RealGM

Inter did more than enough to win but you don’t win without scoring. Dimarco had a great game

Still I can’t say city got lucky after having to go through Bayern and Real

Looking at the match reports it was a bit like last year's final. Inter both outplayed them and shut down City's plan A which is more than Real or Bayern did with far better players available.

magik9113 wrote:Inter did more than enough to win but you don’t win without scoring. Dimarco had a great game

Still I can’t say city got lucky after having to go through Bayern and Real

Aside from the Lukaku blunders, I thought the game was for the taking as well. Lautaro and Barella weren't decisive when they needed to be in the critical moments.

Hellcrooner wrote:
revert bosman stupidty ( wich is what really ruined football) and only allow teams to have 4 players in the line up that can not play for the national team from the league the club is based.

Players have rights too. People asking for bosman rule to be reverted don't care about players at all, and would like them to be treated like property/slaves.
And the last time I checked there is still a European Union, so you can't discriminate players based on their nationality, and you cannot limit the number of players if they are EU nationals, just like you cannot do it with regular workers. Or maybe you would like that too...

Personally, I think clubs should be forced to have at least two or three players that have at some point played in their youth academy (U19 or lower) on the pitch at all times.
For any reasonably working club this restriction should not be a big deal to comply with.

Foye wrote:Personally, I think clubs should be forced to have at least two or three players that have at some point played in their youth academy (U19 or lower) on the pitch at all times.
For any reasonably working club this restriction should not be a big deal to comply with.

We already have that with UCL registration. 4 out of the 25 registered player have to meet the homegrown criteria

You can expand it to actually have them on the pitch, but that rule is always confusing and we saw things like this leading to errors in other leagues/sports.

^^I'm playing a Dortmund 2017 fm save and am in strong disagreement because that year's Gotze/Reus/Sahin are getting nowhere close to a major title

More directly, the rich clubs have the best means to buy future WC players before age 18 so the homegrown rule gets hacked by rich clubs buying promising kids at volume at the expense of overall talent development in the league.

Foye wrote:Personally, I think clubs should be forced to have at least two or three players that have at some point played in their youth academy (U19 or lower) on the pitch at all times.
For any reasonably working club this restriction should not be a big deal to comply with.

That would just bias things towards the rich teams even further.

Mamba81p wrote:

Hellcrooner wrote:
revert bosman stupidty ( wich is what really ruined football) and only allow teams to have 4 players in the line up that can not play for the national team from the league the club is based.

Players have rights too. People asking for bosman rule to be reverted don't care about players at all, and would like them to be treated like property/slaves.
And the last time I checked there is still a European Union, so you can't discriminate players based on their nationality, and you cannot limit the number of players if they are EU nationals, just like you cannot do it with regular workers. Or maybe you would like that too...

oh, you can not put up a rule that you can not contract ue players.
but you can put a rule that you need to have at all times in the field 7 players that can play for your NT.

i personally miss when 90% of the best Belgian players would play for Anderletch/brugge 90% of the best russin players would play for Cska/spartak, 90 % of the best scottish players would play celtic/ ranges, 90% of the best portugues players would play for Benfica/spt/ porto.

because on those times you could be the almighty bayern, the chetalicious real madrid, or the titanic united but you could go out against any of them because odd where never higher than 60/40 when you played.

right now teams otside top 4 premier, top 2,5 spanish (theoretically in the last 0,5 ) top 1 deutsch/french ( still to be proven( clubs have 0 odds of winning cl and very low odds of winning euro/ conference.

i really wish we could see again some Dinamo Tblishi vs Carl Zeiss jena final heroicity again.

Utd hasn't won a CL in 14 years. The bosman rule is a particularly important correction for the English league where trash owners are allowed to take over and then have autocratic control of clubs. Look at Bayern VS Chelsea for a perfect contrast. Bayern's board was sacked for 2 mistakes made 75% through last season thanks to the 51% Bundesliga rule while Chelsea is stuck with owners who went out of their way to bring the club to midtable, raised the financial risk of the whole league, and horded a bunch of peak age talent who could have made the European leagues more entertaining because the English FA sat on their hands as usual in the due diligence for a ownership handover process they forced.

Some speculation by the Men in Blazers guys that Pep could walk away from the game.

Or he could try for a consecutive treble, which is either rare or something that nobody has accomplished.

They note that it's been a long time between his second UCL championship and this third one, so he may want to go for a couple more. Apparently Ancelotti is at 5 or more.

wco81 wrote:Some speculation by the Men in Blazers guys that Pep could walk away from the game.

Or he could try for a consecutive treble, which is either rare or something that nobody has accomplished.

They note that it's been a long time between his second UCL championship and this third one, so he may want to go for a couple more. Apparently Ancelotti is at 5 or more.

They need to fill air space.

SgtPepper wrote:Utd hasn't won a CL in 14 years. The bosman rule is a particularly important correction for the English league where trash owners are allowed to take over and then have autocratic control of clubs. Look at Bayern VS Chelsea for a perfect contrast. Bayern's board was sacked for 2 mistakes made 75% through last season thanks to the 51% Bundesliga rule while Chelsea is stuck with owners who went out of their way to bring the club to midtable, raised the financial risk of the whole league, and horded a bunch of peak age talent who could have made the European leagues more entertaining because the English FA sat on their hands as usual in the due diligence for a ownership handover process they forced.

United are in a competitive league.

Not really sure of the point you're trying to make about Bayern - who have been guaranteed a title or at the very least a CL spot forever and Chelsea.

SgtPepper wrote:and horded a bunch of peak age talent who could have made the European leagues more entertaining

Real Madrid fan with zero mirrors in sight.

Didn't your club just spend another £100m on a midfielder after spending £100m on one last summer in Tchouameni? And then buying another peak young talent in Camavinga?

And then you spent £70m on a teenager (Endrick) and your fans think it's their bound and divine right to sign Mbappe because you don't have talent already on that roster to win the league and the CL?

Sickening club that.

OHHH, THE HUMANITY. My gluttonous institution didn't triumph in the quest to rule our monopolized two team league where we reign due to financial dominance over the rest & our 15th champions league (would have been 5 in the past 10) after buying up all the best young talent in the world, time to run it back again until it works!

Good on ya, Stormi.

Mamba81p wrote:

Foye wrote:Personally, I think clubs should be forced to have at least two or three players that have at some point played in their youth academy (U19 or lower) on the pitch at all times.
For any reasonably working club this restriction should not be a big deal to comply with.

We already have that with UCL registration. 4 out of the 25 registered player have to meet the homegrown criteria

You can expand it to actually have them on the pitch, but that rule is always confusing and we saw things like this leading to errors in other leagues/sports.

Having them on the registered players only doesn't make sense.
That means - they don't even have to be on the match day roster.

They need to play.
The dream of every football kid is to have a chance to play for their favorite club.
Naturally, only very few achieve that dream - but if all spots are blocked by expensive foreign transfers - what does that say about your club? What does it say about your club if they just register some "youth players" who have no chance at playing ever? Eintracht Frankfurt is a good example. They have literally nobody from their own youth academy receiving minutes. Everyone is just bought.

Foye wrote:

Mamba81p wrote:

Foye wrote:Personally, I think clubs should be forced to have at least two or three players that have at some point played in their youth academy (U19 or lower) on the pitch at all times.
For any reasonably working club this restriction should not be a big deal to comply with.

We already have that with UCL registration. 4 out of the 25 registered player have to meet the homegrown criteria

You can expand it to actually have them on the pitch, but that rule is always confusing and we saw things like this leading to errors in other leagues/sports.

Having them on the registered players only doesn't make sense.
That means - they don't even have to be on the match day roster.

They need to play.
The dream of every football kid is to have a chance to play for their favorite club.
Naturally, only very few achieve that dream - but if all spots are blocked by expensive foreign transfers - what does that say about your club? What does it say about your club if they just register some "youth players" who have no chance at playing ever? Eintracht Frankfurt is a good example. They have literally nobody from their own youth academy receiving minutes. Everyone is just bought.

I agree in principle but my point is that number of players on the pitch are tricky to implement. I don't want a game to be decided because after 5 substitutions a manager left 1 less home grown player than he should. Mistakes happen...
You can expand the rule to the number of players on match day.

stormi wrote:

SgtPepper wrote:and horded a bunch of peak age talent who could have made the European leagues more entertaining

Bla Bla Bla bla wankery

You are too dumb to follow the faintest whiff of what I've been talking about. The field describing and predicting how organizations govern and rail guard themselves against bad mistakes is called corporate governance. Practical knowledge of that & other fields is why my understanding of club & league behaviors have been much better than yours. It also helps that I am not a plastic football muppet who is much more engaged with their club during transfer windows than during the football season.

SgtPepper wrote:

stormi wrote:

SgtPepper wrote:and horded a bunch of peak age talent who could have made the European leagues more entertaining

Bla Bla Bla bla wankery

You are too dumb to follow the faintest whiff of what I've been talking about. The field describing and predicting how organizations govern and rail guard themselves against bad mistakes is called corporate governance. Practical knowledge of that & other fields is why my understanding of club & league behaviors have been much better than yours. It also helps that I am not a plastic football muppet who is much more engaged with their club during transfer windows than during the football season.

You support Real Madrid so you must be at least be a Polyethylene.