows how many games he played. . Also when its all well and good but its funny no context applied to it. Him playing for City and Argentina meant this year he was over used, that is an issue for his managers. To have a player play the Copa America and Olympics? That is more down to mismanagement.

Also, of the games he played he was a sub in games too, he averages 46 full 90 minutes last season.


https://footystats.org/players/argentina/julian-alvarez

Your arguments always centre round some kind of Shrodingers footballer.

You need to win games to end up playing 85 matches.
You do not know in August that you will be in those 85.
You only know you have more cup games when you win them.
You need your best players to win the toughest games.
You then get tougher games.
You need your best players to win those.

You are arguing FOR player welfare by suggesting rest. But you won’t accept that if there are fewer games, little or no rest is needed.

You’ve painted yourself into a corner and are currently painting your feet and shouting ‘I wanted them to look like this anyway’. Another two pages and you’ll be able to join the blue man group.

A problem we didn’t have before, that has a clear and understandable reason as to why it happens now, sees you arrive at a solution ‘Well rest the players and probably lose matches and you won’t have a problem’.

It’s odd.

 

[romufc]

Well I’m hoping that as I try to educate you with additional information via links you don’t have to hand, that’s an answer. I’m not going to copy/paste the content here, unless you really are unable to click a button?

1. “Julian Álvarez recorded a season of 1 year and 10 days long after Argentina’s defeat in the Olympics He played 57 games with Man City and 18 with Argentina across Copa América, World Cup Qualifiers and the Olympics”
57 + 18 =75

2.
English Season opens on 10th August.
English season ends 10th May.
Champions League Final 31st May.
Nations League start 4th June.
Nations League end 8th June.
Club World Cup start 15th June
Club World Cup ends 13th July.
Pre season training starts X July/August
English Season starts Friday 8th August

That’s a full year. I half expect that you’ll point out the gap between the 13th and 8th. By all means do. You can choose whether it’s time off, or pre season. It’s obviously the latter, as it always has been. But you can have the former if you like. Leaving the player unfit. Because… There are too many Fcuking games.

That whole calendar starts again as we have a World Cup. Then again as we have a Euros.

You’re just wrong mate.

Edit - gap between WC and Euros obviously. Still only one summer off out of 4.

Thanks for the education. I hope you are not a teacher because the kids will be learning the wrong things. If a kid ever questioned you, your response is check a tweet from ESPN.

Can you please tell me what 18 games he played because I can only see 12. So get your figures right first before educating.

Secondly, if you average his minutes out, it is 46 90 minute worth of games he played.

See you are mistaken here, we are talking about last few seasons, as now you have realised you were wrong, you are now moving onto "potential" games. Applying 0 context to it all.

1. players who play international football at the end of the season, get extra time off, if you didn't know. Assuming from all your posts, you were not aware of that. That is why England and Spain players came back later than others.

2. The club world cup does not apply to every club

3. I agree with you the Nations league is a pointless competition.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Thanks for the education. I hope you are not a teacher because the kids will be learning the wrong things. If a kid ever questioned you, your response is check a tweet from ESPN.

Can you please tell me what 18 games he played because I can only see 12. So get your figures right first before educating.

Secondly, if you average his minutes out, it is 46 90 minute worth of games he played.

See you are mistaken here, we are talking about last few seasons, as now you have realised you were wrong, you are now moving onto "potential" games. Applying 0 context to it all.

1. players who play international football at the end of the season, get extra time off, if you didn't know. Assuming from all your posts, you were not aware of that. That is why England and Spain players came back later than others.

2. The club world cup does not apply to every club

3. I agree with you the Nations league is a pointless competition.

Honestly mate, I’ve owned socks smarter than you. Ignored and off you go.

 

[romufc]

Last season Alvarez played 54 times for City. 37 in the league, 7 CL, 6 FA Cup, 2 CWC, 1 CS and 1 ESC.
For Argentina he played 5 in the Copa America, 4 in the Olympics, 4 International Friendlies 67 total.

In 22/23 he played 49 for City, 31 PL, 10 CL, 5 FA Cup, 2 EFL Cup, 1 CS.
But for Argentina he played 7 World Cup, 8 World Cup Qualifiers, 6 International Friendlies so 21 internationals for a total of exactly 70 games.

137 games in less than 2 years.
Thats nearly 50% of his career appearances in the last 2 years. He's played 230ish club games and 42 for Argentina (including Olympics).

Now on top of something like that, the CL is potentially 4 games bigger, the world cup 1 game bigger, the new club world cup is 7 games etc.. 70 game seasons will become the norm for players at the top 16 clubs in Europe. With a potential well into the 80s.

Yes, I take your point on the games coming up with the new format will increase and I am not a fan of it. The issue I have is people saying that players play 30% more club games now than they did 30 years ago.. which is incorrect.

Also, it is on managers as well to take care of the players, is it necessary for Alvarez to play Copa and Olympics?

 

[antohan]

While I do agree the main motivation from FIFA/UEFA/FAs is money, I think many on here are a bunch of snobs dissing internationals, the Olympics and this new World Club Cup as no more than a nuisance getting in the way of their entertainment..

There's an entire world out there of people who don't support United, City or Real but their local and national team. They want quality too and in many cases have seen this quality disappear progressively as European clubs hoover up all their talent and stick them in their reserves, feeder and stepping stone clubs only to dispose of it way past the useful shelf-life. They are football fans too and deserve quality challenges just as much.

The average country has a league with promising under-18s, 32+ retirees and everyone else being the deadwood shite nobody wanted. League 1 stuff really. For any club to put together and sustain a remotely attractive and competitive side, they need such things as the World Club Cup, much like we often say "we need CL football for x, y or z to be interested".

I don't think the answer to "fixture congestion" at a very limited number of clubs and even more limited number of players is disenfranchising the masses by cutting off internationals and other clubs around the world, telling them to piss off. They are an integral part of the fabric of the world's most popular sport.

 

[NotThatSoph]

Marxcafe has really lost its touch. "It's up to the companies to prioritize employee welfare, if they don't then tough luck."

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

I don't think the answer to "fixture congestion" at a very limited number of clubs and even more limited number of players is disenfranchising the masses by cutting off internationals and other clubs around the world, telling them to piss off. They are an integral part of the fabric of the world's most popular sport.

Are people doing that?

I think there’s room for a Club World Cup, AFCON, Copa, Euros, WC, CL, etc al.

Reducing the number of matches in totality by way of ending the FIFA vs UEFA arms race, doesn’t have to see smaller nations suffer or be marginalised.

Having the rest of Europe play competitive matches to qualify while the ‘Elite’ clubs play some kind of small, seeding competition, isn’t that mad and certainly not punitive.

I’d also go back to the old CL format and remove seedings. I’d honestly rather United go out of a CL group* containing Bayern, Real and Inter, than walk through an easy group and then bow out in the Quarter Finals. 6 big matches is far better than 4.

I’d do the same in the Euros. 55 teams in qualifying , playing 8 or 10 matches each, in order to find 24 teams. And those 24 teams then playing 3 group matches each, to only remove 8 teams is utterly insane. Insulting even. Writing it down has made me angry. It’s all bloat.
[Edit : 284 matches are played to go from 55 teams to 16]
[Edit : There’s probably a way to play a 48 team Euros every four years and just remove qualifying. Mad idea and bloats the tournament but massively reduces load and increases interest]

You could absolutely remove the performative nonsense, retain competition integrity and keep those competitions smaller and tighter.

*yes United are a long way off qualification, far less a seeding.

 

[Red in STL]

Do you know how many footballers there are? If every single footballer is consulted, then I am not sure you will get the right answers.

Or is it that we only consult the ultra rich ones?

There's not that many and no one is suggesting that they will all go on strike, the lower level players are mostly not affected by the changes that are coming,

They don't play in World Club championship games or the CL or the World Cup,, the reality is for top level players the number of games is going to increase substantially and the amount of down time is going to reduce.

If this goes ahead then the quality of football is only heading one way and it's not upwards

 

[Cloud7]

Its a dumb and incredibly spoilt argument and its one of the things that really grinds me about modern football.

I wouldn't pretend playing 50+ games a season as an elite level athlete and being expected to not let your performance level drop is easy or reasonable, as I wouldn't know, but here's the thing:

a) The reason teams have a manager and a squad is precisely to manage this. If someone is tired you can rest them.
b) It is elite/top level sport. It isn't supposed to be f*cking easy or pander to anyone. You're meant to be the best in the world at it for a reason.
c) Not overworking employees is the responsibility of the employer and every single top level football club has both enough playing personnel to not overwork anyone and enough resources to get more personnel if they don't.
d) If resting players means a team might be less likely to win then good. The function of a sport isn't to make it as easy as possible for the best to have an advantage over everyone else.
e) If you are tired the correct thing to do is ask your employer/team for a rest, not threaten to go on strike against football. This would be like the police striking because criminals are committing too much crime. It makes absolutely no sense.

So in summary, feck off.

+ 1

 

[romufc]

There's not that many and no one is suggesting that they will all go on strike, the lower level players are mostly not affected by the changes that are coming,

They don't play in World Club championship games or the CL or the World Cup,, the reality is for top level players the number of games is going to increase substantially and the amount of down time is going to reduce.

If this goes ahead then the quality of football is only heading one way and it's not upwards

So do you not think there is a clear correlation between no. of games to squad size? Look at City for example, they been playing alot of game for 6/7 years at least and I would say they are the probably 1/2 best team in terms of quality on the pitch.

Like you say, low level players are not affected, the same applies the other way, only a certain number of clubs are affected with the over load of games.

At the moment Chelsea and Man City are the only 2 clubs from England qualified for the club world cup, Chelsea have 3 squads to chose from.

They have left of Palmer and others from their Conference league squad, do you think Chelsea leaving them out from the squad drastically changes the level of competition?

 

[Jock Steins Boots]

Its a dumb and incredibly spoilt argument and its one of the things that really grinds me about modern football.

I wouldn't pretend playing 50+ games a season as an elite level athlete and being expected to not let your performance level drop is easy or reasonable, as I wouldn't know, but here's the thing:

a) The reason teams have a manager and a squad is precisely to manage this. If someone is tired you can rest them.
b) It is elite/top level sport. It isn't supposed to be f*cking easy or pander to anyone. You're meant to be the best in the world at it for a reason.
c) Not overworking employees is the responsibility of the employer and every single top level football club has both enough playing personnel to not overwork anyone and enough resources to get more personnel if they don't.
d) If resting players means a team might be less likely to win then good. The function of a sport isn't to make it as easy as possible for the best to have an advantage over everyone else.
e) If you are tired the correct thing to do is ask your employer/team for a rest, not threaten to go on strike against football. This would be like the police striking because criminals are committing too much crime. It makes absolutely no sense.

So in summary, feck off.

That tickled my oats. Absolutely bang on though, well said.

 

[Red in STL]

So do you not think there is a clear correlation between no. of games to squad size? Look at City for example, they been playing alot of game for 6/7 years at least and I would say they are the probably 1/2 best team in terms of quality on the pitch.

Like you say, low level players are not affected, the same applies the other way, only a certain number of clubs are affected with the over load of games.

At the moment Chelsea and Man City are the only 2 clubs from England qualified for the club world cup, Chelsea have 3 squads to chose from.

They have left of Palmer and others from their Conference league squad, do you think Chelsea leaving them out from the squad drastically changes the level of competition?

This isn't about the number of games right now, this is about the upcoming increase and lack of proper breaks

2025 Club world cup - Sun, Jun 15, 2025 – Sun, Jul 13, 2025 and features 32 teams
2026 World cup - Jun 11, 2026 – Sun, Jul 19, 2026 and features 48 teams

League seasons start in August - where do the top players get a break? Because there's COPA and EURO's in 2028 - so in 3 of the next 4 seasons there will be a summer full of football and a lot of kanckered footballers

The people who are going to be upset the most are the fans because the quality of football their team produces is going to suffer

 

[antohan]

Are people doing that?

I think there’s room for a Club World Cup, AFCON, Copa, Euros, WC, CL, etc al.

Yes they are, just read up all the comments on pointless internationals and the CWC.

I largely agree with your points on bloat and unnecessary comps/qualification grind. I just don't think the answer is cutting off what is already suffering badly (e.g. the Nations League has made intercontinental friendlies more rare so you don't just get bored of watching the umpteenth Portugal-Spain but also teams in other regions playing each other more often, offers absolutely nothing new on the menu).

 

[romufc]

This isn't about the number of games right now, this is about the upcoming increase and lack of proper breaks

2025 Club world cup - Sun, Jun 15, 2025 – Sun, Jul 13, 2025 and features 32 teams
2026 World cup - Jun 11, 2026 – Sun, Jul 19, 2026 and features 48 teams

League seasons start in August - where do the top players get a break? Because there's COPA and EURO's in 2028 - so in 3 of the next 4 seasons there will be a summer full of football and a lot of kanckered footballers

The people who are going to be upset the most are the fans because the quality of football their team produces is going to suffer

I understand the club world cup is going to become an issue but this is where I see clubs sending their 2nd teams to these competitions. There is no reason to have another end of season competition for select clubs.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Yes they are, just read up all the comments on pointless internationals and the CWC.

I largely agree with your points on bloat and unnecessary comps/qualification grind. I just don't think the answer is cutting off what is already suffering badly (e.g. the Nations League has made intercontinental friendlies more rare so you don't just get bored of watching the umpteenth Portugal-Spain but also teams in other regions playing each other more often, offers absolutely nothing new on the menu).

Yeah I’m talking about fully formed adults though. Not the idiots.

Personally, I think the CWC could be incredible and an amazing addition to the calendar. I also think it can’t be additive in terms of match volume. It should be immensely exciting to see a global club World Cup. I’m a little gutted that United aren’t in it. But 32 teams for a month, on top of the current calendar is a piss take.

There is another way. I accidentally stumbled upon the suggestion of a 48 team Euros in my post after I ran the numbers (as per the edits). You could run a Euros with a 40 team automatic qualification and cycle the remaining 15 teams through that same process. Hell, put the worst 8 automatic qualifiers in 2 groups at the main event. Let them play tournament football and quite obviously get knocked out by bigger teams in the knockouts. That would advance their national games far better. Let them play semi competitive friendlies against each other to prepare.

For the ‘top’ teams; Run some small randomised 4 nation friendly leagues with UEFA points available, playing each other once, instead of twice.

Cut out all the shite.

Put the top 8 PL teams in one pot for the FA Cup draw so you lose 50% of the best clubs immediately. It sucks. But half of them get relief. Their toughest game is played early in the season and increases the chance of a lower league team drawing the remaining PL teams in a later round.

Just make stuff massively better internationally and moderately better nationally.

It’s not hard to do. Money stands in the way.

 

[HTG]

Every now and then, a player will complain publicly. Nothing more will ever happen. Because the next step for them is to bag the cash generated by these fixtures. They then stop complaining.

I think we’re getting closer to an NBA like model, where the players just don’t take many games seriously and basically play with the foot on the breaks. I actually think we’re already there, to a degree.

 

[romufc]

Every now and then, a player will complain publicly. Nothing more will ever happen. Because the next step for them is to bag the cash generated by these fixtures. They then stop complaining.

I think we’re getting closer to an NBA like model, where the players just don’t take many games seriously and basically play with the foot on the breaks. I actually think we’re already there, to a degree.

Exactly, cash is king.

The only way for it to change is if a player takes the stand e.g Rodri saying he is close to striking.... its all good to say something in a press conference but its another to actually go ahead and doing it.

With PSR and FFP "strict" on select clubs, historic clubs like Manutd, Bayern, Real, Liverpool etc.. all rely on revenues to compete with the others.

In the same way, when a club is successful in winning titles, the players get paid bonuses for winning trophies. At the moment its, we pay you so you do have to play.

Its like in England, TV rights are such a big deal, clubs have to play at certain times because the fixture is chosen to be televised. It can be gotten away with it but TV deals will reduce. Likewise, a poster has mentioned that we should forget and not care about international fans, ostracising international fans again will lead to less revenues.

Now say for example Manutd decide, we wont play at 12:30 on a Saturday, but we will accept 30% reduction in TV money, we wont have pre season internationally, we will accept £200m a year less in revenues, do you think Manutd will be able to afford the transfer fees and wages? No, which means the players we would attract wont be the top players as they want to be paid 200/300k a week.

Certain clubs can inflate revenues so they dont actually need the commercial deals.

 

[Red in STL]

I understand the club world cup is going to become an issue but this is where I see clubs sending their 2nd teams to these competitions. There is no reason to have another end of season competition for select clubs.

They are absolutely not going to send 2nd teams, not with the money involved, this is basically meant to be the FIFA version of the CL

 

[baskinginthesun]

Does anybody know how the strike action works for players?

In most union work groups you put it out as "vote to strike" then ask the governing boards for approval. The work action has to be valid but, generally if the membership has voted "yes" it's hard for the governing boards to turn it down.

If players are serious, shouldn't they put it to the membership?

 

[Bebe]

I understand what you're saying - and get the argument.

But from a health (both physical and mental) perspective - just because you're an elite player, get called up to play for your country and earn x amount doesn't mean the governing bodies should be allowed to run these players into the ground by overloading them with games. There's only so much a body can take before it breaks and the governing bodies need to be more responsible for managing this.

If you look at other sports where salaries are comparable - mainly NFL / NBS / NHL - they all have regular off seasons to allow their bodies to recover.

I agree that the human body has limits and the demands placed on elite players bodies are too high.

The governing bodies want to maximize revenue, which means playing more games. The clubs want to maximize revenue, which means playing more games. The players want to maximize their salaries, which also means playing more games.

If players want to play fewer games (which is eminently reasonable), I think they need to seek a stipulation in their contract saying they will play a maximum of 50 games in a calendar year, or 60 games, or whatever the player decides they can handle. I think that in response, clubs would be reasonable in saying "ok, but we're going to reduce our wage offer by 20%" - problem solved.

I don't think either the clubs or the players can profit immensely off the increased volume of matches, and then go cry to a governing body that the they don't like the thing they signed up for.

The governing bodies and the clubs are both entirely dependent on the players - all that revenue dries up anyway if the best players aren't present for matches.

 

[Red in STL]

I agree that the human body has limits and the demands placed on elite players bodies are too high.

The governing bodies want to maximize revenue, which means playing more games. The clubs want to maximize revenue, which means playing more games. The players want to maximize their salaries, which also means playing more games.

If players want to play fewer games (which is eminently reasonable), I think they need to seek a stipulation in their contract saying they will play a maximum of 50 games in a calendar year, or 60 games, or whatever the player decides they can handle. I think that in response, clubs would be reasonable in saying "ok, but we're going to reduce our wage offer by 20%" - problem solved.

I don't think either the clubs or the players can profit immensely off the increased volume of matches, and then go cry to a governing body that the they don't like the thing they signed up for.

The governing bodies and the clubs are both entirely dependent on the players - all that revenue dries up anyway if the best players aren't present for matches.

One thing about this is that the players didn't sign up for it, one of the points thery've made is that they were never even consulted about it

 

[Cassidy]

Looks like a serious injury, could be out for a while

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Had a damascene conversion over the weekend.

While there is clearly too much football, I found a way to make it all better.

-Go back to 3 subs
-Increase squad sizes by 10
-X% of the squad must be under 23 and English (don’t know where that X level is)
-Cap player selections to 50 match day squads.
-Cap international player selections to 7 match day squads. Tournaments exempt from totals.
(Above needs a fix so as to not penalise smaller countries and competitions)
-Leaves you at 57-62 in a Major tournament year.

Job done. Really squeeze the pips of the clubs.

You’ll hopefully see an end to ridiculous 90+ point seasons, as some of your match day squads will be weaker. More games lost. Levels the playing field as smaller teams not in Europe will effectively always be playing their best team against somewhat weakened top teams. Albeit weaker top teams that have far more better players. Young players given more of a chance too.

I don’t want yo see 3 Premier League teams in both cup semi finals. I don’t want to see clubs aiming at doubles and trebles from the first day of the season. I want them rarer. Have all the games you like, but you’re going to have to pick your competitions and not bitch and moan that your success is something that the likes of Ipswich or Reading need to worry about.

Being back as much jeopardy as possible. Reset it all.

 

[horsechoker]

Had a damascene conversion over the weekend.

While there is clearly too much football, I found a way to make it all better.

-Go back to 3 subs
-Increase squad sizes by 10
-X% of the squad must be under 23 and English (don’t know where that X level is)
-Cap player selections to 50 match day squads.
-Cap international player selections to 7 match day squads. Tournaments exempt from totals.
-Leaves you at 57-62 in a Major tournament year.

Job done. Really squeeze the pips of the clubs.

You’ll hopefully see an end to ridiculous 90+ game seasons, as some of your match day squads will be weaker. More games lost. Levels the playing field as smaller teams not in Europe will effectively always be playing their best team against somewhat weakened top teams. Albeit weaker top teams that have far more better players. Young players given more of a chance too.

I don’t want yo see 3 Premier League teams in both cup semi finals. I don’t want to see clubs aiming at doubles and trebles from the first day of the season. I want them rarer. Have all the games you like, but you’re going to have to pick your competitions and not bitch and moan that your success is something that the likes of Ipswich or Reading need to worry about.

Being back as much jeopardy as possible. Reset it all.

What does this mean?

transitive verb
To decorate (metal) with wavy patterns of inlay or etching.
Same as damask, or damaskeen, v. t.
noun
Metalwork decorated with wavy patterns of inlay or etching.
Fabric having a wavy pattern; moiré.
A kind of plum, now called damson. See damson.
adjective
Of or relating to damascening.
Of or relating to damask.
Of or relating to Damascus.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

What does this mean?

“St. Paul was converted to Christianity on his way to Damascus, in the 30s of the first century A.D.. On his journey to Damascus, the Resurrected Christ appeared to him and it was this encounter that brought about his dramatic and immediate conversion”.

It’s a fairly common phrase and I’d only learned it to mean ‘sudden change of heart’ through contextual learning. I’d never interrogated the why. But there we go.

 

[Oranges038]

Had a damascene conversion over the weekend.

While there is clearly too much football, I found a way to make it all better.

-Go back to 3 subs
-Increase squad sizes by 10
-X% of the squad must be under 23 and English (don’t know where that X level is)
-Cap player selections to 50 match day squads.
-Cap international player selections to 7 match day squads. Tournaments exempt from totals.
(Above needs a fix so as to not penalise smaller countries and competitions)
-Leaves you at 57-62 in a Major tournament year.

Job done. Really squeeze the pips of the clubs.

You’ll hopefully see an end to ridiculous 90+ point seasons, as some of your match day squads will be weaker. More games lost. Levels the playing field as smaller teams not in Europe will effectively always be playing their best team against somewhat weakened top teams. Albeit weaker top teams that have far more better players. Young players given more of a chance too.

I don’t want yo see 3 Premier League teams in both cup semi finals. I don’t want to see clubs aiming at doubles and trebles from the first day of the season. I want them rarer. Have all the games you like, but you’re going to have to pick your competitions and not bitch and moan that your success is something that the likes of Ipswich or Reading need to worry about.

Being back as much jeopardy as possible. Reset it all.

I think it has to go back to 3 subs + 1 (maybe 2 for extra time). Players can sit there knowing, we've 5 subs, I'll get on at some point. Reducing that puts more pressure on teams to manage game time and subs better. Chelsea have a squad of 40 players, they are winning 3-0 and by the 60th minute they've replaced half their team.

Utd played 63 games in 98/99, including 2 CL qualifiers, but the line up everybody associated with that team only started 2 games together. Coventry and Inter Milan.


It's like underage roll on roll off, everybody gets a few minutes stuff. It's bonkers, 3 subs and better game management is what's required.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

I think it has to go back to 3 subs + 1 (maybe 2 for extra time). Players can sit there knowing, we've 5 subs, I'll get on at some point. Reducing that puts more pressure on teams to manage game time and subs better. Chelsea have a squad of 40 players, they are winning 3-0 and by the 60th minute they've replaced half their team.

Utd played 63 games in 98/99, including 2 CL qualifiers, but the line up everybody associated with that team only started 2 games together. Coventry and Inter Milan.


It's like underage roll on roll off, everybody gets a few minutes stuff. It's bonkers, 3 subs and better game management is what's required.

Oh aye. There are many a hole in my suggestion, but I’m fully behind back to 3 subs.

It was always a greater benefit to bigger teams, and bigger teams response has been to accept more games into the calendar.

Stop the problem at source.

I’d love to go back to the era of winning 28 games or less to take the league. It was way more fun. Swollen squads and 5 subs isn’t helping there. Draws feel like disasters… in SEPTEMBER. Mental.

 

[DavidDeSchmikes]

 

[Dave Smith]

No need for a strike. The elite players should just retire from international football. They do that FIFA and UEFA would have a fit.

Personally, I do not think the CWC is the issue - although that should've been a 16-24 team version. The issue is the amount of zero jepody games in football/or the allow of everyone to have a go (see San Marino for example or the ludicrous 36 team CL where 24 qualfiy for the knockouts after playing 8 games.) Then there is the international calender intertwining with the domestic.

For me, the calender should be re-evaluated. With the domestic/club season being Sept - April and the International May-June. With a two-three week break between April and May and a one month break in July/August.

For the domestic calender, scrap second domestic trophies (League Cup - although I do really like the LC) and reel in the CL by doing something like a 32 team comp, first stage groups of four with one game each. Top two go through to a 16 team league of 8 games. Top 4 go to a finals tournament in a host City with single leg knockout tie in semis.

As for the international tournaments. It should rotate between world cup and regional tournaments each year. The first rounds should be single leg ko ties and seeded. This will kill two birds, firstly San Marino 'still get a go', the big team that get them, essentially get a warm-up game.

Do this until you get to 16 for the WC and 8 for the Euros. Then hold a final tourney in a host city/nation. Teams that get knocked out early can play other nations knocked out early to give them some extra games/to build coefficient points.

This would also reduce travel and the financial burden on host nations.

 

[Rooney in Paris]

No need for a strike. The elite players should just retire from international football. They do that FIFA and UEFA would have a fit.

Players can't technically retire from international football - federations could ban them from playing with their clubs if they refused to turn up for international duty. When we see players retiring from international football, it's that they have come to an agreement with their national team to no longer be selected - the situation you're speaking of, which would be an open conflict, wouldn't work.

 

[Dave Smith]

Players can't technically retire from international football - federations could ban them from playing with their clubs if they refused to turn up for international duty. When we see players retiring from international football, it's that they have come to an agreement with their national team to no longer be selected - the situation you're speaking of, which would be an open conflict, wouldn't work.

Did not know this. Thanks.

 

[Rooney in Paris]

Did not know this. Thanks.

I was recently reminded of it following Griezmann's announcement, and there was some chatter around the fact Deschamps could technically call him up, etc. but there was obviously a prior conversation between the 2 during which this was agreed. But in a confrontational context, it could become a bit of an ugly situation.