• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

*Official* English Football Season 2006-07

steds

Hall of Fame Member
Tom Halsey said:
United have a number of English players, though - Chelsea have a few too. Arsenal do not.
Just because you have more than Arsenal doesn't mean you have a good number. Out of the 16 that played/sat on the bench on Sunday, 5 were English. A match day squad of which less than a third is English is a pretty piss poor effort imo.
 

Magrat Garlick

Rather Mad Witch
steds said:
Just because you have more than Arsenal doesn't mean you have a good number. Out of the 16 that played/sat on the bench on Sunday, 5 were English. A match day squad of which less than a third is English is a pretty piss poor effort imo.
But just over a third is ok? (see Wigan Athletic...)
 

Magrat Garlick

Rather Mad Witch
steds said:
Did I say that?
No, but since you're calling him a hypocrite for supporting a team with few English players while thinking few England players at clubs is not a good thing for English football, while you are supporting (although somewhat less fervently) a team with few English players while criticising other clubs fielding few England players for doing a poor effort...
 

steds

Hall of Fame Member
Samuel_Vimes said:
No, but since you're calling him a hypocrite for supporting a team with few English players while thinking few England players at clubs is not a good thing for English football
No, I'm calling him a hypocrite for criticizing/hating a team because it has few English players when the team he supports has few English players itself.
 

Tom Halsey

International Coach
steds said:
No, I'm calling him a hypocrite for criticizing/hating a team because it has few English players when the team he supports has few English players itself.
There is a difference between "no" and "few". One thrid is a poor effort, but none is far, far worse.
 

Tom Halsey

International Coach
roseboy64 said:
Players have been injured though. Most of the first team has had to miss at least one game with injury and on more than a few occassions the team selected has been the first XI. The only real serious concern would be a long term injury to Scholes,Rooney or Ronaldo because I feel there's adequate cover for every other player.
None of our big players have been injured for a period of time.

Long may that continue, but I don't see it happening.
 

roseboy64

Cricket Web Content Updater
steds said:
No, I'm calling him a hypocrite for criticizing/hating a team because it has few English players when the team he supports has few English players itself.
There is no way you can compare Man Utd and Arsenal in that respect. Of the first team Man Utd has 7 English players and 3 others who are Birtish. Arsenal have two English, both of whom rarely start, with one of them not being very good at all.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
roseboy64 said:
There is no way you can compare Man Utd and Arsenal in that respect. Of the first team Man Utd has 7 English players and 3 others who are Birtish.
In spite of the likes of Vidic, Saha, van der Saar, Ronaldo all being in the 11?

So they play 14 men then?
 

roseboy64

Cricket Web Content Updater
marc71178 said:
In spite of the likes of Vidic, Saha, van der Saar, Ronaldo all being in the 11?

So they play 14 men then?
Supposed to have read first team squad. If you use first team alone Arsenal's case is even worse.
 

Barney Rubble

International Coach
roseboy64 said:
Big difference. Still part of the British Isles isn't it?or at least the United Kingdom?
Hell, no. On both counts. :p

EDIT: Well, actually, no, it is technically part of the British Isles, but not of Great Britain.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Well your eyes aren't seeing the right things then, and if you said that to John O'Shea, he'd probably hit you mate! The Irish aren't too keen on being labelled Brits (though Ed Joyce had no problem defecting :p)

I don't think we're even supposed to label them part of the British Isles anymore. I remember reading something about it a while back.
 
Last edited:

Loony BoB

International Captain
O'Shea is definitely not British on any level.

Having said that, Marc, your argument is just silly. To compare Arsenal who often field a full foreign XI with Man United who never do, well, there you go. Manchester United is a very English/British side, with more first XI Brits than any of the other big English sides, and probably a bunch of the lower Premiership sides, too.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Why the fuss about Brits? With English players you definitely have an argument, but Giggs & Fletcher are no more entitled to play for England than Ljungberg or Flamini are.

Scotland, Wales &, heck, even Northern Ireland have their own national teams.
 

Top