A source tells Nigerian site 90minutesgoal.com that the striker is unlikely to complete his anticipated year with the Belgian club because Everton will attempt to end his loan early.
The Blues signed Onyekuru from KAS Eupen for around £7m over the summer and immediately loaned him out so that he could get the experience and requisite international caps for Nigeria in the interim that would qualify him for a work permit in England.
Everton could invoke the "special talent" argument to see if that would satisfy the Department of Employment in January rather than waiting until next summer.
Onyekuru has scored five times in 11 games for Anderlecht since joining them in August.
Reader Comments (90)
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 09/10/2017 at 01:44:26
If we could get him back earlier than first thought due to a change in his work permit status, brilliant. The sooner he's working with Rhino, and around the fringes of the first team, the better.
But if we are pinning our hopes of rescuing our season after a turgid start on the shoulders of a young and completely untested lad, new to the country and league, after a half decent spell in the Belgian league, then things are even worse than they first seem.
If we are not waiting with a blank cheque to get the best of the best on the first day of the transfer window opening I will be very disappointed. We fucked up in the summer. However neglectful one might see that mistake I will forgive it if we make amends in January.
2 Posted 09/10/2017 at 02:27:11
The lad is young, raw and talented, but recalling him to save Koemans hide?
Nah, no thanks.
3 Posted 09/10/2017 at 03:27:21
4 Posted 09/10/2017 at 04:09:23
5 Posted 09/10/2017 at 04:13:07
6 Posted 09/10/2017 at 04:20:28
7 Posted 09/10/2017 at 04:42:21
8 Posted 09/10/2017 at 05:35:57
9 Posted 09/10/2017 at 06:10:06
10 Posted 09/10/2017 at 07:36:59
11 Posted 09/10/2017 at 08:07:41
Tony, the game is being ruined because it is coached to within an inch of its life.
12 Posted 09/10/2017 at 08:22:05
Maybe its age but I now watch most games (Ive stopped watching England full stop) with complete indifference. I dont listen to the pre-game BS, the half-time chatter and I usually switch off once the ref blows for full time.
Cloughie warned the media years ago that theyd kill the spirit of the game if they continued to over analyse and over expose the game and they have. Hours and hours of analysis by so-called pundits bores me to tears nowadays. Its overkill in the extreme and its turned me off completely.
Oh, and as for this kid. We need a new target on the live forum so we can say how shit he is and we all knew hed be shite before wed even heard of him etc
13 Posted 09/10/2017 at 08:22:53
14 Posted 09/10/2017 at 09:18:55
15 Posted 09/10/2017 at 09:19:43
I don't think it is going to get better any time soon, and yet I will still go and watch the game, but it is definitely not the same game I fell in love with all those years ago, what a shame.
16 Posted 09/10/2017 at 09:30:08
There was a director of English football in the 80,s can't think of his name.
His job was to set out the style of play for all teams from youth team upwards.
I read an article from a player telling the story of his first coaching session. He said the director of football put a video in of a Brazil game. There was 50 odd passes leading to a chance on goal. The keeper saved it, long kick forward flick on from centre forward resulting in a goal.
Director of football "that's why the Brazil style doesn't work"
" Football is a simple game complicated by fools"
17 Posted 09/10/2017 at 09:43:47
Play the £40M man in his right position; play Lookman and Mirallas or Vlasic on the wings to inject some pace, and Calvert-Lewin up front... and bench Schneiderlin till he sorts himself out now. How hard is that?
18 Posted 09/10/2017 at 09:47:16
19 Posted 09/10/2017 at 10:27:50
No, football as we have known and loved it, has had it. All very sad.
20 Posted 09/10/2017 at 11:38:02
You had to read his "Coaching Manual" before you could pass any FA coaching badge.
The whole concept was based on POMO, Positions of Maximum Opportunity.
In other words - launch it.
21 Posted 09/10/2017 at 11:56:35
22 Posted 09/10/2017 at 12:10:23
Its awful to watch, and it makes little sense for those teams who have less technically gifted players - the team with the best players will tend to win if the two teams play in the same manner.
So, if one teams players are not as good as anothers, surely they should try and play in a way that worries their opponents? Weve all played football, and even if that was at a low standard there were always things about the opposition that would worry you - a tricky winger who could get to the by-line; a fast guy running at you; a big, strong centre forward and centre half; a couple of midfielders who would “put their foot in” firmly; that bloke who stands in the centre of the pitch and runs the show. And if they had a decent goalie he would frustrate you on the few occasions you managed to get through to him. It probably also helped if they all spoke the same language.
Im not being “all our yesterdays” here, I really think a team playing like that could upset the cartel. Or is that why nobody tries it?
23 Posted 09/10/2017 at 12:12:05
24 Posted 09/10/2017 at 12:13:48
25 Posted 09/10/2017 at 12:30:48
Both lads have bags of talent.
Onyekuru had 10 assists last season as well as his 21 goals. That's impressive for a young lad, even if the Belgian league is miles behind the premier league.
He is lightning fast and skilful and would bring some much needed excitement.
Vlasic is 19, DCL 20, Onyekuru 20, Lookman 19. These 4 are all quick and could transform us from a pedestrian outfit into a super-fast attacking team with serious intent.
Of course, they are young and will struggle with consistency, but with the right formation, and the courage to play them all, it would certainly make interesting viewing.
I expect it's probably a little naive to play all 4 at once, but it can only be an improvement on what we're currently watching.
Vlasic, Onyekuru, and Lookman can all beat a man at pace and that is what this team needs right now.
26 Posted 09/10/2017 at 12:38:43
27 Posted 09/10/2017 at 12:53:37
The PL would be dead without that mate.
Great, if depressing, insight mate
28 Posted 09/10/2017 at 13:03:40
Anderlecht are slowly moving up the table after a poor start to the season and Onyekuru has played a part in that resurgence. I say leave him there and use him next season when we hopefully have a manager who's prepared to use some pace like most of the good teams in the league!
29 Posted 09/10/2017 at 13:33:24
I empathise, mate.
30 Posted 09/10/2017 at 14:10:26
31 Posted 09/10/2017 at 14:39:13
We need a striker, and he can play up top (I think) so get him back ASAP. So what if he's untested in the league, we need bodies.
Having money is definitely no guarantee of us being able to buy a decent striker in January.
I don't understand fans thinking we need to somehow 'save face' by not doing this - do you think the football world hasn't noticed we need a striker? Do you not think we'll be rinsed for as much money as possible on any potential signing in January?
Come off it.
32 Posted 09/10/2017 at 14:49:38
33 Posted 09/10/2017 at 15:04:25
34 Posted 09/10/2017 at 15:15:02
35 Posted 09/10/2017 at 15:19:16
36 Posted 09/10/2017 at 15:25:14
Back to the giving up on life/football sub-thread; I think what needs to happen is the offside law has to be removed.
Only then will we see the return of the beautiful, exciting game that we once loved.
It will happen at some point this century.
If not total removal then at least a natural amendment from two players (defenders) to one player needed to be onside. So effectively, if the Goalkeeper stepped up, the attacking player behind him would be offside. Everything ahead of the Goalkeeper (or whoever the last man is) would be onside.
This is the only way because the bubble wont burst and the money men are here to stay. Its a recession-proof business, maybe nuclear war would stop the football season but thats about Link
37 Posted 09/10/2017 at 15:29:21
I'm thinking exactly the same. My advice is not to support any rugby team, just buy every team's kit (consider it a sizeable investment into your own sanity) and whichever team is top of the table, just wear their kit everywhere and mouth off about how great they are until everyone is utterly sick of you.
Works for plastic Kopites from Southampton, Yeovil, Oslo etc, who go to one of the Liverpool unis, just because Slippy G used to be on the TV as much as the test card girl and that hideous clown.
38 Posted 09/10/2017 at 15:48:45
As to the other running theme about the current state of football at the highest level, I tend to agree that the game lacks much of what attracted many of us to follow it all those years ago.
I watched the BBC's documentary last night in honour of Sir Bobby Charlton celebrating his 80th Birthday. I never saw him play in the flesh but even now the goals that he scored for United and England, give me goosebumps and whilst the man himself wasn't everybody's cup of tea he's given more to the game than most and is a benchmark for all the would be superstars of the modern era.
Players of his era and possibly up to the formation of the Premier League loved the game and its fans, and money whilst important wasn't the main reason for them playing the game.
Some younger players have this same passion and natural ability but for some reason the coaches and managers insist on 'helping' them develop into clones, restricting their instincts for the sake of the team and taking out any individuality from the more talented.
Mind you I blame Sir Alf Ramsey, he might have won the World Cup with his wingless wonders but even he made Bobby Charlton man mark Franz Beckenbauer in the World Cup Final. To be fair the German boss asked Franz Beckenbauer to do the same job on Bobby Charlton which had the effect of both of them having less influence on the game than they might have.
I suppose every generation believes that the game that they grew up with and the heroes that they had in their younger days, were far superior to any of those that are on offer as they grow older. There are still some fine players out there but I would argue not as many as there were in days gone by.
39 Posted 09/10/2017 at 16:18:49
40 Posted 09/10/2017 at 16:56:55
Lawrence, 37 - saw Charlton; Best; Law play many times and they were magic - what would they be worth today? I don't understand your comment that Charlton wasn't everybody's cup of tea - he was certainly mine, as was Alan Ball; Howard Kendall and Colin Harvey; Bobby Collins; Alex Young - I could go on. The point I am making there is nobody out there today playing for EFC you could put in the same bracket.
I would like to say we do have one player who can excite but he doesn't want to stay.
41 Posted 09/10/2017 at 17:03:44
Even better if it was a Blue that said it.
Too much detail and analysis put into coaching for me.
Players have too much information in their heads when they go out to play.
Paralysis by analysis.
He's struggling now but one of the best and most sensible interviews I saw involved Slaven Bilic.
Interviewer asked him about formations and setting a team up.
He replied the difference between any formation you named was a matter of 10-15 yards on the pitch.
"Give your players a starting formation then trust them to adapt to the formation the opposition play"
Again, it's a simple game.
Pass and move into a position to give the man with the ball an option.
Movement in all areas of the pitch and quick passing.
Nobody can run faster than the ball.
42 Posted 09/10/2017 at 17:32:09
Thats what Im saying John,
If you get rid of offside this creates movement in all areas of the pitch (literally) and fast, exciting passing and the return of skilful, pacy wing play.
The game would take place within the whole of the pitch, not just the space between the two defences.
Its too easy now for teams to just sit in their shape, more space needs to be created. The game needs shaking up. I can see it becoming progressively more dull and boring in the next 20 years.
If attendances start dropping then theyll have to do something.
This happened in the 1920s and the offside law was amended in 1925.
43 Posted 09/10/2017 at 17:32:53
Siggs may not have done the best on the field yet but can go home now and conjugate the verb To Love. Amo, amas, Amant May explain tiredness?
Shit, opinion needed. Black can be white in partial sunlight. Splinters.
44 Posted 09/10/2017 at 17:34:59
45 Posted 09/10/2017 at 17:50:16
46 Posted 09/10/2017 at 18:16:59
Whilst I have wonderful and fond memories of the 60s, 70s and 80s, I personally think today's game and skill levels surpasses that of earlier decades.
The game has got slower, somebody above claims? Has it buggery! It is more often played at high octane levels, thanks to vastly improved fitness levels by the players and better science, analysis and monitoring of invidivual and team play.
Every week in Europe's top leagues you see incredible skill and ability - at speed, under pressure - in every area of the park: goalkeeper, defence, midfield and attack.
Don't confuse a possible distaste for the commercialism of the game and the riches now available with the view that today's game and skill levels are now poorer as a result.
That amounts to looking backwards through sepia coloured glasses, IMO.
47 Posted 09/10/2017 at 18:28:45
Hopefully rose tinted spectacles aren't needed to come to the conclusion that 60's football was a better game than today.
48 Posted 09/10/2017 at 18:42:28
Not looking backwards, mate.
Looking forward to the game being released by the abolition of offside. thats my point.
The players are faster, stronger and in some cases more skilful now, true.
They just need releasing from the prison of negative, cautious tactics that plague the minds of the majority of so-called coaches and managers.
The organisation of defences has improved to the point of utter tedium.
Im saying this needs shaking up with the abolition (or amendment) of offside, and then we will see , in this century, the fastest, most exciting football that has ever been played.
Its a positive argument Im putting forward.
49 Posted 09/10/2017 at 18:45:35
Amo amas amat
Happy birthday by the way!
50 Posted 09/10/2017 at 19:00:29
To my mind a number of factors have led to the current lack of competition (in no particular order):
1 The number of subs allowed, and the loan system, which allows - encourages - wealthy teams to stock pile players;
2 The Bosman ruling/freedom of contract which means that less fashionable teams can't hold on to their best players who therefore gravitate to the top teams. Before the Premier League there were always top-class players who spent several seasons if not careers with less 'fashionable' clubs ( eg Trevor Francis, Martin Peters, Cyrille Regis off the top of my head) ;
3 The quality of today's pitches which although a good thing from the purist's point of view, removes a 'levelling' factor;
4 The over-protection of players which means it is impossible to put in an early 'tasty' tackle against the opposition's best player (again not one for the purists!)
51 Posted 09/10/2017 at 19:05:38
Fitness levels are indisputably vastly improved from the 60s and 70s. You imply that has been at the expense of skill levels. I wholeheartedly disagree. You suggest the improved fitness levels have come at the detriment of skill levels. In truth, both have made huge strides in the intervening 40-50 years.
Whilst every decade had its artisans and players with sublime skills, I can see every week moves and plays by individuals and teams that were unheard of and unseen in earlier decades.
You further claim that "another major change has been from tactics aimed at entertaining to tactics of fear aimed at maintaining status" is also a hollow one.
In every decade the very best teams were entertaining, including those of this century. In every decade, teams in threat of relegation played with "fear aimed at maintaining their status."
In the decades you applaud it was also much more common place to have an enforcer (or two!) in place - Hunter, Bremner, Giles at Leeds, Chopper Harris at Chelsea, Nobby Styles at United, Tommy Smith, Souness at Liverpool, Peter Storey at Arsenal. They had carte blanche to commit the most atrocious fouls against skillful opponents. Such players are largely gone from the modern game and the thuggery they brought has largely gone with them.
Skillful players are afforded much greater protection than the 'halcyon' days you appear to long for.
As for your comment: "The reason I say this is that more young people played the game then and far less people were lost to the game via higher education" that is just gibberish psycho babble.
I doubt there is a 'young person' with a smattering of ability from the age of even 5-6 that isn't 'known' and sort after by any number of clubs, such is the ruthless efficiency of clubs in seeking out young talent.
As football offers a richer career path than many a profession available via 'higher education' it is regarded as a most desirable career to pursue, by young 'uns and their parents alike.
52 Posted 09/10/2017 at 19:19:28
I consider your proposal of abolishing the offside rule another issue which is of no relevance to the opinion I am offering about the current state of the game compared to earlier decades.
As for your observation (as justification for abolishing the offside rule): "The organisation of defences has improved to the point of utter tedium."
(Putting aside that right now I would welcome such 'tedium' to be shown every week by Everton's defence).
And yet, skillful players and clever tactics continue to create and score goals every week, many of them a true delight to behold.
Brian @ 49, totally agree. The great players of the past would be great today. The rest of your post goes off on a tangent from my own assertion, which was merely to disagree with a belief expressed in this thread by some posters that the game and players are not as skillful as in the past.
You open up a completely different line of enquiry about what has led "to the current lack of competition" which is far removed from what I was referencing.
53 Posted 09/10/2017 at 19:20:47
Instead of being so angry and contrary, tell me, do you seriously enjoy watching football? Are the actual games you watch any fun? Are you not thinking, ‘Jesus, this is fucking painful I just want to turn this off?
Or like me, do you just sit through it anyway and accept that football is just not very entertaining.
Im sure the past was full of dreadful matches too, of course, but just admit that its fucking tedious now aswell.
Heres one thing that was better in the past anyway, just to provoke you, European Cup knockout ties as opposed to the shite that is now the Champions League group stage.
Last season, Id say that Man City v Monaco game was the standout match of the season. Cant really think of many more.
Our 4-0 counter-attacking masterclass v City was the highlight blues-wise..
54 Posted 09/10/2017 at 19:38:34
Happily admit to being contrary to the majority opinion on this thread.
Angry? Just because I admit in my very first post in this thread to having a counter view? Don't be soft, lad.
Engage with the debate rather than going all pouty and taking umbrage at a counter view and offer me something that makes me consider or change my own point of view rather than getting personal.
To answer your specific points in your latest post, yes I still SERIOUSLY enjoy watching all manner of football. Now watching Everton at the moment certainly is painful, but you don't specify that.
Just a few days ago I watched a thrilling 0-0 draw for the full 90 minutes in which the Bolivian goalkeeper had an absolute blinder to deny Brazil what should have been an overwhelming victory. Neymar was moved to just laugh at his shots being denied and at the end of the game exchanged his shirt with the keeper. How often do you see outfield players do that? Similarly, the Brazilian coach Tite was straight on to the pitch at the final whistle to congratulation the keeper and praised him in his after match comments.
And WTF has a change in the CL format got to do with the SKILLS AND FITNESS levels on which I focus?
As for only referencing the City game to get your juices running, you're a hard one to please if you can't derive pleasure from our best ever PL home form and goals tally and a run of 9 consecutive home victories in which we were scoring 3-4 and even 6 goals a game.
Each to their own.
55 Posted 09/10/2017 at 19:44:18
Ill admit, Im the angry one, always have been.
56 Posted 09/10/2017 at 19:56:30
57 Posted 09/10/2017 at 19:56:30
But seriously, our Premier League home form last season, are you joking? Absolutely abysmal stuff. No movement, static football an a stadium with no atmosphere.
The worst game was the 1-0 win against West Ham; they battered us and I think Barkley nicked a winner. So, no, I didn't enjoy our home form last season; I just ‘got through it', which is I'm sure how most people feel.
I'm glad you enjoy watching football, Jay. The Scotland game the other night was great, I'll admit, when they nicked a last-minute winner. I can only enjoy it when there's something at stake. Otherwise, it's all about the Blues.
58 Posted 09/10/2017 at 20:03:43
Not sure whether, if a country applies its own rules in this way, the winner of the domestic tournament would then be eligible to qualify for the Europa League.
59 Posted 09/10/2017 at 20:18:23
I'd go one further and say trial it at the World Cup; it would improve that snore-fest no end. In reality it would probably be trialled at something smaller like the League Cup, yes.
But it would probably have to happen at a FIFA level, so something like an U20 World Cup or maybe even a Copa America, I could see that.
60 Posted 09/10/2017 at 20:18:43
"Our PL home form last season, are you joking?
Absolutely abysmal stuff. No movement, static football an a stadium with no atmosphere."
So you couldn't enjoy this run of results from December onwards and all the drama some of the games contained?
H Arsenal w 2-1
H Liverpool l 0-1
H Southampton w 3-0
H Man City w 4-0
H Bournemouth w 6-3
H Sunderland w 2-0
H WBA w 3-0
H Hull w 4-0
H Leicester w 4-2
H Burnley w 3-1
H Chelsea l 0-3
H Watford w 1-0
P 12 W 10 D 0 L 2 F 32 A 11 Pts 30 (out of a possible 36)
You just "got through it" you say. And feel emboldened to speak for the majority by adding "which is I'm sure how most people feel".
Each to their own, as I said.
61 Posted 09/10/2017 at 20:35:26
None of them were. All pretty routine, the soul-less, unlikable yet devastatingly good striker Lukaku scores. We win. No one really cares. He'll be gone soon, there's nothing we can do about it, what's the fucking point?
It was that kind of feeling. Empty.
62 Posted 09/10/2017 at 20:40:44
Seek help, Andy, while you still can.
63 Posted 09/10/2017 at 20:53:01
On this basis, please forgive me but I'll pass on responding to the points you raised that are purely opinion, irrelevant to the discussion, statements of the bleeding obvious or just not worth further discussion from me at least.
Jay, if you like modern football in preference then fine but please remember that you'd not get much agreement from anybody who actually watched football in the 60s. This isn't to say that there aren't very skillful players in the current game; there are obviously.
The points about fewer playing or being lost to further education were obviously a bit much for you but, if you work on it for a few days, it should come.
64 Posted 09/10/2017 at 21:08:35
65 Posted 09/10/2017 at 21:10:42
Everton are dull, England are dull but the Barcelona team over the last number of years were in my view better than what has gone before. Brazil in 1970 were brilliant with class, guile and characters, some of whom liked a fag. Different times, different values.
It' s like telling kids the A-Levels are easy these days.
66 Posted 09/10/2017 at 21:30:01
To misquote the great Danny Blanchflower... "If a player is not interfering with play what the fuck is he doing on the pitch?" Best wishes.
67 Posted 09/10/2017 at 21:45:40
I was going to discuss that type of player of today who have all of the skills of yesterday coupled with a level of fitness that is that of any athlete. There are many and I was going to cite Ronaldo as an example. I thought though that there was no point in doing so with somebody who was on a wind up so thanks for raising this.
What I was saying wasn't about individuals but the game in general. My contention was that modern football isn't a patch on the 60s game where any side could win the league and attacking football was common. Villa and Forest won European Cups playing great football and there was no Sky.
What I was saying is that football then was just a much better spectacle than the game I see today.
What would I say about the relative merits of Best and Ronaldo? Best every time.
68 Posted 09/10/2017 at 22:01:16
Nope! Not trolling. Simply offering an alternative opinion and replying to those who addressed me directly. That includes yourself.
And on that score, I note you revert to type and try to claim some imaginary moral high ground by failing to counter perfectly legitimate and on-topic observations I make.
You also pompously presume to speak for a whole generation of football watchers in the 60s and confuse what I have actually stated. I enjoyed the football of the 60s in its era.
I continue to enjoy the football of today in its era. I disputed the claim by some in this thread that modern football is less skillful than in previous decades. I gave reasons why I believe this.
Your point about young people being lost to the game by taking up further education remains in my eyes how I originally labelled it: gibberish fabricated psycho babble.
Stick to crocheting, Martin. It suits you, sir.
69 Posted 10/10/2017 at 01:10:40
70 Posted 10/10/2017 at 06:23:33
I could just get through it if we can start playing some of the exciting stuff we played in the games you mention. Let's hope Koeman and Co produce a similar second half to the season.
71 Posted 10/10/2017 at 06:44:37
If that is what you think will bring increased interest in football then you must really love the half-time Hit the Crossbar competition.
72 Posted 10/10/2017 at 19:20:35
73 Posted 10/10/2017 at 19:30:59
74 Posted 10/10/2017 at 19:51:52
You probably didn't read my somewhat dull and geeky post, why should you life is short.
In my proposal goalhangers would be offside. An amendment of the rule from two players needed between the attacker receiving the ball and the goal line (or level with as it is now) to just one player/defender means any attacker ahead of the goalkeeper (who, let's face it, is always in most cases likely to be the last man) would be offside.
The goalkeeper (or whoever the last man is) would effectively be playing people on or offside. So goal hanging would be pointless as you would be offside.
Of course, the attacking team could always have a man on or the near the keeper, but so what? What would the point of this be? You can't really challenge fairly with goalkeepers any more anyway.
A defender would come back and mark this player maybe, which would free up more space in the game.
The cliched, received wisdom, knee-jerk response to any amendment of offside is ‘but what about goal hangers!!?' As if that's the end of the world, but I do understand the reaction. If you actually think about it for a bit though and go one level deeper, it's really all about freeing up more space on the whole pitch to play in.
What would be the point of just putting three men on the goalkeeper? I'm sure some Allardychian style coach would try it, but the law change doesn't change the fundamentals of football, it's still going to be all about passing and moving into space. This change gives more space, and what's most likely to happen is you will see wingers come back into fashion, as all the space in behind on the wing is also in play too.
All kinds of new exciting movements and patterns would emerge and we'd see a more fluid, attractive style of play, with probably more goals and end to end ding -dong battles, as an attacking strategy would probably be the most sensible way to go under the new rule.
They got rid of offside in Hockey in the 90s and it made it a far more dynamic game. I'm not saying get rid of offside (yet) just amend it to one defender instead of two. Hope you'll find it within your heart and mind to possibly entertain seeing it from this point of view.
75 Posted 10/10/2017 at 20:12:22
You should have posted that after the Belgium game.
The devils club could influence an injury to Lukaku.
76 Posted 10/10/2017 at 20:47:25
1 Tamha's post ages ago made me laugh a lot.
2 Football just being played from a formulaic manual. Trust me, I deeply hate to say this but either of the Manchester clubs (I hate this even more LFC as well) are playing expansive football that is good to watch. Thank fuck LFC (I love predictive text gives me a hideously greasy option when I type that) can't defend, a bit like Sin Miedo before he got scared.
3 comparing individuals from different eras is, in my opinion, fatuous. It is like comparing them in different leagues, some (Ibrahimovic, probably Ronaldo? Pogba) have shown they can do it in a different environment; many haven't.
77 Posted 10/10/2017 at 21:04:02
I know you have the right to your opinion and I respect that right. I think that there was just a misunderstanding over individual skill, which I appreciate is still present in spades, and the skills shown in the game itself.
No offense meant and I hope none taken. I actually prefer crochet to knitting, far more skillful.
78 Posted 10/10/2017 at 21:08:45
I don't think he should have posted it at any time, got no love at all for Liverpool, at any time, but getting pleasure from injuries? More than naughty, that.
79 Posted 10/10/2017 at 21:22:08
80 Posted 10/10/2017 at 21:35:35
I'd be glad of the win but wouldn't do much gloating over it.
81 Posted 10/10/2017 at 23:26:30
We had our own of course, but I didn't want to come across as biased.
As far as pace is concerned, today's players probably have the edge, but there were a few about in those days to; Alex Scott and Mike Helliwell of Birmingham come to mind.
When it comes to strength and fitness I am not so sure. How many of them suffered from hamstring and cartilage injuries? I put that down to more natural training routines and different pitch conditions. They certainly had to deal with more physical attention than today's players.
Interestingly all three played up a bit off the field but what a joy it was to watch them on it.
I reckon if they were around today they would do what they did then:
Torment defenders and goalkeepers. Entertain us.
82 Posted 10/10/2017 at 23:47:48
Appreciate them for what they were at the time they played just as I appreciate the great racing cars and drivers of generations ago without worrying about the fact that some of those racing cars would be slower than cars we drive to work every day now.
83 Posted 11/10/2017 at 08:01:00
For example, how do you think Juan Manuel Fangio would go driving a modern Formula 1 car today?
In athletics only 4 men have broken 29 feet in the long jump. The last man to do that was Mike Powell of the USA in 1991. Before that, Bob Beaman held the record which he set in 1968.
Similarly only one man has ever broken 8 feet for the high jump Javier Sotomayor something he did in 1989 and once more in 1993. Nobody since has bettered his efforts.
But it's not just about strength and speed that matters on a football pitch. No question that pace is a important but you also need players with football nous, ball control, and mental and physical toughness in your team.
I would say that if the three players in my links were playing with today's football, in today's boots, on today's surfaces, with the same support from dieticians and physios, they would be a match for any three footballers playing today including, Ronaldo, Messi, or Aguerro.
Actually the thought of Best, Garrincha, and Greaves playing in the same forward line is frightening.
84 Posted 11/10/2017 at 08:19:09
David, you'd have to go back some way for that to be true... or very low down in the categories/formulas but I know what you mean.
85 Posted 12/10/2017 at 15:29:19
Changing the Offside Rule is not original and was much the same as your suggestion which, even according to you, didn't/doesn't work.
The only rule changes I can think of which have worked, three came from Goodison; Goal nets, numbers on players shirts and Sam Chedzegoi's (?) corner and according to your theory we should change that last one back so that defenders go over to stop it thereby creating more room in the penalty box for corners. The fourth is changing from goal average to goal difference. Somebody will probably say I've forgotten such and such and may be right.
Ask yourself if this would be a change just for the Premier League or if it would work in the lower divisions of the Sunday League. If the answer is it wouldn't work at all levels then it probably isn't a good change. You admit that Sam Allardyce type managers may revert to "goal hangers". I would suggest that there are at least six or seven others. Remember Graeme Taylor's Watford? Kick-and-run football they said but I think they finished second as other teams couldn't stop it.
Let's have a look at other rule changes. Did stopping the keeper picking up back passes reduce the number of back passes? Three points a win didn't change the idea that winning at home and drawing away was Champion winning football. If there was a change it meant losing the odd one was made up for by winning the odd one. Work it out, 19 home wins, 19 away draws equals 76 points which is Champions League which is what teams aim for, it's what Everton hire managers to achieve.
A change to players interfering with play by playing, or not, the ball in offside positions only led to defences moving up to play them offside leaving themselves vulnerable to players coming from onside positions. None of it created more room for more attractive football.
Other failures include the away goal rule and the golden goal of extra time which had quite the opposite affect.
It's attitudes that need changing not rules. Chelsea, Tottenham and Arsenal have no problem playing attractive football under the present rules. Man Utd under Mourinho have little trouble getting plenty of players forward right across the pitch while City rely on fast, skillful players on the break and de Bruyn when that isn't the best way.
The best team ever, in my opinion, Brazil 1970, had no problem under these rules even if they weren't much cop defensively and was it Peru or Columbia who changed attitudes on free kicks in goal scoring positions and walls to stop it?
What rule changes would I suggest? Change the Champions League back to the European Cup, champions and the holders only, no seedings and the knockout format on a home and away basis. If that's where the money is then play for the chance to participate. It did produce exciting if not purist football. Rule changes have rarely improved the style of good football and I don't see your suggestion changing that.
86 Posted 12/10/2017 at 23:00:03
And I agree with the comments about the game being in a state of flux, or moreover perhaps a bit lost. I get so bored of all the talk of the so called top 6 teams... every paper, every website, every radio station... it's boring!
Maybe that's because we haven't got anywhere near breaking into this group. And as for project Everton... Just do one, and give me some quality football that entertains and gets the odd win (hopefully more than odd win) but you get what I mean. I'd suffer Moyes over this fella... but not Martinez... or Smith... or Walker...
87 Posted 13/10/2017 at 17:39:42
And when it is, I would revert the sub-clause back to ‘when you're offside, you're offside', there would be no interfering or not interfering with play bullshit.
I don't think anyone has ever successfully changed someone's mind or altered their point of view even a couple of degrees via exchange's on the internet. Let's agree to disagree.
I got excited though, thought ‘Maybe this is the one!' But, no. Oh well, never mind.
Thanks for reading my post anyway and caring enough to respond. Roll on the future and the abolition of offsides. Can't wait!
88 Posted 13/10/2017 at 18:19:11
89 Posted 13/10/2017 at 20:03:52
Like shit off a shovel and a good finish.
90 Posted 13/10/2017 at 20:09:28
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.