Decent day for Eng in the test - all to play for tomorrow. 63-37 to Oz from 80-20 at the start of play - IMHO....
No doubt this will curse him, but I like the look of Stokes. Whatever happens tomorrow, I reckon he's worth persevering with.
The silver lining in this series for England is that Australia are doing it largely on the back of a bowling attack that is coming to the end of its effectiveness. Of the fasties, Siddle is the only one under 30 - and he's 29. A few of the batsmen are in their 30s too, as is Brad Haddin. So this is not an Australian team that is built to last. They are going to have to make big changes over the coming years.
Erm except we don't play them again for ages and we've got KP, Jimmy, Trott (if ever), Belly, Prior, Swanny, Carbs also getting on a bit.
From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.
Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.
LOL, he should be picked because he might win something in the future. He has won one race where it is a team effort , and you try to compare that with someone winning Wimbledon. I can only assume you are being a wit.
I take it you didn't watch the Tour this year. Unless by Team Sky you mean Movistar ?
I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome.
Ok, so you don't understand cycling, you've just read a couple of paragraphs of the crap reporting available in our broadsheets.
Teams are considered successful if their best rider does well - TeamSky's support of Froome was frequently woeful - he would have won riding for any other squad.
The idea an individual is chosen and then waits to see if the team is good, is laughable.
Decent day for Eng in the test - all to play for tomorrow. 63-37 to Oz from 80-20 at the start of play - IMHO....
No doubt this will curse him, but I like the look of Stokes. Whatever happens tomorrow, I reckon he's worth persevering with.
The silver lining in this series for England is that Australia are doing it largely on the back of a bowling attack that is coming to the end of its effectiveness. Of the fasties, Siddle is the only one under 30 - and he's 29. A few of the batsmen are in their 30s too, as is Brad Haddin. So this is not an Australian team that is built to last. They are going to have to make big changes over the coming years.
Erm except we don't play them again for ages and we've got KP, Jimmy, Trott (if ever), Belly, Prior, Swanny, Carbs also getting on a bit.
Couple of years, isn't it? It goes without saying that we have to rebuild. But they have to as well. So we have a reasonable chance of regaining the Ashes next time. We are not up against a juggernaut, but an old team having a great series.
I imagine that Bell will still be around for a while. Cook and Root as well. I would not be surprised to see Pietersen retire from international cricket at the end of this series and it's unlikely that Trott will come back. Prior may also be nearing the end. With Stokes at six that leaves two batters and one keeper/batsman to find. The bowling is going to be a challenge too. Swann and Anderson look to be in trouble, and the third seamer place is a perennial problem. There's talk that Mills at Essex could be very fast, but still very wild. Finn could be good but lacks control too. And we'll need to find a spinner. Interesting times.
Southam Sorry to disappoint you but Spurs are on the up now
Let's see where they are on 2nd January: eight games in three weeks, starting with Team Suarez tomorrow. It could be the making of the team; it could be horrible. I (and you) know where my money is.
Surely anyone born after 1980 must listen to the Spurs fans "they let us down time after time" type moans and wonder why they have high expectations anyway? For thirty odd years they have been a pretty solid top 10 side who never look like winning the league or getting relegated (apart from 86/87 and 93/94?)
Yet I know Spurs fans who were born around that time and have that sense of not living up to whattheyaresupposed to be achieving.
Everton fans have tasted glory in that time, but I dont getthe impression theythink theyare being let down, when theyfinish 7th or8th....maybe I just don't know any
Spurs are one of the 20 richest clubs in world football. Everton aren't.
So are Newcastle, and they've won even less
Since 1980 Spurs have won the FA Cup three times, the UEFA Cup once and the League Cup twice. Not brilliant, but outside of Arsenal, Utd, Chelsea and Liverpool I am not sure there are any other teams in England that come close to that.
Our support base was (no longer is, sadly) as big as Arsenal's and way bigger than Chelsea's. But in the 1980s we got Alan Sugar; Arsenal got David Dein. Then a few years later Chelsea got Roman Abramovitch after Ken Bates bankrupted them. That, I would argue, is the difference. And Spurs fans pay as much as Arsenal and Chelsea fans to go to games.
I should have said since 1984! That would have changed your trophy list quite a bit.... (all bar one FA and one League Cup were pre 84)
Tht 5th place in the All Time Prem is a bit misleading as its down to lack of relegations... Everton & Villa are close in 6th and 7th place... Man City are 10th and I think they can claim to have had a more successful Premier League than Spurs so far, as can Blackburn Rovers and Leeds United.
I think I was being fair in saying a consistent top 10 side.
To be fair in the 80s you also got Lineker, Gazza & Waddle... I think the problem has been trying to buy success and then losing patience with the managers too quickly (probably because of the aforementioned unrealistic expectations)
I think a fair comparison is with the England Football Side... always in the competition, never ever look like winning, then get slagged off for not being as good as they were overrated
Decent day for Eng in the test - all to play for tomorrow. 63-37 to Oz from 80-20 at the start of play - IMHO....
No doubt this will curse him, but I like the look of Stokes. Whatever happens tomorrow, I reckon he's worth persevering with.
The silver lining in this series for England is that Australia are doing it largely on the back of a bowling attack that is coming to the end of its effectiveness. Of the fasties, Siddle is the only one under 30 - and he's 29. A few of the batsmen are in their 30s too, as is Brad Haddin. So this is not an Australian team that is built to last. They are going to have to make big changes over the coming years.
Erm except we don't play them again for ages and we've got KP, Jimmy, Trott (if ever), Belly, Prior, Swanny, Carbs also getting on a bit.
There will be big changes for England after this Ashes series. I don't see Cook lasting that long as captain and good old Jimmy Anderson is coming to the end of effectiveness. There will no doubt be a changes for Oz too but England's performance has been dire; no patience and impulsive batting.
Decent day for Eng in the test - all to play for tomorrow. 63-37 to Oz from 80-20 at the start of play - IMHO....
No doubt this will curse him, but I like the look of Stokes. Whatever happens tomorrow, I reckon he's worth persevering with.
The silver lining in this series for England is that Australia are doing it largely on the back of a bowling attack that is coming to the end of its effectiveness. Of the fasties, Siddle is the only one under 30 - and he's 29. A few of the batsmen are in their 30s too, as is Brad Haddin. So this is not an Australian team that is built to last. They are going to have to make big changes over the coming years.
Erm except we don't play them again for ages and we've got KP, Jimmy, Trott (if ever), Belly, Prior, Swanny, Carbs also getting on a bit.
There will be big changes for England after this Ashes series. I don't see Cook lasting that long as captain and good old Jimmy Anderson is coming to the end of effectiveness. There will no doubt be a changes for Oz too but England's performance has been dire; no patience and impulsive batting.
Why should we drop Cook as captain ? The same reasoning would have seen Bell dropped before the last Ashes series in England. Cook is clearly out of nick, but who would you replace him with ? KP ? Cracking player also but not a captain. Root is far far too young, and Bell hmm ye not a captain. The only very very faint possibility for captain other than Cook that I could possibly see of the current lot is Stuart Broad, but that won't happen.
Jimmy Anderson is great with a bit of cloud, obviously 40 C and bright sunlight in Perth won't suit.
Southam Sorry to disappoint you but Spurs are on the up now
Let's see where they are on 2nd January: eight games in three weeks, starting with Team Suarez tomorrow. It could be the making of the team; it could be horrible. I (and you) know where my money is.
Surely anyone born after 1980 must listen to the Spurs fans "they let us down time after time" type moans and wonder why they have high expectations anyway? For thirty odd years they have been a pretty solid top 10 side who never look like winning the league or getting relegated (apart from 86/87 and 93/94?)
Yet I know Spurs fans who were born around that time and have that sense of not living up to whattheyaresupposed to be achieving.
Everton fans have tasted glory in that time, but I dont getthe impression theythink theyare being let down, when theyfinish 7th or8th....maybe I just don't know any
Spurs are one of the 20 richest clubs in world football. Everton aren't.
So are Newcastle, and they've won even less
Since 1980 Spurs have won the FA Cup three times, the UEFA Cup once and the League Cup twice. Not brilliant, but outside of Arsenal, Utd, Chelsea and Liverpool I am not sure there are any other teams in England that come close to that.
Our support base was (no longer is, sadly) as big as Arsenal's and way bigger than Chelsea's. But in the 1980s we got Alan Sugar; Arsenal got David Dein. Then a few years later Chelsea got Roman Abramovitch after Ken Bates bankrupted them. That, I would argue, is the difference. And Spurs fans pay as much as Arsenal and Chelsea fans to go to games.
I should have said since 1984! That would have changed your trophy list quite a bit.... (all bar one FA and one League Cup were pre 84)
Tht 5th place in the All Time Prem is a bit misleading as its down to lack of relegations... Everton & Villa are close in 6th and 7th place... Man City are 10th and I think they can claim to have had a more successful Premier League than Spurs so far, as can Blackburn Rovers and Leeds United.
I think I was being fair in saying a consistent top 10 side.
To be fair in the 80s you also got Lineker, Gazza & Waddle... I think the problem has been trying to buy success and then losing patience with the managers too quickly (probably because of the aforementioned unrealistic expectations)
I think a fair comparison is with the England Football Side... always in the competition, never ever look like winning, then get slagged off for not being as good as they were overrated
Since 2006, Spurs' PL finishes have been 5th, 5th, 11th, 8th, 4th, 5th, 4th, 5th.
Three times we missed out on the CL on the final day of the season.
We are also the last North London club to win a trophy of any kind.
Arsenal's great good fortune was to get a top manager at a time when European club competition was completely reworked - David Dein did a magnificent job in finding him. But without the top three or four getting into the CL and having access to money that other clubs cannot match would he have lasted so long? I doubt it.
In terms of buying success, compare and contrast the Spurs and Arsenal wage bills. You had the stats up on here a few weeks back.
From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.
Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.
LOL, he should be picked because he might win something in the future. He has won one race where it is a team effort , and you try to compare that with someone winning Wimbledon. I can only assume you are being a wit.
I take it you didn't watch the Tour this year. Unless by Team Sky you mean Movistar ?
I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome.
Ok, so you don't understand cycling, you've just read a couple of paragraphs of the crap reporting available in our broadsheets.
Teams are considered successful if their best rider does well - TeamSky's support of Froome was frequently woeful - he would have won riding for any other squad.
The idea an individual is chosen and then waits to see if the team is good, is laughable.
Obviously not as much as a self lauded expert as yourself. However you need to learn to read before opening your big trap. Where did anybody say he would not have won with any other team. Try reading what I said this time rather than trying to be a smart arse.
My quote: I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome
Decent day for Eng in the test - all to play for tomorrow. 63-37 to Oz from 80-20 at the start of play - IMHO....
No doubt this will curse him, but I like the look of Stokes. Whatever happens tomorrow, I reckon he's worth persevering with.
The silver lining in this series for England is that Australia are doing it largely on the back of a bowling attack that is coming to the end of its effectiveness. Of the fasties, Siddle is the only one under 30 - and he's 29. A few of the batsmen are in their 30s too, as is Brad Haddin. So this is not an Australian team that is built to last. They are going to have to make big changes over the coming years.
Erm except we don't play them again for ages and we've got KP, Jimmy, Trott (if ever), Belly, Prior, Swanny, Carbs also getting on a bit.
Couple of years, isn't it? It goes without saying that we have to rebuild. But they have to as well. So we have a reasonable chance of regaining the Ashes next time. We are not up against a juggernaut, but an old team having a great series.
I imagine that Bell will still be around for a while. Cook and Root as well. I would not be surprised to see Pietersen retire from international cricket at the end of this series and it's unlikely that Trott will come back. Prior may also be nearing the end. With Stokes at six that leaves two batters and one keeper/batsman to find. The bowling is going to be a challenge too. Swann and Anderson look to be in trouble, and the third seamer place is a perennial problem. There's talk that Mills at Essex could be very fast, but still very wild. Finn could be good but lacks control too. And we'll need to find a spinner. Interesting times.
Mr. Rokz, got to consider the economic climate. Less money to spend means funding cuts from the government and less disposable income for individuals.
Golf is monstrously expensive. Swimmers under-achieved significantly at the Olympics. Tennis is a bit odder, as, although we're not exactly the top nation, we've got one of the stars of the men's game and Laura Robson has been putting in decent performances.
Mr Dancer, agreed.
Golf traditionally had high fees, true, and like a lot of different sports clubs, offset them with discounted bar prices as well as not so long ago, more generous, mostly legal, opening hours than the pubs and hotels. Golf courses, by their nature tend to be away from public transport routes and lugging around a bag of clubs on a course is accepted, around the streets, on buses and, in the not too distant future, trams, not so much so. Cars are therefore important and drink/driving will get you banned as well as being socially unacceptable.
But against that, we had the Open in 2013 at Muirfield and the Ryder Cup due in 2014 at Gleneagles. And of course, our very own FM is keen on the sport as well, although some of his now ex-buddies could be considered to be slightly dubious but we'll let the hair blow over that.
I have seen, and know many parents, seemingly religiously, driving their kids to extracurricular activities, sometimes 3 or 4 different types each week, and I really wonder if this is going to make a difference for the kids enjoyment of sport or it's the parents trying to assuage some guilt complex.
Southam Sorry to disappoint you but Spurs are on the up now
Let's see where they are on 2nd January: eight games in three weeks, starting with Team Suarez tomorrow. It could be the making of the team; it could be horrible. I (and you) know where my money is.
Spurs are one of the 20 richest clubs in world football. Everton aren't.
So are Newcastle, and they've won even less
I should have said since 1984! That would have changed your trophy list quite a bit.... (all bar one FA and one League Cup were pre 84)
Tht 5th place in the All Time Prem is a bit misleading as its down to lack of relegations... Everton & Villa are close in 6th and 7th place... Man City are 10th and I think they can claim to have had a more successful Premier League than Spurs so far, as can Blackburn Rovers and Leeds United.
I think I was being fair in saying a consistent top 10 side.
To be fair in the 80s you also got Lineker, Gazza & Waddle... I think the problem has been trying to buy success and then losing patience with the managers too quickly (probably because of the aforementioned unrealistic expectations)
I think a fair comparison is with the England Football Side... always in the competition, never ever look like winning, then get slagged off for not being as good as they were overrated
Since 2006, Spurs' PL finishes have been 5th, 5th, 11th, 8th, 4th, 5th, 4th, 5th.
Three times we missed out on the CL on the final day of the season.
We are also the last North London club to win a trophy of any kind.
Arsenal's great good fortune was to get a top manager at a time when European club competition was completely reworked - David Dein did a magnificent job in finding him. But without the top three or four getting into the CL and having access to money that other clubs cannot match would he have lasted so long? I doubt it.
In terms of buying success, compare and contrast the Spurs and Arsenal wage bills. You had the stats up on here a few weeks back.
The wage bill difference must surely be down to bonuses paid to players for making the Champs Leage , Qualifying for the last 16 etc etc..
If Spurs had done this for the last 16 seasons then their wages paid would be a lot bigger, possibly as big as Arsenals, even if they had the same players, on which they spent considerably more money, on the same contracts as they have had
Decent day for Eng in the test - all to play for tomorrow. 63-37 to Oz from 80-20 at the start of play - IMHO....
No doubt this will curse him, but I like the look of Stokes. Whatever happens tomorrow, I reckon he's worth persevering with.
The silver lining in this series for England is that Australia are doing it largely on the back of a bowling attack that is coming to the end of its effectiveness. Of the fasties, Siddle is the only one under 30 - and he's 29. A few of the batsmen are in their 30s too, as is Brad Haddin. So this is not an Australian team that is built to last. They are going to have to make big changes over the coming years.
Erm except we don't play them again for ages and we've got KP, Jimmy, Trott (if ever), Belly, Prior, Swanny, Carbs also getting on a bit.
Couple of years, isn't it? It goes without saying that we have to rebuild. But they have to as well. So we have a reasonable chance of regaining the Ashes next time. We are not up against a juggernaut, but an old team having a great series.
I imagine that Bell will still be around for a while. Cook and Root as well. I would not be surprised to see Pietersen retire from international cricket at the end of this series and it's unlikely that Trott will come back. Prior may also be nearing the end. With Stokes at six that leaves two batters and one keeper/batsman to find. The bowling is going to be a challenge too. Swann and Anderson look to be in trouble, and the third seamer place is a perennial problem. There's talk that Mills at Essex could be very fast, but still very wild. Finn could be good but lacks control too. And we'll need to find a spinner. Interesting times.
From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.
Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.
LOL, he should be picked because he might win something in the future. He has won one race where it is a team effort , and you try to compare that with someone winning Wimbledon. I can only assume you are being a wit.
I take it you didn't watch the Tour this year. Unless by Team Sky you mean Movistar ?
I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome.
Ok, so you don't understand cycling, you've just read a couple of paragraphs of the crap reporting available in our broadsheets.
Teams are considered successful if their best rider does well - TeamSky's support of Froome was frequently woeful - he would have won riding for any other squad.
The idea an individual is chosen and then waits to see if the team is good, is laughable.
Obviously not as much as a self lauded expert as yourself. However you need to learn to read before opening your big trap. Where did anybody say he would not have won with any other team. Try reading what I said this time rather than trying to be a smart arse.
My quote: I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome
They are picked because they have the biggest chance to win the race out of the entire team. Anyway Chris Froome could have won the Tour without a team last year, he was that good.
Southam Sorry to disappoint you but Spurs are on the up now
Let's see where they are on 2nd January: eight games in three weeks, starting with Team Suarez tomorrow. It could be the making of the team; it could be horrible. I (and you) know where my money is.
Spurs are one of the 20 richest clubs in world football. Everton aren't.
So are Newcastle, and they've won even less
I should have said since 1984! That would have changed your trophy list quite a bit.... (all bar one FA and one League Cup were pre 84)
Tht 5th place in the All Time Prem is a bit misleading as its down to lack of relegations... Everton & Villa are close in 6th and 7th place... Man City are 10th and I think they can claim to have had a more successful Premier League than Spurs so far, as can Blackburn Rovers and Leeds United.
I think I was being fair in saying a consistent top 10 side.
To be fair in the 80s you also got Lineker, Gazza & Waddle... I think the problem has been trying to buy success and then losing patience with the managers too quickly (probably because of the aforementioned unrealistic expectations)
I think a fair comparison is with the England Football Side... always in the competition, never ever look like winning, then get slagged off for not being as good as they were overrated
Since 2006, Spurs' PL finishes have been 5th, 5th, 11th, 8th, 4th, 5th, 4th, 5th.
Three times we missed out on the CL on the final day of the season.
We are also the last North London club to win a trophy of any kind.
Arsenal's great good fortune was to get a top manager at a time when European club competition was completely reworked - David Dein did a magnificent job in finding him. But without the top three or four getting into the CL and having access to money that other clubs cannot match would he have lasted so long? I doubt it.
In terms of buying success, compare and contrast the Spurs and Arsenal wage bills. You had the stats up on here a few weeks back.
The wage bill difference must surely be down to bonuses paid to players for making the Champs Leage , Qualifying for the last 16 etc etc..
If Spurs had done this for the last 16 seasons then their wages paid would be a lot bigger, possibly as big as Arsenals, even if they had the same players, on which they spent considerably more money, on the same contracts as they have had
So the wages argument is null and void
What trophy was that?
League Cup - 2008. We lost the final on penalties in 2009 to Man Utd.
Not sure the wages argument is null and void. I wonder how many players at Spurs get close to what the top earners at Arsenal get. I doubt Ozil's basic is comparable to anything anyone at WHL earns. Ditto with RVP before him. Ashely Cole felt insulted to be offered a basic of £60,000 a week. That's way more than any Spurs player was getting back then. But you make my point for me. Arsenal got lucky with the change in competition rules and have been able to pay wages to keep their best players, which in turn means they keep getting into the CL. If it had happened sooner, it might have been Spurs.
Jim Murphy: 'I'm happy to take on all-comers on policy but no longer going to accept bucketload of personal bile poured at me through my twitter feed.'
From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.
Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.
LOL, he should be picked because he might win something in the future. He has won one race where it is a team effort , and you try to compare that with someone winning Wimbledon. I can only assume you are being a wit.
I take it you didn't watch the Tour this year. Unless by Team Sky you mean Movistar ?
I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome.
Ok, so you don't understand cycling, you've just read a couple of paragraphs of the crap reporting available in our broadsheets.
Teams are considered successful if their best rider does well - TeamSky's support of Froome was frequently woeful - he would have won riding for any other squad.
The idea an individual is chosen and then waits to see if the team is good, is laughable.
Obviously not as much as a self lauded expert as yourself. However you need to learn to read before opening your big trap. Where did anybody say he would not have won with any other team. Try reading what I said this time rather than trying to be a smart arse.
My quote: I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome
They are picked because they have the biggest chance to win the race out of the entire team. Anyway Chris Froome could have won the Tour without a team last year, he was that good.
At last you have read and understood what I said, ie the team pick who they think is the best and then the rest of the team support them to try and win. Hey presto not actually a solo effort. You will have world expert Maaaaarsh on shortly decrying you as a fool.
Southam Sorry to disappoint you but Spurs are on the up now
Let's see where they are on 2nd January: eight games in three weeks, starting with Team Suarez tomorrow. It could be the making of the team; it could be horrible. I (and you) know where my money is.
Spurs are one of the 20 richest clubs in world football. Everton aren't.
So are Newcastle, and they've won even less
The wage bill difference must surely be down to bonuses paid to players for making the Champs Leage , Qualifying for the last 16 etc etc..
If Spurs had done this for the last 16 seasons then their wages paid would be a lot bigger, possibly as big as Arsenals, even if they had the same players, on which they spent considerably more money, on the same contracts as they have had
So the wages argument is null and void
What trophy was that?
League Cup - 2008. We lost the final on penalties in 2009 to Man Utd.
Not sure the wages argument is null and void. I wonder how many players at Spurs get close to what the top earners at Arsenal get. I doubt Ozil's basic is comparable to anything anyone at WHL earns. Ditto with RVP before him. Ashely Cole felt insulted to be offered a basic of £60,000 a week. That's way more than any Spurs player was getting back then. But you make my point for me. Arsenal got lucky with the change in competition rules and have been able to pay wages to keep their best players, which in turn means they keep getting into the CL. If it had happened sooner, it might have been Spurs.
We aren't going to agree and anyway who wants to? Football fans are always going to fight their corner.
I don't really buy the "Arsenal got lucky.. " argument though, as we weren't in the Champions League when Wenger arrived, and it was his modest spending on shrewd signings (Vieira, Petit, Anelka etc) that enabled us to qualify in the first place. Spurs were never consistently finishing top 4 in years leading up to the Champs League rule changes were they? So how could it have been them?
Arsenal notoriously over pay squad players (Squillaci, Bendtner, Denilson, Diaby etc hence we couldn't get rid of the first three) Wenger has said he like a "socialist" style of pay where no one earns significantly more than anyone else.. I don't think RvP was on megabucks, Ozil maybe
I would ask if you think Bale was offered Ozil/RvP type wages to stay? Surely he was?
From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.
Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.
LOL, he should be picked because he might win something in the future. He has won one race where it is a team effort , and you try to compare that with someone winning Wimbledon. I can only assume you are being a wit.
I take it you didn't watch the Tour this year. Unless by Team Sky you mean Movistar ?
I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome.
Ok, so you don't understand cycling, you've just read a couple of paragraphs of the crap reporting available in our broadsheets.
Teams are considered successful if their best rider does well - TeamSky's support of Froome was frequently woeful - he would have won riding for any other squad.
The idea an individual is chosen and then waits to see if the team is good, is laughable.
Obviously not as much as a self lauded expert as yourself. However you need to learn to read before opening your big trap. Where did anybody say he would not have won with any other team. Try reading what I said this time rather than trying to be a smart arse.
My quote: I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome
They are picked because they have the biggest chance to win the race out of the entire team. Anyway Chris Froome could have won the Tour without a team last year, he was that good.
At last you have read and understood what I said, ie the team pick who they think is the best and then the rest of the team support them to try and win. Hey presto not actually a solo effort. You will have world expert Maaaaarsh on shortly decrying you as a fool.
The ironic thing is if it truly was a race with no teams Chris Froome would be sitting on two TdFs by now I think.
Jim Murphy: 'I'm happy to take on all-comers on policy but no longer going to accept bucketload of personal bile poured at me through my twitter feed.'
Typical Labour cannot take criticism , cries like a big baby because people disagree with him, if he is not up to the rough and tumble of political life he needs to find a real job.
From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.
Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.
LOL, he should be picked because he might win something in the future. He has won one race where it is a team effort , and you try to compare that with someone winning Wimbledon. I can only assume you are being a wit.
I take it you didn't watch the Tour this year. Unless by Team Sky you mean Movistar ?
I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome.
Ok, so you don't understand cycling, you've just read a couple of paragraphs of the crap reporting available in our broadsheets.
Teams are considered successful if their best rider does well - TeamSky's support of Froome was frequently woeful - he would have won riding for any other squad.
The idea an individual is chosen and then waits to see if the team is good, is laughable.
Obviously not as much as a self lauded expert as yourself. However you need to learn to read before opening your big trap. Where did anybody say he would not have won with any other team. Try reading what I said this time rather than trying to be a smart arse.
My quote: I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome
They are picked because they have the biggest chance to win the race out of the entire team. Anyway Chris Froome could have won the Tour without a team last year, he was that good.
At last you have read and understood what I said, ie the team pick who they think is the best and then the rest of the team support them to try and win. Hey presto not actually a solo effort. You will have world expert Maaaaarsh on shortly decrying you as a fool.
The ironic thing is if it truly was a race with no teams Chris Froome would be sitting on two TdFs by now I think.
Jim Murphy: 'I'm happy to take on all-comers on policy but no longer going to accept bucketload of personal bile poured at me through my twitter feed.'
Typical Labour cannot take criticism , cries like a big baby because people disagree with him, if he is not up to the rough and tumble of political life he needs to find a real job.
Jim Murphy: 'I'm happy to take on all-comers on policy but no longer going to accept bucketload of personal bile poured at me through my twitter feed.'
Typical Labour cannot take criticism , cries like a big baby because people disagree with him, if he is not up to the rough and tumble of political life he needs to find a real job.
Decent day for Eng in the test - all to play for tomorrow. 63-37 to Oz from 80-20 at the start of play - IMHO....
Agree. Not sure why doom and gloom. Need to make 200 tomorrow. Not easy but all to play for.
Frankly, to me it is 75- 25 Oz. Englang will bat last. I am not sure England can even score 300 unless Bell hits a ton. He better this time after all that hype. Australia needs to score 250 - 300 in the second knock to win.
Many said before the series that it would be a clean sweep. They were correct !
v surprised at Arsenal line up.. only 2 changes from Wed... Sagna for Jenkinson & Ramsey for Rosicky.. thought Wilshere and Walcott would start after taking no part vs Napoli
Jim Murphy: 'I'm happy to take on all-comers on policy but no longer going to accept bucketload of personal bile poured at me through my twitter feed.'
Typical Labour cannot take criticism , cries like a big baby because people disagree with him, if he is not up to the rough and tumble of political life he needs to find a real job.
What's it even supposed to mean? It seems to be saying he's going to shame these people for saying mean things to him on Twitter before he blocks them, but then the screenshot is all teensy and blurry so you can hardly read it. Meh.
Mr. Observer, wash your mouth out with soap, young man! I thought the article was very interesting. I've put a few pounds on Farah, but (whilst financially delighted if he wins) I think Murray deserves it by a country mile.
FPT: Miss Cyclefree, you're very welcome. We seem to be drifting towards an increasing narrowing of freedom, whereby more actions are obligatory or forbidden, and we're (or the metropolitan political clowns who govern us) losing the common sense ability to disapprove of something without wanting to pass a law making it illegal.
Rowan Atkinson's right. We must be allowed to insult other people.
I backed Murray before Wimbledon to win SPOTY so I already have sizeable net winnings on this year's event having been paid out by Ladbrokes and having cashed in on Betfair.
Since then I backed Ainslie on the back of the America's Cup win but that achievement hasn't really made a splash and I think the bet is sunk.
I've had a small bet on Froome too but the wheels seem to have come off his chances of winning as he doesn't seem that popular and lots of people seem to be fed up of cyclists winning.
I probably should have jumped onto McCoy for SPOTYdom when he won his 4000th race and was value for this.
So I've had one final Try to make some more money from SPOTY. For two farthings I think Leigh Halfpenny could convert his Welsh SPOTY win into a podium place in tomorrow night's SPOTY. He does very well in the Telegraph poll and with Murray not turning up he may benefit from an anti-Scots vote as well as having the built in support of all of Wales and all British Lions Rugby fans.
The Opinium poll has dented my enthusiasm for his chances but I've had £5 on him to win at 999/1 on Betfair and I've backed him to win without Murray at 19/1 and to be in the top 3 at 4/1.
v surprised at Arsenal line up.. only 2 changes from Wed... Sagna for Jenkinson & Ramsey for Rosicky.. thought Wilshere and Walcott would start after taking no part vs Napoli
Who am I to question A-dubz?
I was put away by livescore... had the wrong team
Wilshere, Walcott & Ramsey come in.. no Arteta interesting...
Cant fault AWs team, but my prediction is a 2-1 or 3-1 defeat... the Arse havent won a big domestic match away from home in a very long while
Murray won Olympic Gold in London, and then went onto win Wimbledon. It will be a farce if he doesn't win SPOTY after that combined achievement.
Why? he won a gold and silver medal last year, not this year which is what the award is for. This year he is being touted to win because he happened to win one tournament in a sport that the British aren't generally very good at.
Surely Mo is the man, he is world champion at two major athletics disciplines having won Olympic gold medals last year.
But due to the bizarre attitude towards tennis and a tournament that happens to take place in London, I expect Murray will win.
Mr Herdson posted - A third choice then is one I make with both my heart and head. If the measure of a team is its ability to rise above the sum of its individual components, the Bradford City is that team, becoming in 2013 the first fourth-tier side to reach a major Wembley final, and the first to defeat three (near full-strength) top-flight teams in one cup run: one over two legs, another who reached the Champions League knock-out stages, and a third who went on to win the FA Cup
You forget mr herdson,the Bradford city side from the 4th tier to reach 2 Wembley finals(one major)in the same season and also to get promoted ;-)
Murray won Olympic Gold in London, and then went onto win Wimbledon. It will be a farce if he doesn't win SPOTY after that combined achievement.
Why? he won a gold and silver medal last year, not this year which is what the award is for. This year he is being touted to win because he happened to win one tournament in a sport that the British aren't generally very good at.
Surely Mo is the man, he is world champion at two major athletics disciplines having won Olympic gold medals last year.
But due to the bizarre attitude towards tennis and a tournament that happens to take place in London, I expect Murray will win.
SPOTY voters are mainly middle class. Mo definitely should be the winner as he should have been last year too ! Winning the 5000 / 10000 double happens at best once in a generation. He has done it twice now.
Over recent years we have watched the BBC reduce their coverage of the party Conferences in the UK, with only a late night round up tucked away on BBC2 after Newsnight outside normal programming. It was totally ridiculous to send the BBC QuestionTime team out to South Africa for that programme.
Without taking anything away from Mo Farrah's amazing sporting achievements, it would be a farce if the tennis loving and Wimbledon hosting nation didn't recognise the achievement of our first male singles title holder in over 70 years.
Murray won Olympic Gold in London, and then went onto win Wimbledon. It will be a farce if he doesn't win SPOTY after that combined achievement.
Why? he won a gold and silver medal last year, not this year which is what the award is for. This year he is being touted to win because he happened to win one tournament in a sport that the British aren't generally very good at.
Surely Mo is the man, he is world champion at two major athletics disciplines having won Olympic gold medals last year.
But due to the bizarre attitude towards tennis and a tournament that happens to take place in London, I expect Murray will win.
From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.
Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.
LOL, he should be picked because he might win something in the future. He has won one race where it is a team effort , and you try to compare that with someone winning Wimbledon. I can only assume you are being a wit.
I take it you didn't watch the Tour this year. Unless by Team Sky you mean Movistar ?
I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome.
Ok, so you don't understand cycling, you've just read a couple of paragraphs of the crap reporting available in our broadsheets.
Teams are considered successful if their best rider does well - TeamSky's support of Froome was frequently woeful - he would have won riding for any other squad.
The idea an individual is chosen and then waits to see if the team is good, is laughable.
Obviously not as much as a self lauded expert as yourself. However you need to learn to read before opening your big trap. Where did anybody say he would not have won with any other team. Try reading what I said this time rather than trying to be a smart arse.
My quote: I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome
So you're not now claiming Froome's achievements are minor because they were delivered by a team, as you began?
Without taking anything away from Mo Farrah's amazing sporting achievements, it would be a farce if the tennis loving and Wimbledon hosting nation didn't recognise the achievement of our first male singles title holder in over 70 years.
He won one grand slam tournament, and I believe he won one last year as well. In international tennis terms, he is a pygmy. What would be a farce would be to recognise someone as SPOTY who in any other country would be regarded as an also-ran in terms of sporting stardom.
And I am not sure the British are "tennis-loving", yes there is a load of media hype during Wimbledon fortnight, but in practice we don't actually produce many decent players. I guess that means not many people actually bother to play it.
You have to admit that whatever random person it is out there who's upset a high-ranking politician and possible future Prime Minister enough to get him to write an incoherent blog post whining about them rather than just ignoring or blocking them has to be doing some seriously effective trolling.
The Unite union is offering to teach unemployed Romanians and Bulgarians how to claim benefits in Britain.
The organisation, Labour’s biggest donor, is courting foreigners from the two countries as part of a membership drive.
It offers the advice as a reward for signing up to the union.
It has even issued membership forms in Romanian and Bulgarian, despite the Government – and Labour – saying immigrants should learn English.
The unemployed are offered the chance to join the union for just 50p a week. In return, Unite says it will offer new arrivals with advice on how to maximise benefit claims.
Southam Sorry to disappoint you but Spurs are on the up now
Let's see where they are on 2nd January: eight games in three weeks, starting with Team Suarez tomorrow. It could be the making of the team; it could be horrible. I (and you) know where my money is.
Surely anyone born after 1980 must listen to the Spurs fans "they let us down time after time" type moans and wonder why they have high expectations anyway? For thirty odd years they have been a pretty solid top 10 side who never look like winning the league or getting relegated (apart from 86/87 and 93/94?)
Yet I know Spurs fans who were born around that time and have that sense of not living up to whattheyaresupposed to be achieving.
Everton fans have tasted glory in that time, but I dont getthe impression theythink theyare being let down, when theyfinish 7th or8th....maybe I just don't know any
Spurs are one of the 20 richest clubs in world football. Everton aren't.
So are Newcastle, and they've won even less
Since 1980 Spurs have won the FA Cup three times, the UEFA Cup once and the League Cup twice. Not brilliant, but outside of Arsenal, Utd, Chelsea and Liverpool I am not sure there are any other teams in England that come close to that.
Our support base was (no longer is, sadly) as big as Arsenal's and way bigger than Chelsea's. But in the 1980s we got Alan Sugar; Arsenal got David Dein. Then a few years later Chelsea got Roman Abramovitch after Ken Bates bankrupted them. That, I would argue, is the difference. And Spurs fans pay as much as Arsenal and Chelsea fans to go to games.
Spurs are also based in Tottenham, surely the horriblest part of London (yes, even worse than Harlesden), whereas Arsenal are in elegant Highbury and Chelsea are in, well, Chelsea.
I know where I'd rather go to watch a game.
Tottenham is not nice. Gentrification is a long way off, though if it got a tube station it may happen as there are some fairly nice terraced streets around Bruce Castle park etc. I would not bet on it though. Either way, on match days it's not a problem. Go any other time and you are in real bandit country. Even walking down the High Road in broad daylight on a non-match day can be pretty nervy.
Murray not only won Wimbledon (and the US Open), he did it during the most competitive period in men's tennis for many years. He's also won an Olympic gold (and silver).
When people talk about the stars of tennis now, Murray *is* in the elite group, alongside Djokovic and Nadal.
That kind of disqualifies you from being taken seriously on this subject.
Why? He is 27 and has won only 2 grand slams. Pitiful. Roger Federer has won 17. You could describe him as "one of the best in the world" at the moment, but that is all. Mo is the best at his disciplines, full stop.
Over in Catalonia, meanwhile, the government there has said that if the referendum it wants to hold on independence next year is not allowed by the central government it will resign and call an election. That is likely to lead to a victory for ERC, the most avowedly republican of all the parties and so even greater stand off with Madrid.
SPOTY voters are mainly middle class. Mo definitely should be the winner as he should have been last year too ! Winning the 5000 / 10000 double happens at best once in a generation. He has done it twice now.But he won't win.
You are right of course, Murray will win because of exactly the emotional tripe cited by Fitalass as justification. He won a tennis tournament that happens to be in south west London. Big deal. If anything he deserved it more last year when he won the US Open and an Olympic gold. Surely winning a tournament on foreign fields is a greater achievement than winning one at home?
Murray not only won Wimbledon (and the US Open), he did it during the most competitive period in men's tennis for many years. He's also won an Olympic gold (and silver).
When people talk about the stars of tennis now, Murray *is* in the elite group, alongside Djokovic and Nadal.
Three out of those four achievements were last year, and it is a 2013 award, not one for lifetime achievement. It's a minority sport, and a made-up one with silly rules, rather than running which is a sort of ur-sport. It's what people do. Being "one of the best in the world this year" surely isn't good enough when we have a double world champion eligible for the award.
Sun have a bit of a mare. Twitter Sun Politics @Sun_Politics 4m Our apologies to @LucyMPowell for including her on list of the 10 laziest MPs while on maternity leave. Story taken down + under review.
John Rentoul @JohnRentoul 2m @Sun_Politics Almost the 1st rule of political journalism: don't do a #Top10 Laziest MPs. You always include people dying of cancer.
Sun have a bit of a mare. Twitter Sun Politics @Sun_Politics 4m Our apologies to @LucyMPowell for including her on list of the 10 laziest MPs while on maternity leave. Story taken down + under review.
Wouldn't it be interesting to know if she is still claiming expenses, though?
And more to the point, how much "maternity leave" has she chosen to take? Do MPs have a contract of employment? If the amount they are entitled to isn't specified, she should arguably take no more than the statutory minimum, and no maternity pay other than SMP.
SPOTY voters are mainly middle class. Mo definitely should be the winner as he should have been last year too ! Winning the 5000 / 10000 double happens at best once in a generation. He has done it twice now.But he won't win.
You are right of course, Murray will win because of exactly the emotional tripe cited by Fitalass as justification. He won a tennis tournament that happens to be in south west London. Big deal. If anything he deserved it more last year when he won the US Open and an Olympic gold. Surely winning a tournament on foreign fields is a greater achievement than winning one at home?
Wimbledon is a far bigger tournament than the US Open.
I'm not sure the strategy of reaching for a shovel is the best one when stuck in a hole. Ok, you think Mo deserves to win SPOTY this year, fair enough, trying to make out that Murray is a "pygmy" of the tennis world or having a pitiful career is just bizarre.
SPOTY voters are mainly middle class. Mo definitely should be the winner as he should have been last year too ! Winning the 5000 / 10000 double happens at best once in a generation. He has done it twice now.But he won't win.
You are right of course, Murray will win because of exactly the emotional tripe cited by Fitalass as justification. He won a tennis tournament that happens to be in south west London. Big deal. If anything he deserved it more last year when he won the US Open and an Olympic gold. Surely winning a tournament on foreign fields is a greater achievement than winning one at home?
Wimbledon is a far bigger tournament than the US Open.
In what way? Do the top ranking tennis players not play? You certainly don't have a partisan crowd shouting from Henman Hill.
Sun have a bit of a mare. Twitter Sun Politics @Sun_Politics 4m Our apologies to @LucyMPowell for including her on list of the 10 laziest MPs while on maternity leave. Story taken down + under review.
Wouldn't it be interesting to know if she is still claiming expenses, though?
And more to the point, how much "maternity leave" has she chosen to take? Do MPs have a contract of employment? If the amount they are entitled to isn't specified, she should arguably take no more than the statutory minimum, and no maternity pay other than SMP.
Given the role has no defined duties, I'm not sure how you would judge the difference between maternity leave and being an MP.
I'm not sure the strategy of reaching for a shovel is the best one when stuck in a hole. Ok, you think Mo deserves to win SPOTY this year, fair enough, trying to make out that Murray is a "pygmy" of the tennis world or having a pitiful career is just bizarre.
Ok, if pressed I might admit he is "quite good". But that shouldn't win you SPOTY. As major tennis stars go, he is certainly in the second rank.
Mr. Observer, as a chap with some knowledge of Spain (certainly more than me), how do you see the situation there going?
Badly!
The only possible resolution I can see is for the central government to give Catalonia more powers, including the right to keep all the tax money it collects and to protect the Catalan language in any way it sees fit. Independence is not something that is just going to go away, that is for sure.
There is not the same pressure for separation in the Basque country because outside of defence, foreign affairs and a few infrastructure related issues the Basques essentially look after themselves. Most Catalans would be happy with the same. The current central government, which is Spanish nationalist, will not concede that. The Socialists probably would, but they are unlikely to win the next election. No Madrid party will agree to a Catalan independence referendum.
Basically, what we have right now are two very stubborn centre right governments in Madrid and Barcelona refusing to budge an inch, with a much more left wing, much more aggressive party in Catalonia ready to become the biggest party in the Parliament there. I can see this running and running and it getting tenser and tenser, until at some stage someone relatively unimportant (a colonel, a captain, someone in the Catalan police force) does something very stupid and people get killed. At that stage the EU will step in and a deal will be forced on both sides, with the Catalans basically getting what the Basques have.
You have to admit that whatever random person it is out there who's upset a high-ranking politician and possible future Prime Minister enough to get him to write an incoherent blog post whining about them rather than just ignoring or blocking them has to be doing some seriously effective trolling.
No, just thin skinned Labour nonentities do not believe they should ever be questioned on their superiority. I have more chance of being the next Pope than he does of being PM.
Sun have a bit of a mare. Twitter Sun Politics @Sun_Politics 4m Our apologies to @LucyMPowell for including her on list of the 10 laziest MPs while on maternity leave. Story taken down + under review.
Wouldn't it be interesting to know if she is still claiming expenses, though?
And more to the point, how much "maternity leave" has she chosen to take? Do MPs have a contract of employment? If the amount they are entitled to isn't specified, she should arguably take no more than the statutory minimum, and no maternity pay other than SMP.
Given the role has no defined duties, I'm not sure how you would judge the difference between maternity leave and being an MP.
Well, for a start she doesn't need to visit London if she is on Maternity Leave, and therefore should have no need to claim expenses.
I'm not sure the strategy of reaching for a shovel is the best one when stuck in a hole. Ok, you think Mo deserves to win SPOTY this year, fair enough, trying to make out that Murray is a "pygmy" of the tennis world or having a pitiful career is just bizarre.
Ok, if pressed I might admit he is "quite good". But that shouldn't win you SPOTY. As major tennis stars go, he is certainly in the second rank.
He is clearly the third best tennis player in the world. Mo is almost certainly in the top 3 athletes in the world but that's a matter of judgement and not everyone will agree. Your opinions on the matter are ridiculous but that's just my judgement too.
From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.
Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.
LOL, he should be picked because he might win something in the future. He has won one race where it is a team effort , and you try to compare that with someone winning Wimbledon. I can only assume you are being a wit.
I take it you didn't watch the Tour this year. Unless by Team Sky you mean Movistar ?
I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome.
Ok, so you don't understand cycling, you've just read a couple of paragraphs of the crap reporting available in our broadsheets.
Teams are considered successful if their best rider does well - TeamSky's support of Froome was frequently woeful - he would have won riding for any other squad.
The idea an individual is chosen and then waits to see if the team is good, is laughable.
Obviously not as much as a self lauded expert as yourself. However you need to learn to read before opening your big trap. Where did anybody say he would not have won with any other team. Try reading what I said this time rather than trying to be a smart arse.
My quote: I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome
So you're not now claiming Froome's achievements are minor because they were delivered by a team, as you began?
Usual inconsistent, foul mouthed rubbish.
You are not very bright are you. I stated that it is a team sport now , where one member is picked to be the winner , if at all possible by the team. The others then spend the race doing their best to assist the chosen one to win. I am beginning to think you are not the world cycling expert that you make yourself out to be. You have trouble reading basic sentences. The race is still difficult to win but it is won as part of a team effort , not by individual endeavours alone.
I'm not sure the strategy of reaching for a shovel is the best one when stuck in a hole. Ok, you think Mo deserves to win SPOTY this year, fair enough, trying to make out that Murray is a "pygmy" of the tennis world or having a pitiful career is just bizarre.
Ok, if pressed I might admit he is "quite good". But that shouldn't win you SPOTY. As major tennis stars go, he is certainly in the second rank.
John, stop digging. You can only be right if the 2nd rank starts with the 3rd best player in the world. Not something you will be able to justify easily.
I'm not sure the strategy of reaching for a shovel is the best one when stuck in a hole. Ok, you think Mo deserves to win SPOTY this year, fair enough, trying to make out that Murray is a "pygmy" of the tennis world or having a pitiful career is just bizarre.
Ok, if pressed I might admit he is "quite good". But that shouldn't win you SPOTY. As major tennis stars go, he is certainly in the second rank.
John, stop digging. You can only be right if the 2nd rank starts with the 3rd best player in the world. Not something you will be able to justify easily.
At the moment. Other players have spent far longer at higher rankings. He is certainly second rank in terms of lifetime achievement, compared with current players. This year, he has won one grand slam tournament. No big deal. If he'd won two or more, or spent 6 months ranked as No 1, I might concede he is SPOTY material. I just don't think he is, his achievements in world tennis are not great enough this year when there are other people with greater success (TdF winners, world Athletics champions).
But he'll win anyway, because people will vote for him, because of the ludicrous hype and emotional incontinence that we have to suffer during Wimbledon.
OTOH Tottenham may be of interest to property speculators. It must be just about the last place in London you can get a one bed flat under £100k. Substantially under, too:
Very interesting. I presume the Foreign Office is doing what it can to encourage Catalan separatism, seems only fair given the Spanish attitude over Gibraltar.
I'm not sure the strategy of reaching for a shovel is the best one when stuck in a hole. Ok, you think Mo deserves to win SPOTY this year, fair enough, trying to make out that Murray is a "pygmy" of the tennis world or having a pitiful career is just bizarre.
Ok, if pressed I might admit he is "quite good". But that shouldn't win you SPOTY. As major tennis stars go, he is certainly in the second rank.
John, stop digging. You can only be right if the 2nd rank starts with the 3rd best player in the world. Not something you will be able to justify easily.
At the moment. Other players have spent far longer at higher rankings. He is certainly second rank in terms of lifetime achievement, compared with current players. This year, he has won one grand slam tournament. No big deal. If he'd won two or more, or spent 6 months ranked as No 1, I might concede he is SPOTY material. I just don't think he is, his achievements in world tennis are not great enough this year when there are other people with greater success (TdF winners, world Athletics champions).
But he'll win anyway, because people will vote for him, because of the ludicrous hype and emotional incontinence that we have to suffer during Wimbledon.
John, I heartily agree with you regarding Wimbledon, overhyped rubbish.
Comments
Teams are considered successful if their best rider does well - TeamSky's support of Froome was frequently woeful - he would have won riding for any other squad.
The idea an individual is chosen and then waits to see if the team is good, is laughable.
I imagine that Bell will still be around for a while. Cook and Root as well. I would not be surprised to see Pietersen retire from international cricket at the end of this series and it's unlikely that Trott will come back. Prior may also be nearing the end. With Stokes at six that leaves two batters and one keeper/batsman to find. The bowling is going to be a challenge too. Swann and Anderson look to be in trouble, and the third seamer place is a perennial problem. There's talk that Mills at Essex could be very fast, but still very wild. Finn could be good but lacks control too. And we'll need to find a spinner. Interesting times.
Tht 5th place in the All Time Prem is a bit misleading as its down to lack of relegations... Everton & Villa are close in 6th and 7th place... Man City are 10th and I think they can claim to have had a more successful Premier League than Spurs so far, as can Blackburn Rovers and Leeds United.
I think I was being fair in saying a consistent top 10 side.
To be fair in the 80s you also got Lineker, Gazza & Waddle... I think the problem has been trying to buy success and then losing patience with the managers too quickly (probably because of the aforementioned unrealistic expectations)
I think a fair comparison is with the England Football Side... always in the competition, never ever look like winning, then get slagged off for not being as good as they were overrated
Jimmy Anderson is great with a bit of cloud, obviously 40 C and bright sunlight in Perth won't suit.
http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2013/12/14/poll-alert-38/
Three times we missed out on the CL on the final day of the season.
We are also the last North London club to win a trophy of any kind.
Arsenal's great good fortune was to get a top manager at a time when European club competition was completely reworked - David Dein did a magnificent job in finding him. But without the top three or four getting into the CL and having access to money that other clubs cannot match would he have lasted so long? I doubt it.
In terms of buying success, compare and contrast the Spurs and Arsenal wage bills. You had the stats up on here a few weeks back.
My quote:
I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome
Cook, Vince, Root, Bell, Taylor, Stokes, Bairstow, Broad, Finn, Jordan, Briggs ?
Golf traditionally had high fees, true, and like a lot of different sports clubs, offset them with discounted bar prices as well as not so long ago, more generous, mostly legal, opening hours than the pubs and hotels. Golf courses, by their nature tend to be away from public transport routes and lugging around a bag of clubs on a course is accepted, around the streets, on buses and, in the not too distant future, trams, not so much so. Cars are therefore important and drink/driving will get you banned as well as being socially unacceptable.
But against that, we had the Open in 2013 at Muirfield and the Ryder Cup due in 2014 at Gleneagles. And of course, our very own FM is keen on the sport as well, although some of his now ex-buddies could be considered to be slightly dubious but we'll let the hair blow over that.
I have seen, and know many parents, seemingly religiously, driving their kids to extracurricular activities, sometimes 3 or 4 different types each week, and I really wonder if this is going to make a difference for the kids enjoyment of sport or it's the parents trying to assuage some guilt complex.
If Spurs had done this for the last 16 seasons then their wages paid would be a lot bigger, possibly as big as Arsenals, even if they had the same players, on which they spent considerably more money, on the same contracts as they have had
So the wages argument is null and void
What trophy was that?
http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/player/459257.html
And this is another bloke form Essex who might be interesting:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/player/454668.html
Disclosure: I am not an Essex fan, but am a Middlesex member.
Not sure the wages argument is null and void. I wonder how many players at Spurs get close to what the top earners at Arsenal get. I doubt Ozil's basic is comparable to anything anyone at WHL earns. Ditto with RVP before him. Ashely Cole felt insulted to be offered a basic of £60,000 a week. That's way more than any Spurs player was getting back then. But you make my point for me. Arsenal got lucky with the change in competition rules and have been able to pay wages to keep their best players, which in turn means they keep getting into the CL. If it had happened sooner, it might have been Spurs.
http://arsenaltruth.squarespace.com/arsenal-truth/2012/11/4/arsenals-1434m-wage-bill-exposed.html
Spurs turnover 2012: £144.2 million
http://www.glory-glory.co.uk/showthread.php/4138-Tottenham-Hotspur-Accounts-2012
http://www.jimmurphymp.com/jims-blog/blog.aspx?b=37
You will have world expert Maaaaarsh on shortly decrying you as a fool.
I don't really buy the "Arsenal got lucky.. " argument though, as we weren't in the Champions League when Wenger arrived, and it was his modest spending on shrewd signings (Vieira, Petit, Anelka etc) that enabled us to qualify in the first place. Spurs were never consistently finishing top 4 in years leading up to the Champs League rule changes were they? So how could it have been them?
Arsenal notoriously over pay squad players (Squillaci, Bendtner, Denilson, Diaby etc hence we couldn't get rid of the first three) Wenger has said he like a "socialist" style of pay where no one earns significantly more than anyone else.. I don't think RvP was on megabucks, Ozil maybe
I would ask if you think Bale was offered Ozil/RvP type wages to stay? Surely he was?
Their batters are due a fail, and we are due a few catches sticking..
Many said before the series that it would be a clean sweep. They were correct !
Who am I to question A-dubz?
Here are two newspaper polls.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/sports-personality-of-the-year/10476288/Poll-Andy-Murray-is-favourite-to-be-named-Sports-Personality-of-the-Year-but-who-gets-your-vote.html
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/poll/2013/dec/12/bbc-sports-personality-year-award-2013-poll
I backed Murray before Wimbledon to win SPOTY so I already have sizeable net winnings on this year's event having been paid out by Ladbrokes and having cashed in on Betfair.
Since then I backed Ainslie on the back of the America's Cup win but that achievement hasn't really made a splash and I think the bet is sunk.
I've had a small bet on Froome too but the wheels seem to have come off his chances of winning as he doesn't seem that popular and lots of people seem to be fed up of cyclists winning.
I probably should have jumped onto McCoy for SPOTYdom when he won his 4000th race and was value for this.
So I've had one final Try to make some more money from SPOTY. For two farthings I think Leigh Halfpenny could convert his Welsh SPOTY win into a podium place in tomorrow night's SPOTY. He does very well in the Telegraph poll and with Murray not turning up he may benefit from an anti-Scots vote as well as having the built in support of all of Wales and all British Lions Rugby fans.
The Opinium poll has dented my enthusiasm for his chances but I've had £5 on him to win at 999/1 on Betfair and I've backed him to win without Murray at 19/1 and to be in the top 3 at 4/1.
Wilshere, Walcott & Ramsey come in.. no Arteta interesting...
Cant fault AWs team, but my prediction is a 2-1 or 3-1 defeat... the Arse havent won a big domestic match away from home in a very long while
Surely Mo is the man, he is world champion at two major athletics disciplines having won Olympic gold medals last year.
But due to the bizarre attitude towards tennis and a tournament that happens to take place in London, I expect Murray will win.
You forget mr herdson,the Bradford city side from the 4th tier to reach 2 Wembley finals(one major)in the same season and also to get promoted ;-)
I'm rather envious. Would love to have the skill and time.
But he won't win.
Well done Jim Murphy.
However, QT did have the interesting and disturbing (yet unsurprising) piece about support for Mugabe style land-grabs.
Usual inconsistent, foul mouthed rubbish.
And I am not sure the British are "tennis-loving", yes there is a load of media hype during Wimbledon fortnight, but in practice we don't actually produce many decent players. I guess that means not many people actually bother to play it.
The organisation, Labour’s biggest donor, is courting foreigners from the two countries as part of a membership drive.
It offers the advice as a reward for signing up to the union.
It has even issued membership forms in Romanian and Bulgarian, despite the Government – and Labour – saying immigrants should learn English.
The unemployed are offered the chance to join the union for just 50p a week. In return, Unite says it will offer new arrivals with advice on how to maximise benefit claims.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2523553/Romanians-Bulgarians-taught-claim-UK-benefits-return-joining-union.html#ixzz2nSKt8vaJ
Murray not only won Wimbledon (and the US Open), he did it during the most competitive period in men's tennis for many years. He's also won an Olympic gold (and silver).
When people talk about the stars of tennis now, Murray *is* in the elite group, alongside Djokovic and Nadal.
Twitter
Sun Politics @Sun_Politics 4m
Our apologies to @LucyMPowell for including her on list of the 10 laziest MPs while on maternity leave. Story taken down + under review.
John Rentoul @JohnRentoul 2m
@Sun_Politics Almost the 1st rule of political journalism: don't do a #Top10 Laziest MPs. You always include people dying of cancer.
And more to the point, how much "maternity leave" has she chosen to take? Do MPs have a contract of employment? If the amount they are entitled to isn't specified, she should arguably take no more than the statutory minimum, and no maternity pay other than SMP.
The Coward of the Country, not up to the job , a lightweight labour No hoper. What a loser.
The only possible resolution I can see is for the central government to give Catalonia more powers, including the right to keep all the tax money it collects and to protect the Catalan language in any way it sees fit. Independence is not something that is just going to go away, that is for sure.
There is not the same pressure for separation in the Basque country because outside of defence, foreign affairs and a few infrastructure related issues the Basques essentially look after themselves. Most Catalans would be happy with the same. The current central government, which is Spanish nationalist, will not concede that. The Socialists probably would, but they are unlikely to win the next election. No Madrid party will agree to a Catalan independence referendum.
Basically, what we have right now are two very stubborn centre right governments in Madrid and Barcelona refusing to budge an inch, with a much more left wing, much more aggressive party in Catalonia ready to become the biggest party in the Parliament there. I can see this running and running and it getting tenser and tenser, until at some stage someone relatively unimportant (a colonel, a captain, someone in the Catalan police force) does something very stupid and people get killed. At that stage the EU will step in and a deal will be forced on both sides, with the Catalans basically getting what the Basques have.
This is all very, very Spanish.
http://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/
But he'll win anyway, because people will vote for him, because of the ludicrous hype and emotional incontinence that we have to suffer during Wimbledon.