Jump to content

Monty13

Members
  • Content Count

    5,840
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by Monty13

  1. Something more constructive, But isn''t every club which is now promoted from the Championship forced to abide by their FFP rules forever more? I am sure I read that when the championship one was being detailed online. If so wont this: A) Make it a lot harder for promoted clubs forced to adhere to these rules when clubs that have not come up aren''t. B) Mean that theoretically the amount of clubs not affected by the Europe FFP and not constrained by Championship FFP will slowly dwindle? but for the lucky few that avoid relegation and have zero European ambition.
  2. A trust with the club in the hands of the average pinkun poster/canary caller, frightens the cr@p out of me!
  3. Badger while I don''t disagree totally with everything your saying, your spouting a very Michael Moore-esque one sided opinion of a huge issue. Your totally skewing the definition of the word rule! I''m sorry we are not ruled by finance capitalists. Your going to have to expand your point further because I''m not sure the point your trying to imply, that a capitalist system affects the lives of all within it? of course it does, there will be rich and poor and many in-between, just because the finance within that system is skewed with few with much and many with little does not directly confer power over the many by the few. People seem to think that free should mean fair? Of course it doesn''t, freedom is purely the removal of restraints. If you have no restraint than the powerful will bully the weak. That is the outcome we have, that is our free market. That is capitalism. Governments are more powerful than financiers, governments control policy while financiers can only control the market. The problem you have is that at present financiers are more active lobbying government than the people the governments represent. You continue to blame those with money, where as the reason for the lack of accountability is the apathy of the represented within western democracies. That''s because as much as we all complain, the reality is for most in the western world, life is eminently more preferable to that elsewhere and the lives of generations before us, so we really can''t be bothered to upset the status quo. I agree the world isn''t fair, it could be so much better, but then I look at my big TV and nice car, my pay from my steady job and think, what do I really care? It''s not a perfect system but I''m doing ok out of it..... I like this quote as we seem to be doing a lot of them: "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest." While I love the ideals of Marx''s writings, I''m not sure anyone will be able to explain to me how they could ever be realistically realised, apart from a society where mankind wants for nothing. Please, that''s not an invitation to try, just my view.
  4. Zipper, personally I don''t think he can play the Hoolahan role, certainly not to the standard of the man himself. I also don''t think 442 is the answer to anything apart from how to get battered at this level. I didn''t remember him playing in the West Ham game but thanks for pointing it out. I honestly don''t think that game is as fair a reflection as Swansea. Look at the Swansea side he played in it is pretty much all first choice players. Then look at the West Ham team, and who is the big name missing, no Holt up front. To me Swansea is the only example of Howson playing in a full strength team, in the current favoured formation. I don''t think he is as strong in the tackle as Tettey or Johnson, but then neither of them have his passing range or dribbling ability. You have to make compromises somewhere and at the minute the compromise seems to be play 6 defensive minded players and hope Hoolahan does some magic or we nick a goal from a set piece. I would rather see one of the two defensive midfielders changed for a more balanced player.
  5. Howson shouldn''t be replacing Wes, he should be playing in a team with him against similar levelled opposition. Howson alongside Johnson or Tettey would show more attacking intent and take the pressure off Wes being required to be the catalyst of all our build up. While the stats for Howson aren''t good this year, when starting he has often played in a 442 formation. As I have said before my only recollection of him starting in one of the defensive berths in a 451 was at Swansea and we not only won the game we scored 4 goals.
  6. Oh no, who rules us then? I need to know, your being very cryptic, is it the illuminati? Seriously, in a Democratic state the people rule through Democratic representation. That is what we have, who exactly is preventing this from being exercised? If I was to start my own party, gather massive support from the people of this country, win a majority in parliament and sit in number 10 for 5 years enacting rule by Democratic Representation, who is going to stop me? You can''t political failure in a democracy on anybody but the people being represented. I totally agree with your liberal assessment of welfare and taxation apart from your assessment of the modern ruling class, who are they out of interest? If you mean the rich of this country who''s tax dodging is frankly sickening then I would hate to think of the Jimmy Carrs of this world as the ruling class, what a thought! Unfortunately badger the world is a free market and until that changes government will always spend money to generate growth. It''s a non argument as capitalism has never really been challenged in reality by any workable alternative. Not really Badger, the financial crisis occurred under the regulation and with the encouragement of government, there was also no real breaking of legalities. The criminal can''t be guilty if he hasn''t technically broken the law and the policemen was watching and egging him on. Even if his crime was morally wrong.
  7. I don''t really understand the Horse meat crisis anyway. Do we all just feel cheated that we''ve not got beef when it says beef, or is there something fundamentally unsafe about eating Horse meat that I am unaware of? I mean I really like Horses, but I don''t really feel any sympathy for the cow/chicken/duck/lamb/pig that usually provides my meat so not sure why horse meat is such an affront? But being tricked, that I can understand getting peoples goat.....while were on it why don''t we eat goat?
  8. I''m not really sure what you mean when you talk about power, rule and its shift Badger. Democracy is purely the right of every citizen who is eligible to vote to have their say through representation. In itself it has zero to do with economics (other than to be an influence upon it through representative government) and only influences social change through the popular opinion of its eligible citizens (by definition). I also love the constant argument that welfare and public services have been eroded. The amount of money in terms of percentage GDP that has been spent on the various social and public enterprises has either remained fairly constant or steadily increased (even in the latest cuts, social platforms have remained relatively unscathed). Unfortunately we have the twin problems that these have become increasingly expensive to provide while our chosen capitalist system has struggled to support the economic growth required to sustain them. The financial crisis is an interesting argument anyway, the idea and process of capitalism hasn''t failed (Chinas interesting take on State Capitalism is only now struggling as the rest of the world slows). Regulation did and regulation is fulfilled by government through democratic representation. Yet everyone bleats about "its all the banks fault" when actually it is the worlds governments (that are the peoples representatives) that have failed and continue to fail to regulate them. And we go back to my last point, if we cared enough as a Democratic society we would change the world, but individually we really can''t be bothered!
  9. Thanks for the lesson on the English language Badger. Here''s a two apparently little known interesting facts, Karl Marx''s writings are not the gospel of the definitions of socio-economics and also the world has moved forward significantly in terms of economics and social change since he finished his writings. How do you pigeon hole the welfare capitalism that our state provides? Is it Capitalism, not by Marx''s definition. As concepts of human existence they are antithesis of each other. In the reality in which they have been implemented they are two competing ideologies, neither of which can practically ever be applied in isolation. Now by definition of the word and concept we are very much a democracy. The fact that you feel the people that represent you are failing, merely highlights the apathy to which people care about their representation. We have Democracy in the UK, we just don''t really care about it. You are free to put yourself forward as a candidate for parliament, to join any political party or to start your own. You can protest, campaign and do what ever the hell you like to influence peoples democratic opinion. The one thing you can''t change is if know one really cares.
  10. Really Lincoln, what about a bit further back, Assaye? Trafalgar? Great attacking victories against the odds. But I am just being obtuse :)
  11. Its not logically impossible ron, its now historic fact. Its happened on two occasions in the last dozen years and both countries are still ostensibly democracies. Democracy is actually the wrong thing to highlight, what people yearn for is representation, to believe that someone cares for and is enacting their views. I''m not sure modern democracy actually provides that. But we are massively digressing.....
  12. Is the answer to the title question: until the board decide to sack him? Because I was unaware there was a vote I was missing out on.
  13. Democracy imposed on a population....there is definitely no recent examples of a powerful democratic nation imposing democracy on other countries....what an incredible idea that would be.....
  14. Oh purple you cheeky devil. Only if you met the eligibility to vote, and as it took till 1893 for those plucky Kiwis to give woman the vote, while I don''t think anyone can argue that the ideal of democracy has always been virtuous, the implementation has historically been somewhat lacking.
  15. Stig you can believe in the Marxist ideal, but that doesn''t make you a communist. Your political persuasion is communist, really? What do you do that is active in these political beliefs. You also have a slight issue, and that is that the class conflict that Marx talked of has been muddied by capitalism. You have as many self proclaimed "working class" millionaires now as elitists. Capitalism and Communism are not the antithesis of each other, they are competing solutions to the problems associated with class. Am I jealous of your convictions, no, I just don''t believe them. We can all dream of a utopian society and the realisation of human freedom, doesn''t make us communist.
  16. Your not a communist Stig, you really aren''t, no matter what you say.
  17. But my point is LDC if a team turns up trying hard not to lose, its our job to break them down, not match their defensiveness. If teams turn up trying to get a point and get one, then we are not achieving our aim, but they are.
  18. While their fans think otherwise, the majority of PL managers, other than the big teams, presumably turn up to carrow road looking to get a point. How many teams and managers have you seen turn up this year and go all out for a win? We are the ones who against similar level opposition, which probably includes 11/12 other teams, should be looking to get 3 points at home and should be disappointed with a draw. I don''t understand your point. QPR, Newcastle, Fulham, West Ham all turned up looking for a point and we obliged, that''s not something to celebrate. The only team that the manager probably expected to win and we got a draw is Tottenham.
  19. Enjoyed reading this thread, its been a good debate. I like Hughton, and I think negative or not he will keep us up this year. But I think some of the (fairly constructive) criticism of his tactics on here is justified. I like 451, its a great formation, versatile and effective if used correctly. That is the reason it''s now the default formation (or variations of it) for nearly all top teams. I agree, and have said before, that the defensive two is our issue going forward. They do an excellent defensive role but sit so deep and do not push forward enough when we have the ball. I think this is partly the fault of the coaching/tactics, partly the fact they are both defensively minded players. I''d like to add one thing for debate though, and its the opinion of Howson. There seems to be much derision of his performances this year. To be fair he has played in some pretty abject performances. But mainly these have been in a 442 or replacing Wes (mainly late on) behind the striker. While I think BJ and Tettey do a sterling job when we are the underdogs, I would personally agree that we can''t play both, especially at home against similar level opposition and expect to win (although we probably wont lose). People have said we don''t have the personnel, that''s why they both play, but to me Howson is the one player who, when on his game, can play alongside one of the other two, and provide cover to the defence, while providing more going forward than either of them can. I can only remember one instance (although i am sure someone will prove me wrong!) of our playing 451 in the Prem this year and Howson playing alongside one of the other two in those berths. That game was Swansea, and we went in at half time dominating and having scored 3. Ok the second half we took it to the wire, but they came out and out played us in the second half , but we still won the game. If wed had Tettey fit subbing him on for Howson at that point would have made perfect sense to hold our lead. So why has Howson not been used more as a partner for either BJ or Tettey when we want to try to win the game, but maintain the discipline and the shape against similar level opposition? Instead he has been reduced from our only real all round central midfielder to a bit part replacement, and frankly sub standard, Wes.
  20. But wait a minute chops, did you not say that you are not a season ticket holder on another thread?!! This means I can no longer respect your opinion and certainly can''t accept your position as top fan. I will have to wait until a properly appointed Season Ticket holder is here to help me decide on my opinion, while I cower from the instinctive level of higher football knowledge they have and from their lofty position within the fan hierarchy. Oh no wait....actually I''ll just get on with my life, not care about what trolls think and take everyone''s opinions on here at face value of whether I think they are talking utter cr@p or not. And on second thoughts you have my vote to be supreme leader. ;)
  21. Personally with these two out I would love us to go 442 with Becchio/Holt up front. Bring Howson into the centre and push Wes onto the left side. I''d actually prefer Wes out there to an unfit Surman. Holt would be more than capable of dropping slightly deeper to maintain a shape closer to our usual 4411 anyway so in reality it wouldn''t be that huge a change of shape. I suspect we will just straight swap Howson in for Tettey and Bennett for Pilkington though and otherwise remain unchanged.
  22. No LDC the club refers to people who are non season ticket holders as members or non members. Anyone can buy casual tickets when available which is the only official use of the word casual by the club as far as I am aware. Go back and read your original post. In the wording you have labelled people who buy casual tickets, ie. non season ticket holders as "casuals". Presumably in reference to there aforementioned requirement to buy casual tickets to see games. How is that any different than non season ticket holders being referred to as plastics? You''ve just created a slightly nicer sounding term to you for your post. It means the same thing though, its singling out ST holders from non. I''m not really bothered by it, but it really does show how stupid the whole argument over what different fans are called is.
  23. er... I''m not, and I would assume not many on here are either, a casual fan, my appearances at carrow road are. Can you not label others, as you so wildly rage against yourself being labelled.
  24. The cynic in me would suggest that recently he has not had that amount of time and space with the ball in a shooting position to bury such a clear cut chance. Great finish though, hope he continues to prove Trap was wrong to not include him before.
×
×
  • Create New...