Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Scepticalscribe

Suspended
Original poster
Jul 29, 2008
65,135
47,525
In a coffee shop.
??? Not that I read? Half time and it’s still 1-0. Not even a goal disallowed. City have missed some sitters though.
Ah, good; my bad.

That is excellent for West Ham, leading City (I suppress an unworthy snigger) at half-time.

And a wonderful sight to behold is that of Erling Haaland.......not scoring, or not putting away chances.
 

laptech

macrumors 601
Apr 26, 2013
4,096
4,422
Earth
Spurs are down (by a goal to nil) against Sheffield United, while Brighton (playing away) are leading Manchester United by three goals to one.
oh dear, currently losing to Brighton at home....if ETH stays in his job before December he be a very luck man.
 

laptech

macrumors 601
Apr 26, 2013
4,096
4,422
Earth
Wow. Spurs turned that around! Goals in the 98th and 100th minute to get the win!
Teams will soon learn not to time waste as a way to try and move the game in their favour because this new rule of adding the mins to the add of each half is hurting teams because many a game have been won and lost due to time waste mins being added on to the end of the game.
 

laptech

macrumors 601
Apr 26, 2013
4,096
4,422
Earth
Was it last season that Brighton beat United 4-0? now they've beaten them 1-3 away. A very bad loss for United considering how much money they spent in the transfer window and how many injured players they bought. ETH will be lucky to survive by xmas because all the transfers have been his decision. He's got players falling out with him (Sancho), players on hiatus due to do bad things (Antony) and player transfers that all ready carried injuries and now they are out injured.
 

Scepticalscribe

Suspended
Original poster
Jul 29, 2008
65,135
47,525
In a coffee shop.
Teams will soon learn not to time waste as a way to try and move the game in their favour because this new rule of adding the mins to the add of each half is hurting teams because many a game have been won and lost due to time waste mins being added on to the end of the game.
A lot of the time, this added time is not just on account of time-wasting, (a dark skill in itself, and one that rightly draws the wrath of referees), but also comes about as a result of delays - for example - in order to consult VAR, or on account of injuries, and having to treat, or deal with, injuries to players.
 

Scepticalscribe

Suspended
Original poster
Jul 29, 2008
65,135
47,525
In a coffee shop.
And, just spotted an observation in the Guardian to the effect that the cost of Brighton's entire team (the one that has just inflicted a three one defeat on Manchester United at Old Trafford) is around £20 million.
 

Apple fanboy

macrumors Ivy Bridge
Feb 21, 2012
56,912
55,848
Behind the Lens, UK
And, just spotted an observation in the Guardian to the effect that the cost of Brighton's entire team (the one that has just inflicted a three one defeat on Manchester United at Old Trafford) is around £20 million.
That sounds like an underestimation in my opinion. 20 million would not buy 11 players. That’s £1.8 million each. No way that can be accurate.
 

Scepticalscribe

Suspended
Original poster
Jul 29, 2008
65,135
47,525
In a coffee shop.
That sounds like an underestimation in my opinion. 20 million would not buy 11 players. That’s £1.8 million each. No way that can be accurate.
The Guardian could have been giddy with excitement; I think that you are right, but that the Guardian's main point (over-stated, and imprecisely expressed, as even the serious media tends to do nowadays when writing on the fly) that the Brighton squad cost a fraction of what United paid would still be valid (and is what they should have written).

I assume that some of the players may have been home-grown (i.e. Academy products) which, therefore, would have cost the club "nothing" - at least, as far as formally putting them on the books is concerned and for formal accounting purposes when subject to financial oversight.

However, you are probably right, and, while the Guardian's point was more than valid, they could have, and should have, expressed it better.
 

laptech

macrumors 601
Apr 26, 2013
4,096
4,422
Earth
If you do some quick searches on the net, Brighton's squad value varies depending on which tabloid you read but the consensus seems to be that the squad cost somewhere in the region of £114 million to £160 million. Compare that to United's transfer dealing this season which came to £169.2 million:

Rasmus Hojlund £65 million
Mason Mount £55 million
Andre Onana £45 million
Altay Bayindir £4.2 million

The rest of the transfer were on loan or free.

So, just 4 United players this transfer cost more than the whole of Brighton's squad and they get beat 1-3 at home. That is not good reading by anyones standards.
 

Apple fanboy

macrumors Ivy Bridge
Feb 21, 2012
56,912
55,848
Behind the Lens, UK
The Guardian could have been giddy with excitement; I think that you are right, but that the Guardian's main point (over-stated, and imprecisely expressed, as even the serious media tends to do nowadays when writing on the fly) that the Brighton squad cost a fraction of what United paid would still be valid (and is what they should have written).

I assume that some of the players may have been home-grown (i.e. Academy products) which, therefore, would have cost the club "nothing" - at least, as far as formally putting them on the books is concerned and for formal accounting purposes when subject to financial oversight.

However, you are probably right, and, while the Guardian's point was more than valid, they could have, and should have, expressed it better.
The truth is Brighton have been punching above their weight for a while, despite other clubs raiding them for talent.
United on the other hand are not performing to the level they should given what they have spent.
Still doing better than Chelsea though!
 

Silencio

macrumors 68040
Jul 18, 2002
3,528
1,659
NYC
Di Zerbi coached rings around ETH, and Brighton's players worked twice as hard as United's. Brighton had a few key absences in their squad, but kept right on rolling, so that's one fewer excuse for United's poor display. Maybe things would've been different if Højlund's equalized had stood, but that was bad luck the ball went barely out of play beforehand. Probably not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe

Scepticalscribe

Suspended
Original poster
Jul 29, 2008
65,135
47,525
In a coffee shop.
Di Zerbi coached rings around ETH, and Brighton's players worked twice as hard as United's. Brighton had a few key absences in their squad, but kept right on rolling, so that's one fewer excuse for United's poor display. Maybe things would've been different if Højlund's equalized had stood, but that was bad luck the ball went barely out of play beforehand. Probably not.
Di Zerbi has been excellent for Brighton, an intelligent, thoughtful, coach who makes the most of the players he has at his disposal, persuades them to work hard, and work well together as a unit, a team, and very good at identifying, planning for (and addressing) threats posed by opponents.
 

Scepticalscribe

Suspended
Original poster
Jul 29, 2008
65,135
47,525
In a coffee shop.
The truth is Brighton have been punching above their weight for a while, despite other clubs raiding them for talent.
United on the other hand are not performing to the level they should given what they have spent.
They have, but they have an excellent coach, a good system, and they play to their strengths.
Still doing better than Chelsea though!
Indeed.

There is something wonderfully karmic about seeing Chelsea suffer.
 

Apple fanboy

macrumors Ivy Bridge
Feb 21, 2012
56,912
55,848
Behind the Lens, UK
They have, but they have an excellent coach, a good system, and they play to their strengths.

Indeed.

There is something wonderfully karmic about seeing Chelsea suffer.
Playing to your strengths is key for any team, but more so for those on a smaller budget.

I enjoy seeing any of the greedy six struggle to be honest. Would have loved to get something from todays game. Oh well. I’ll still be watching MOTD later.
 

Scepticalscribe

Suspended
Original poster
Jul 29, 2008
65,135
47,525
In a coffee shop.
Playing to your strengths is key for any team, but more so for those on a smaller budget.
Absolutely agree.

Playing to your strengths as a team, (rather than to any individual) seems to me to be key, which also means being able to recognise your strengths.

And it also means not succumbing to what is currently fashionable in tactical terms (if your resources don't allow you to do that, just because the elite teams are able to do so.)
 

Apple fanboy

macrumors Ivy Bridge
Feb 21, 2012
56,912
55,848
Behind the Lens, UK
Absolutely agree.

Playing to your strengths as a team, (rather than to any individual) seems to me to be key, which also means being able to recognise your strengths.

And it also means not succumbing to what is currently fashionable in tactical terms (if your resources don't allow you to do that, just because the elite teams are able to do so.)
Exactly. We play on the break and concede possession. It suits our team. But can be a nervous watch sometimes!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.