Jump to content


Member +
  • Post count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3,310 Excellent

About KingsX

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    the Realms of Delusion
  • Fan Since

Recent Profile Visitors

3,559 profile views
  1. Point well made. Levy’s stadium-first approach and failure to refresh the squad was an equal contributor to the pickle they’re in. I didn’t mention it as it’s not relevant to us (I assume the Srivaddanaprabhas are not planning to invest half a billion in the KP extension). He finally went and refinanced all that debt out to near-infinity, so they can at least invest CL winnings in the squad. It beggars belief that someone with his shrewd reputation, didn’t do that early enough to buy at least one or two key players in those unused windows. Maybe he just thought he and his team were smart enough to bring the Toilet Bowl in on time and budget … and to keep extending mature players on the cheap … and got caught out. A huge miscalculation.
  2. Agree. And that's the tightrope our board will have to learn to walk, now that we have several players who project to be good enough for top PL and European clubs. Extensions can be a win-win for young players who haven’t yet banked enough for their financial security. And just maybe -- a club where you have good young teammates and good coaching, and a family ethos where players feel valued and enjoy coming in to work, is a club young players might not rush to leave. But you can’t keep them forever.
  3. This is obviously the best approach for a club like ours, and thank goodness we have the scouting and analytics resources to make it work. That said, Spurs are now demonstrating the limits of it. “Their squad is getting stale”, “Poch has lost the changing room” … eh, maybe it’s just simple economics. Levy has always locked his good players up to incentive-laden, club-friendly extensions to maximize the profit when they do move on. Now the likes of Eriksen, Alderweireld and Vertonghen have had enough and held up their middle fingers. They have long since proven themselves, and are not about to burn themselves out giving 100% to Pochettino’s pressing game. Get through the next six months, and the fat fees Levy expected to pocket will go to them as signing bonuses. Spurs' season won't fix itself unless their summer signings can contribute. It’s 2019 and at some point, most elite players are going to demand market value. Surely we are offering raises and extensions to the likes of Maddison and Soyuncu. It will be telling to see which players sign them (though I suppose refusals may not make the news). They are probably a fair measure of who feels ready to leave.
  4. KingsX


    the laughs moved into this thread Or I'm just warped... Who would be a Mod? Part zookeeper, part grade-school principal, part cop. They may occasionally make unexplained decisions, but the "unmoderated" alternative is exemplified by the Fighting Cock. This is much, much better IMHO.
  5. Those new teeth were expensive. He shouldn't grind them so much
  6. Correct decision that time. At the half ... VAR 2, football 1, Liverpool 0
  7. Their home form is rancid, with 10 allowed in 4 matches. If there's an away match to set up aggressively, this is surely it.
  8. Why all the fuss, when there’s a simple cure for that itch for publicity. anyway, pissed-off Vardy is peak Vardy.
  9. Appears Sigurdsson needed that kick in the butt of being benched.
  10. Which clubs have benefited, and/or suffered, from result-changing VAR incidents? ESPN's Anti-VAR table strips them out. It's supposed to be what the table would look like if VAR didn't exist. Decisions, decisions, decisions ... In a shock turn of events over the past month, VAR has actually started giving goals to teams rather than taking them away. We've seen Bournemouth, Arsenal and Crystal Palace all awarded goals that last season would have been chalked off by the linesman's flag. That's a good thing, right? Well, don't let the football purists hear you say that. So far 15 match-changing incidents have been overturned, with 11 goals disallowed. But what does this all mean for the Premier League table? Who would be much higher in the table without VAR, and who has VAR helped the most? The Anti-VAR Index mirrors the Luck Index at the top of the table, with Liverpool's lead cut in half to four points. Jurgen Klopp's men lose two points because, without VAR, Chelsea would not have had a goal disallowed against them at Stamford Bridge, resulting in a draw. And Man City would have won at home to Tottenham earlier in the season. Man United can also have a good moan about VAR, as Arsenal gained an equaliser at Old Trafford when Pierre-Emmanuel Aubameyang had a disallowed goal ruled back in, costing the Red Devils two points. The only team to suffer a greater points drop than the Manchester clubs are Sheffield United. Chris Wilder's team have enjoyed a great start to life back in the Premier League, but just imagine if the goal disallowed for offside at home to Southampton, when the score was 0-0, had stood. The Anti-VAR Index say the Blades would have won rather than suffer a 1-0 defeat, shooting them into lofty heights of seventh. That climb of six places is the greatest in the list. Meanwhile, Bournemouth and Tottenham have profited most from VAR decisions and would slide five places down the table to 14th and 15th, respectively, had original decisions stood. So things could be worse for troubled Spurs boss Mauricio Pochettino. Burnley don't fare much better, dropping four places into 11th, when you strip out VAR decisions. While that trio of clubs might drop the most positions without VAR, it's Southampton who lose the most points. With two VAR decisions in their favour, they are docked three points, but as they are 17th they can only fall into 19th but one point off the foot of the table.
  11. Bummer just published in the Athletic Says he now mostly stays in, and can't take a walk by himself. Sad for a "mere" 70 year old, but he obviously crammed a lot into those years.
  • Create New...