Liverpool FC Forum

john craig wrote:

josip84 wrote:The funny thing is : you all seem to consider that the standards in your Premiership are a lot higher than in our french Ligue1. Some of you (not all of you) even openly despise whatever is not related to your premiership. Let me tell you A : this is a very conceited and boastful way of seeing soccer matters  , and B : in the last 3 seasons, every time Olympique de Marseille have had to encounter British sides in european competitions, WE have qualified : Bolton Wanderers, Newcastle and......LFC never beat us, either at home or away. Poor record for such a highly praised Premiership, isn't it?

When was the last time a French team won the European cup/Champions league?

Were 3 out of 4 of this year's CL semi-finalists from the Premiership?

Tell me that the Premiership is not a higher standard league than the French league at the moment.

Ace Ventura wrote:A few one off games mean nothing.

Ace Ventura wrote:Only an idiot would think the french league and the english are comparable.
That is not being boastful or arrogant, thats fact.
A few one off games mean nothing.
Comparing the clubs against each other its blatantly obvious which league is stronger, and by a wide margin.

josip84 wrote:No, I wouldn't say that the Premiership is not a higher standard league than the French league at the moment. It IS a higher standard league, undoubtedly.
What I'm saying is : the difference is NOT what you think it is. Supposing it were, french teams would be heavily defeated every time they encounter english sides, which is NOT the case.
You can even witness such a strange thing as this : some french players who were regarded as just average in the french league do very well when transferred to english clubs : Sylvain Distin is one example, Mickael Sylvestre is another. And there are more.

bigmick wrote:Yeah I think the current Celtic team would be kind of Everton standard I guess. As John says however their huge fan base, increased likelyhood of being taken over by some multi-millionaire from Boston (Massachusetts not Lincolnshire) and increased advertizing revenue were thay to be allowed into the Premeirship (which they absolutely unquestionably should IMHO along with Rangers) would mean they would be at least challenging for Europe fairly quick smart. Out of interest, what's your teams up there lads? (Hacksaw Jim and John Craig).

josip84 wrote:

Ace Ventura wrote:A few one off games mean nothing.

Then why should LFC take part in the Champions League, i.e a competition where you have to play a few one off games which mean nothing?

bigmick wrote:Gothenburg have some very prestigious scalps, and Ajax are a team steeped in rich history, but their respective leagues aren't particularly strong. It's the poorer teams and the quality they posess which dicates the quality of the league, and the French isn't a strong one by any stretch.
I have to once again point out that it's very simple. If Cisse scores heavily there, it ain't a strong league.

bigmick wrote:

josip84 wrote:No, I wouldn't say that the Premiership is not a higher standard league than the French league at the moment. It IS a higher standard league, undoubtedly.
What I'm saying is : the difference is NOT what you think it is. Supposing it were, french teams would be heavily defeated every time they encounter english sides, which is NOT the case.
You can even witness such a strange thing as this : some french players who were regarded as just average in the french league do very well when transferred to english clubs : Sylvain Distin is one example, Mickael Sylvestre is another. And there are more.

On the question of French teams meeting English, I think that kind of misses the point. Brondby are a decent team who have beaten some very notable clubs in their history, but it doesn't mean the Danish League is strong. Similarly Gothenburg have some very prestigious scalps, and Ajax are a team steeped in rich history, but their respective leagues aren't particularly strong. It's the poorer teams and the quality they posess which dicates the quality of the league, and the French isn't a strong one by any stretch.

I have to once again point out that it's very simple. If Cisse scores heavily there, it ain't a strong league.

josip84 wrote:

bigmick wrote:Gothenburg have some very prestigious scalps, and Ajax are a team steeped in rich history, but their respective leagues aren't particularly strong. It's the poorer teams and the quality they posess which dicates the quality of the league, and the French isn't a strong one by any stretch.
I have to once again point out that it's very simple. If Cisse scores heavily there, it ain't a strong league.

I agree with the point you made about Gothenburg or Ajax. Yet the french league as a whole seems to be above the Swedish or Dutch leagues, but this could be another discussion.
Anyway one more thing about Cissé : you seem to be forgetting that Cissé scores goals not only for Auxerre or Marseille, but also for France. Couldn't it be a hint that you are considerably under-rating his skills and ability?

puroresu wrote:The whole french youth system is wrong, the french national youth sides are wrong, guy roux is wrong,  domenech is wrong,  L'OM are wrong.  Somehow Cisse has only managed to reach reach the top level of professional football due to his speed and hard shot.  Believe it or not that is what some people actually believe.

Bamaga man wrote:In fairness to Cisse he did get his fair share of goals when he got the chance to play. I'm not saying we should keep him as IMO he lacks a footballing brain, but as said he did score a fair few.

Now people are quick to say how s.hit Cisse is, and yet at the same time tell us how good Kuyt is. Kuyt is a better footballer out of the two, but I dont think he's as good as some people believe, and I find the gulf in comparison from Cisse being s.hit to Kuyt being a ' legend to come ' almost funny, if it wasnt so serious.
Where Cisse only has pace, I'd say Kuyt only has stamina and workrate. Where Cisse scored goals, I'd say Kuyt could improve his own tally on that.

People never really ... neither did Rafa give Cisse the time to settle, but yet can say he isnt good enough him for Liverpool's standard. But when Kuyt has one season and gets critised, 'its he needs more time, he'll score more next time'. Its very one sided when defending one and critising another.

Arguably  both players were played out of their more natural position too but in my book but NOT Rafa's I think strikers are there to score goals.

All in all I wouldnt have Cisse back I dont think he's good enough, and I'd probably never of brought Dirk Kuyt either. But hey I bet your glad I'm not the gaffa.

puroresu wrote:That was my argument.  I can fully understand Rafa not thinking Cisse was for us.  However would I replace him with Bellamy or kuyt?  No way.

Kuyt is greatly overrated by Liverpool fans.  His work rate and constant running seems to put blinkers on people's eyes as his other attributes are not great.

josip84 wrote:

LFC2007 wrote:

josip84 wrote:how can you claim that Djib was rubbish,  a terrible player etc., and at the same time claim that on the transfer market he's worth much more than what we're going to pay for him?

When you play for a team like Liverpool you don't get time and space to run with the ball, in France you get that time and space in much more abundance.  The defending here is more atute and if you have a poor touch and a lot of pace it becomes easy to disposess the striker.

That is one of the funniest things I have had the opportunity to read lately. Defending in the premiership being more atute than in the french league? You must be joking, lad. Some defenders in the Premiership are so terrible that such a prominent player as my Grandma even wearing flip-flops could score loads of goals in your league.

      PMSL

It's not just more astute, it's a level ahead.