What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

***Official Soccer Discussion Thread*** (6 Viewers)

Fernandes electing to go ahead and make that challenge after he's already slipped is pretty damn dumb. At that point it's guaranteed to be nothing but studs and he didn't have to do it -- he extends into the contact all the way through his fall.

But studs or no... how is that enough contact for a red card?
Heal on shin pad is never a red. Poor decision by the ref. Poor decision by Bruno too. But not red worthy.

First time watching it for me.

Looks like he slips and then tries to lunge for it as he's falling, putting his foot high up the leg. It's Bruno, so we can guess it wasn't malicious... But if it was anybody else, the kickout "looks" intentional and red worthy for both the intent and the height on the leg. Not slam dunk, but also squarely in the red wheelhouse.
Which is why the ref should have gone to the monitor (most of the time this is the case IMO anyway). No contact with studs, heal on shin so not high, slipping so no force behind it.

If they are going to go look to make sure studs hit the man so they can red card someone they can go look to see that it didn't and take the red away.
Im not reading the news about this, so this is just my own take from that video I posted... He looks like he kicked out and up after he started falling, hitting the leg. For me, not about studs up or amount of contact, but more about that kick not going for the ball and just kinda aiming up and out (again, likely because he slipped)... It looks intentional.
Ok, clear yellow then. Thanks. :fro:
 
Bayern at Aston Villa today.
These teams have met only once, in the finals of the 1981-1982 European Cup Final. (now Champions League)
The match was May of 1982 in Rotterdam and Alston Villa won the title 1-0.

It's so unusual to see Bayern playing a team in the tournament that they have never played or just once in this case.
 
Last edited:
Bayern at Alston Villa today.
These teams have met only once, in the finals of the 1981-1982 European Cup Final. (now Champions League)
The match was May of 1982 in Rotterdam and Alston Villa won the title 1-0.

It's so unusual to see Bayern playing a team in the tournament that they have never played or just once in this case.
How many times have they played Aston Villa?
 
Bayern at Alston Villa today.
These teams have met only once, in the finals of the 1981-1982 European Cup Final. (now Champions League)
The match was May of 1982 in Rotterdam and Alston Villa won the title 1-0.

It's so unusual to see Bayern playing a team in the tournament that they have never played or just once in this case.
How many times have they played Aston Villa?
read the second line of his post :)
 
Bunch of guys in this thread probably do 100 in a 55 and then say to the police "but I didn't crash into anyone so let me off without a ticket please"
 
Bayern at Alston Villa today.
These teams have met only once, in the finals of the 1981-1982 European Cup Final. (now Champions League)
The match was May of 1982 in Rotterdam and Alston Villa won the title 1-0.

It's so unusual to see Bayern playing a team in the tournament that they have never played or just once in this case.
How many times have they played Aston Villa?
read the second line of his post :)
Who is Alston Villa?

:boxing:
 
Bayern at Alston Villa today.
These teams have met only once, in the finals of the 1981-1982 European Cup Final. (now Champions League)
The match was May of 1982 in Rotterdam and Alston Villa won the title 1-0.

It's so unusual to see Bayern playing a team in the tournament that they have never played or just once in this case.
How many times have they played Aston Villa?
read the second line of his post :)
Who is Alston Villa?

:boxing:
Fixed. Funny, I guess I’ve heard an ‘L’ there in the past. :shrug:
 
Bayern at Alston Villa today.
These teams have met only once, in the finals of the 1981-1982 European Cup Final. (now Champions League)
The match was May of 1982 in Rotterdam and Alston Villa won the title 1-0.

It's so unusual to see Bayern playing a team in the tournament that they have never played or just once in this case.
How many times have they played Aston Villa?
read the second line of his post :)
Who is Alston Villa?

:boxing:
Fixed. Funny, I guess I’ve heard an ‘L’ there in the past. :shrug:
Just having a little fun...
 
@RobDawsonESPN
Just in Europe since the start of last season, Man United have conceded two goals in four minutes at Bayern, two in 10 mins vs Galatasaray (h), two in four minutes vs Copenhagen (a), two in nine minutes vs Galatasaray (a) and now two in seven minutes vs Porto (a).

In English comps since Boxing Day: 2 in 8 minutes against Palace; 2 in 8 minutes against Coventry; 2 in 2 minutes against Chelsea; 3 in 24 minutes against Wolves; 2 in 11 against Newport; 2 in 5 minutes against Villa.

12 goals scored in their last 4 European away games, going 2-0 up in three of them and they haven't won any of these games.

from the Football Ramble pod this morning
 
Interesting stat

================

https://x.com/MenInBlazers
Men in Blazers
@MenInBlazers

This is the first-ever Premier League season with SIX winless teams after five games
Soon to be 5 winless teams after six games.

But, an even crazier stat is that Brentford is the first team ever to score in the 1st minute of a game in 3 consecutive matches. And even crazier is those 3 opponents were Man City, Tottenham, and West Ham. 😳

Going out on a limb and saying that record will never be broken.
Well, the streak is over.

They only scored in the 2nd minute 🤣🤣🤣

Literally 15 seconds away from making it 4 weeks in a row. You can't make this stuff up.
 
I may have some of that wrong it turns out -- not the overall gist, but the specific finding they're building on.
Yeah, what you’re talking about was some transfer thing with something else that I started to read about until my eyes crusted over and I woke up in an alley. The Man City decision has to do with sponsorships, fair value of them, etc. I’m only half-*** following it because the ruling could actually benefit Newcastle, helping them unlock the part of the tidal wave of cash everyone assumed they’d have when the takeover happened.
 
I may have some of that wrong it turns out -- not the overall gist, but the specific finding they're building on.
Yeah, what you’re talking about was some transfer thing with something else that I started to read about until my eyes crusted over and I woke up in an alley. The Man City decision has to do with sponsorships, fair value of them, etc. I’m only half-*** following it because the ruling could actually benefit Newcastle, helping them unlock the part of the tidal wave of cash everyone assumed they’d have when the takeover happened.
Why can't I LOL at this? Whatever. I LOLed at this.
 
This is unrelated to the 115 charges.
Yeah, it's PR -- trying to generalize the finding that FIFA's rules regarding a very narrow transfer rule were illegal under Euro law to argue that the FA is horrible and no-good -- awful everywhere all the time forever.

I've been kind of following this from a distance. This ruling involved the PL rules on Associated Party Transactions - meaning, when a company related to the owner is also a marketing partner. For example, if Newcastle United were to announce a shirt sponsorship deal with a company it also owns as the sponsor, the PL would look at the deal to make sure its at market rates. This prevents a club from inflating its revenues artificially by having a related party overpay for a media deal. Rich clubs want to increase their revenue numbers so they can spend more under the FFP and PL break-even rules. This is a common concept in tax law, sometimes known as "transfer pricing" rules. For example, a company based in the US could open a subsidiary in Ireland, where taxes are low, and have a license to all its IP owned by the Irish entity. They could price the license fee way above FMV so as to artificially increase revenues in the lower tax country and shift revenue away from the higher tax country. This is illegal and is often the subject of litigation which involves a court determining what FMV is for a given transaction.

It is generally not very difficult to determine the FMV of something like a shirt sponsor deal because there are so many comps. There is typically a range of reasonable values that experts can agree on. So if Man City has a shirt sponsor deal with an Abu Dhabi Company that is a bit rich, but within the range of reasonable valuations, it should be approved. However, the PL rejected a few proposed marketing deals Man City had in place so they went to arbitration.

The things Man City won on - 1) the PL's method of establishing FMV is not well known or predictable. Clubs have the burden of establishing that their deals are FMV, which seems unfair to begin with, and the benchmarks the PL's experts use are secret, which is unfair; 2) The PL missed its own deadlines a few times during the process of rejecting some Man City proposed deals; 3) Most importantly, many clubs in the PL operate under favorable lending facilities from their owners. Roman A. loaned Chelsea something like a billion euros over 20 years, essentially at no interest and with no repayment terms (that debt was all cancelled when he had to give up the team.) In transfer pricing tax law, a favorable loan is treated no different than transferring any other asset on terms that are not arm's length. The ruling on this point is that the PL can't regulate things like APT sponsorship deals exclude APT lending deals from its purview. That's unfair. This could affect many big clubs in England, depending on how the PL addresses it. As examples, Arsenal, Everton and Brighton are all reported to have large interest free loans from their shareholders. The panel ruled that excluding these loans from its APT regulations is unlawful. It is possible the PL will address this part of the ruling by essentially eliminating owners' ability to provide below-market loans to their clubs.

The things the PL won on - APT rules are not thrown out. They are allowable, but need to be enforced more fairly.

 
This is unrelated to the 115 charges.
Yeah, it's PR -- trying to generalize the finding that FIFA's rules regarding a very narrow transfer rule were illegal under Euro law to argue that the FA is horrible and no-good -- awful everywhere all the time forever.

I've been kind of following this from a distance. This ruling involved the PL rules on Associated Party Transactions - meaning, when a company related to the owner is also a marketing partner. For example, if Newcastle United were to announce a shirt sponsorship deal with a company it also owns as the sponsor, the PL would look at the deal to make sure its at market rates. This prevents a club from inflating its revenues artificially by having a related party overpay for a media deal. Rich clubs want to increase their revenue numbers so they can spend more under the FFP and PL break-even rules. This is a common concept in tax law, sometimes known as "transfer pricing" rules. For example, a company based in the US could open a subsidiary in Ireland, where taxes are low, and have a license to all its IP owned by the Irish entity. They could price the license fee way above FMV so as to artificially increase revenues in the lower tax country and shift revenue away from the higher tax country. This is illegal and is often the subject of litigation which involves a court determining what FMV is for a given transaction.

It is generally not very difficult to determine the FMV of something like a shirt sponsor deal because there are so many comps. There is typically a range of reasonable values that experts can agree on. So if Man City has a shirt sponsor deal with an Abu Dhabi Company that is a bit rich, but within the range of reasonable valuations, it should be approved. However, the PL rejected a few proposed marketing deals Man City had in place so they went to arbitration.

The things Man City won on - 1) the PL's method of establishing FMV is not well known or predictable. Clubs have the burden of establishing that their deals are FMV, which seems unfair to begin with, and the benchmarks the PL's experts use are secret, which is unfair; 2) The PL missed its own deadlines a few times during the process of rejecting some Man City proposed deals; 3) Most importantly, many clubs in the PL operate under favorable lending facilities from their owners. Roman A. loaned Chelsea something like a billion euros over 20 years, essentially at no interest and with no repayment terms (that debt was all cancelled when he had to give up the team.) In transfer pricing tax law, a favorable loan is treated no different than transferring any other asset on terms that are not arm's length. The ruling on this point is that the PL can't regulate things like APT sponsorship deals exclude APT lending deals from its purview. That's unfair. This could affect many big clubs in England, depending on how the PL addresses it. As examples, Arsenal, Everton and Brighton are all reported to have large interest free loans from their shareholders. The panel ruled that excluding these loans from its APT regulations is unlawful. It is possible the PL will address this part of the ruling by essentially eliminating owners' ability to provide below-market loans to their clubs.

The things the PL won on - APT rules are not thrown out. They are allowable, but need to be enforced more fairly.

iirc , it is a big divide among the teams
10 teams spoke and sided with the league
3 or 4 teams spoke and sided with Man City
 
So my kid joined AYSO United this past spring. It's AYSO's club team. Looks like they offer some soccer trips for kids around the country to go to Europe. Different ages and locations.
My soon to be 16 year old daughter is interested in the Spring Break trip. Training and playing vs teams in the Netherlands and Germany. Seeing Eredivisie and Bundesliga games. Trip to Dortmund, training with Dutch coaches, seeing the sights. She's excited and I want to make it happen.

They also open it up to parents and families to go. I'm thinking about it. Debating whether to send her alone or try to go with her. She's open to both.

I did a similar trip when I was 18. England, Denmark, Norway. Was amazing. Different time in the world so we had little supervision. Plus being male helped. Did have a woman's team go too.

Might have to do some crowdfunding here with all you lovely soccer people to pay for one or both of us! hahaha.
 
I was ready to give that a thumbup emoji until that last sentence.


I know we've talked about those euro trips when we were kids. of course you have to make it happen- so amazing from a life standpoint, let alone soccer. I did 3 soccer-related:

12yo- pay to play (and pay to get the organizers a free trip) in West Berlin. Played against and trained with Hertha and saw a match. I still barely knew how to play, so my memories were more about seeing East Berlin than anything else.

16yo- Dana Cup and Norway Cup, starting with a few days at Aston Villa training with their coaches at their facilities. Incredible all the way around- I was hooking up with girls everywhere I could... which might be what your daughters trip could look like :lol: . plus there was soccer. We came in 3rd at Dana and final 8 at Norway. omg, norwegian girls.

18yo- Hannover/Germany with NCal u19 state team. this is the trip where I got to play against the Cameroon national team who was at the same facility training for an upcoming ACC. played against whatever state select team Hannover was in and bundie2 team. this was the pinnacle of my soccer playing life.

Both trips started with hosts telling me that the first team we'd play the next day after arriving was "really good" and no shame in losing. we beat each of those two team by double digits, leaving the hosts to scramble to have us play much better competition (they were used to US teams being awful back then). So we played the AV youth squad... I think we tied. And that led us to play the Bundie2 squad as well. In germany, we were stationed in Hannover and would travel around the region for our games, which would be publicized with small posters. The first game poster listed us correctly as California U19 select, but it escalated from there. By the last game, we were the full USA u23 team. So I guess I got capped.
 
I was ready to give that a thumbup emoji until that last sentence.
:lmao:

And of course I am going to make it happen for her. Too good an opportunity even beyond soccer to not go.
16yo- Dana Cup and Norway Cup, starting with a few days at Aston Villa training with their coaches at their facilities. Incredible all the way around- I was hooking up with girls everywhere I could... which might be what your daughters trip could look like :lol: . plus there was soccer. We came in 3rd at Dana and final 8 at Norway. omg, norwegian girls.
I played in both these cups as an 18 year old. Trained outside London, stayed at Royal Hathaway College (I think), beat a men's pub team and they hated us for it. But we invited them up to the pub for post game drinks and made peace.
Was 1992 right after Denmark won the Euros (without qualifying). Beat a German team in Denmark and watched them chase the English ref off the pitch.
Saw Leeds v Arsenal and United Vs Lillistrom in Norway along with playing in the tourney.
So I guess I got capped.
Congrats! HA
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top