Re: The great Premiership myth - Why the EPL isn't the best league in the world

On Feb 5, 9:57 pm, kenhig...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Feb 5, 4:04 pm, 3rdte...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:



On Feb 3, 10:18 pm, kenhig...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

On Feb 3, 11:46 am, 3rdte...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

On Feb 2, 11:18 am, MH <nos...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

3rdte...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Feb 1, 9:23 pm, Jellore <jell...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Feb 1, 9:17 pm, 3rdte...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

On Jan 30, 6:18 pm, Ian <i...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 30 Jan, 14:10, 3rdte...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

On Jan 28, 5:51 pm, Ian <i...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 26 Jan, 10:51, 3rdte...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

One of the greatest and most genuine minds in Australian Journalism

Whether theEPLis the best league is a moot point anyway. FWIW, the
top 3 leagues have different qualities. The CL (which recently might
favour theEPL, not weaken its claim as the writer stupidly suggests)
isn't a good measure for any number of reasons.

What is important is that anything this man writes should be taken
with a pinch of salt.

That can be said of any journalist of football analyst. Moot point.

Utter rot.

Your opinion is

I suspect your usual reading is the Daily Star.

As with your opinion, you are wrong. You are simple sore that he
mocked the EPL - the illusion based on multi-billion dollar marketing
campaign.

Completely contemptible rubbish.

Yawn, prove it.

He doesn't understand the basics of creating an
argument.

Argue against this:

"The results of the 2006 World Cup and the Champions League last week
again bear this out and both involve Italy, the world's second most
successful football country."

England provided 3 of the 4 Champions League semi finalists.

So?

Serie A did the same in 2003. Spain has done so multiple times. Point
is that two of those giants got rooted by Milan.

The World Cup comment is so farcically meaningless,

Typical English rubbish. You can pretend that it is meaningless, but
we all know it is because England hasn't won a meaningful cup, ever.
You can pretend that leagues, and specifically the EPL are the
pinnacle of football world wide, but you are transparently full of it.

I won't even respond to that.

Because you cannot, as I suspected you would try to brush it under the
carpet. The point is, it's true.

Hey fool why didn't you respond to the previous poster who listed the
data that proves in recent times EPL clubs have had the measure of
Serie A clubs.

What was there to respond to fool? Was I supposed to deny that those
are accurate figures? Or go on some tangential response on something
completely irrelevant like you would have done? Unlike yourself, I
have no pretenses to any league's hegemony over the other. I don't
police the internet to spread imaginary propoganda for one leagues
dominance over the others. I like all three big leagues to be honest,
and I watch the BL and even the SPL when they are on Setanta. Get
this, I even watch South American football ;) I'm not some homer
retard like you who has sworn his life to defending any one particular
league. Your place in the world, and even more so on the internet is
so insignificant. It's just fun getting a rise out of your sorry arse.

Total is
Serie A 6 wins 4 draws 8 losses
EPL 8 wins 4 draws 6 losses
Teams (% of wins)
Chelsea 100 % 2 games
Milan 75 % 6 games
Arsenal 62.5 % 4 games
Liverpool 50 % 4 games
Inter 50 % 2 games
Man Utd 43.75 % 8 games
Roma 37.5 % 4 games
Juve 25 % 4 games
Lazio 0 % 2 games
Milan accounts for 4 of Italy's six wins, so one can hardly make
generalizations about "Italian teams" - generally they've been poor
against EPL opposition.

I suppose I could put the totals of TITLES captured, but you'd
probably ignore it :))

Champions league or European cup wins are 11,11, and 10 for Spain ,
Italy, and England so not much separates them there.

Not in total titles captured, not much to seperate unless you count up
for both CL and EUFA cup as well as factor in runner up titles. If we
are going to count semi-final appearances, I'd reckon that runner up
is just as significant:

I'd reckon that Internationals should be factored in somewhere as well
to get a better overall picture. This is probably how I would do it:

Why would International titles count for anything in club football?

LOL, you don't want to look internationally for the reason that your
supported team hasn't done well in recent years. Too easy :)

I don't need to look at International titles because I don't believe
there is a correlation between the best club side and the best
international team.

Well too bad that there really is no way to prove it. Though you've
changed the goalposts by adding club side. The topic here was league.

If you believe there is, how about producing some evidence?

Why don't you produce evidence that there is no correlation between
them?

Could it be because no evidence exists either way?

We can cut to the chase and just admit that you don't like looking at
international achievements because your team doesn't have much to
boast about in the last 40+ years.

No-one is doubting that, for example, Real were the dominant team in
the late 50s/early 60s.
That certainly went a long way to showing that La Liga was the
strongest league around, but given that Real's success was largely
based on an Argentinian, a Hungarian, a Frenchman and sundry other
foreigners hardly proves to me that Spain were the dominant national
side of that era.

Settle down Higgs. No one has said that. No need to get so worked up
about some supposition you created out of nothing.

You're proposing taking national achievements into consideration in
club football.

I'm proposing looking at the big picture. I've never said that
national achievements are indicative of club football. Culturally
speaking it wouldn't matter since both at the club level (CL) and
International level, Italy are on top. Spain is right up there at the
club level, while Germany are there internationally. Both are
significant, however I never said dependant on each other. That's a
new spin on your part.

I don't believe they are neccessarily related.

Who cares.

For example, Ajax/Bayern were the dominant club sides in Europe in the
early/mid 70s, and they comprised of mostly home grown players. The
Dutch and German teams were the two top teams in world soccer.
10 years later, the spoils were shared between English, Italian,
Dutch, Romanian and Portuguese sides.
Were they the top national teams of the time?

Early to mid 70's? 10 years later? Putting us into the mid eighties?

And as for the Euro Championships counting for more than a WC win,
well, it not only makes you look like a troll, but it makes you look
like the same kind of idiot that Barc4eva is

I never said it was. I said that some fans of Spain might think so,
given that Englands world cup win was tainted. Since both happened in
the 60's, they're hardly worthy of anything relevant though. Just a
bigger view, drawing conclusions on whatever it is you like.

What proof do you have that some Spanish fans think this?

I said some fans of Spain might think so. The only proof would be the
some fans that have said so. What more would you like? And why does it
bother you that some fans might think a Euro championship is harder
than a World championship. It might very well be, but we all know that
the World Cup is more prestigious.

Do you hate Barcelona or something, or just Spanish football in
general?-

I don't hate Barcelona or Spanish football at all

Could have fooled me with the amount of vitriol you just put out. I
bet like Jellore you are a closet hater. I bet like Jellore, sooner or
later, you'll just come out and admit you hate Spain.



.

Relevant Pages