Jump to content

Follow Follow Rangers. Season 2023/24


Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, Orbix said:

I’m of two minds about it, there’s definitely a minimum bar of not getting booted off the ball, but there have been plenty of wirey strikers who score without being able to deadlift a car - Vardy, Berbatov, Torres etc were never massive. 

Berbatov and Torres were both 6 foot+. My understanding is that Weston is still really short. Only 5.7". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, G51 said:

That's the nature of the game pal. Man City and Chelsea nick our youngsters, we nick them from Hibs and Motherwell, Hibs and Motherwell nick them from somewhere else.

True, but I have been looking down the English pyramid for Chelsea and Man City B teams but can't seem to find them. Odd, that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, DMCs said:

Berbatov and Torres were both 6 foot+. My understanding is that Weston is still really short. Only 5.7". 

Was just the first three I could think of, there’s probably better examples of wirey short arses. 
 

3 minutes ago, Ranaldo Bairn said:

True, but I have been looking down the English pyramid for Chelsea and Man City B teams but can't seem to find them. Odd, that.

The City Group own 8? different teams worldwide. Chelsea had Vitesse Arnhem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Orbix said:

True. Just don’t want to see them all go the way of Katic and overtrain. Doubt they’d be allowed too. 
 

Lol that its only July and Twitter is doing the ‘who’s on the plane’ tracking thing.

The restrictions on loans coming in  mean that Academies are going to have to move earlier to bring in youth from everything I’ve read. 

I don't mind the age, necessarily, it's the volume. Having the grotesque imbalance of 2 teams in the same system simply allows greater hoarding and less opportunities for other clubs to prosper from loans or released youngsters. It's horrendous, and that wee fella from St Mirren you and Celtic are trying to sign will go from being on the edges of a tier 1 club's squad, to scrabbling around in tier 5. Joke.

That's one of the reasons I was so delighted when Aaron Hickey told Bayern to get stuffed after they said he'd be shoved in their B team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Orbix said:

Was just the first three I could think of, there’s probably better examples of wirey short arses. 

Torres and Berbatov are probably two of the worst examples of “wirey short arses” you could’ve picked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Orbix said:

Was just the first three I could think of, there’s probably better examples of wirey short arses. 
 

The City Group own 8? different teams worldwide. Chelsea had Vitesse Arnhem.

Sigh. Those clubs are not in the same pyramid as each other. The hoarding issue is still there, though.

And I fundamentally disagree with multi-club ownership anyway, as I'm sure you do yourself, with all the potential for chicanery there is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ranaldo Bairn said:

Sigh. Those clubs are not in the same pyramid as each other. The hoarding issue is still there, though.

And I fundamentally disagree with multi-club ownership anyway, as I'm sure you do yourself, with all the potential for chicanery there is.

Why does it make a difference whether the City Group cannibalise a club in the Scottish, English or French pyramids? Surely completely hollowing out a club and running it solely to benefit another team is much, much worse than B teams. I wouldn't have thought that's controversial at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sortmeout said:

Torres and Berbatov are probably two of the worst examples of “wirey short arses” you could’ve picked.

Initially was just listing wirey players. Would say Berbatov and Vardy definitely in that category, Torres before he bulked up the same?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, G51 said:

Why does it make a difference whether the City Group cannibalise a club in the Scottish, English or French pyramids? Surely completely hollowing out a club and running it solely to benefit another team is much, much worse than B teams. I wouldn't have thought that's controversial at all.

It is worse for that club, yes, but at least the damage is spread. I suppose it's up to oneself which one thinks is the greater evil. I am completely against both, to be clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ranaldo Bairn said:

It is worse for that club, yes, but at least the damage is spread. I suppose it's up to oneself which one thinks is the greater evil. I am completely against both, to be clear.

How is the damage spread, exactly? What does that mean? And surely the club that actually gets cannibalised is the important party here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ranaldo Bairn said:

It is worse for that club, yes, but at least the damage is spread. I suppose it's up to oneself which one thinks is the greater evil. I am completely against both, to be clear.

Me as well to be clear. The B team idea I think works to alleviate an immediate problem in the context of the SPFL and its place in European football but long term it’s unworkable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, G51 said:

How is the damage spread, exactly? What does that mean? And surely the club that actually gets cannibalised is the important party here?

Spread around different countries. Clubs here and there rather than entire pyramids being undermined. For that club's followers definitely; balancing that against an entire pyramid, hard to say.

As I said quite plainly, both these methods are unconscionable, so I wouldn't like to think you are setting up a wee straw man here to deflect from the original argument.

2 minutes ago, Orbix said:

Me as well to be clear. The B team idea I think works to alleviate an immediate problem in the context of the SPFL and its place in European football but long term it’s unworkable. 

What do you mean by this? Works for whom? What has European football got to do with it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ranaldo Bairn said:

Spread around different countries. Clubs here and there rather than entire pyramids being undermined. For that club's followers definitely; balancing that against an entire pyramid, hard to say.

As I said quite plainly, both these methods are unconscionable, so I wouldn't like to think you are setting up a wee straw man here to deflect from the original argument.

What do you mean by this? Works for whom? What has European football got to do with it?

Right, but the entire SPFL pyramid isn't undermined by B teams that can't get promoted or compete in cup competitions. Unless you happen to think that a pile of other European nations don't have functioning pyramids either. Having a team that has winning as a secondary objective would seem to me to be significantly more likely to undermine a pyramid. Or severely restricting promotion and relegation within the pyramid.

I don't think you really have an original argument tbh.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, G51 said:

Right, but the entire SPFL pyramid isn't undermined by B teams that can't get promoted or compete in cup competitions. Unless you happen to think that a pile of other European nations don't have functioning pyramids either. Having a team that has winning as a secondary objective would seem to me to be significantly more likely to undermine a pyramid. Or severely restricting promotion and relegation within the pyramid.

I don't think you really have an original argument tbh.

 

If you don't think that the presence of the B teams in the LL is but step 1 of a much wider plan for them then you've not been listening. If you don't think they are already causing immense resentment around tiers 5 and 6 then again, I don't think you've been listening. You may have also noticed that winning is already a secondary objective for the 3 x B teams.

Having B teams in pyramids undermines them yes, that's self-evident.

Despite your feeble attempt at a barb in the last line, the sad fact is, it's not an original, i.e. new, argument. Sensible people have been saying it for years. An ever decreasing number of clubs hoarding an ever increasing number of young players (in whatever guise) is bad for the game. By whatever metric you choose to use; elite or otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ranaldo Bairn said:

 

What do you mean by this? Works for whom? What has European football got to do with it?

IMO, teams can offer youth players four things: Experience, Coaching, Facilities, Wages. The way that the B teams solves an immediate problem is that it allows certain SPFL teams to offer experience, facilities and coaching to players to offset the fact they couldn’t compete on wages with clubs outwith Scotland (because of where it sits in terms of European football, but in which the SPFL teams need to compete to earn money). Ultimately it'll lead to those teams that can afford to do it farming younger and younger youth players domestically for other teams to gamble on, concentrating the academy structure and consolidating a power imbalance in the league pyramid. 
 

IDK how you’d solve it though, restriction on transfers is likely not kosher with the ECJ, some minimum limit of first team minutes before a player can transfer maybe, stop the likes of Turnbull being poached before the producing club gets benefit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...