• UmadLULW@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    So many childish and straight up bad takes here (capitalism fault, environment, bla bla) What it boils down to is what average stress load can a footballer physically take and the lack of transparency what is expected in terms of a football club.

    If they recognise, on average, that the amount of games exceeds the possibility for the average player, then a) they make it clear that clubs should structure around creating more squad depth to enable rotation and look at transfer policy in a more well-rounded squad than paying stupid money for the ideal 11. Or b) cut on games and competitions that aren’t necessary (league cup). The base problem is that clubs are over-paying on transfer and player salaries, which incentivises the need for more matches.

    Clubs just need to get it out of their heads that they have to succumb to stupid transfer fees.

    • Matt4669@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      How is “capitalism’s fault” a childish excuse, it’s a genuine reason why there’s too many games, so the Premier League, UEFA, FIFA etc. can be greedy and make more money

      That’s what capitalism is

      • I_miss_Chris_Hughton@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        A socialist system would also extort as many games as possible out of the players. If anything capitalist systems have proven to be far more responsive to overtaxing resources, whereas historically socialist systems are hesitant to reduce production of a good or service.

        • Matt4669@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t think a socialist system is the best solution either

          A more moderate, less greedy capitalist system would be good, like making teams in Europe unable to participate in the League cup, and maybe reducing the teams in the Prem and have less games in pre season

          • I_miss_Chris_Hughton@alien.topB
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Reducing the league cup games only delegitimises the competition. The better solution, objectively, is to reduce the number of european games played. Imo jt should be a straight knockout, no group stage games.

      • UmadLULW@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It isn’t. It’s overspending. Which has nothing to do with economic system. But straight up poor club management. You can set rules like budget or salary limit without a systematic change.

        That’s why dying “capitalism bad” is a dumb and childish statement.

  • DildoFappings@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Agreed. It’s already started to cross the limit of what a referee can handle. That bunda referee tore his ACL yesterday.

  • GaryHippo@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Increasing squad size is the way. The governing bodies love money too much to play less games so having more players could go some way to alleviating the stress on players’ bodies.

    • PureArmadillo1730@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Reducing number of games is the way. Bigger squads will only help the big clubs, whilst the likes of Brighton, Villa and West Ham (or any other team that gets European football) will not be able to keep up with the spend

  • serennow@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I know r/soccer hates Newcastle but what’s happening to them at the moment is a poster for what’s wrong here (so are Brighton, and others, and indeed most clubs have big injury lists).

    Club gets to the champions league spot for the 1st time in ages, spends basically the max allowed by FFP to try to increase the squad to cope but it’s nowhere near enough. Yesterday 10+ out after getting several back post international break. Their 25 man squad left the line up as including a 17 year old in the first 11, 3 goalkeepers on the bench, 4 kids with basically 0 prem mins and 2 semi-retired lads whose ages probably sum to 112.

    If we’re not to change to less games, do away with injury time (by punishing harshly any time wasting perhaps?). Or could some forced rotation work - eg in baseball they often play 5 days in a row but have different pitchers each day. Could limit the number of starters who are allowed to play a mid-week game after playing 70+mins at the weekend.

      • serennow@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        My only worry with increasing the squad size is that it would make the league even more uneven, as the big clubs hoover up more talent.

  • Pokefreaker-san@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    it will reach to a certain point where clubs will purposely throw in the small cup and it turns into which team wanted to lose more.

  • worotan@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The environment, too. The planet is collapsing, but because it isn’t a televised sport, we don’t see it. Puts people being off being happy and buying things, if we saw what is happening and how rapidly it’s getting worse.

    We can’t keep acting as though all that matters is more entertainment in our lives.

    The entertainment being provided so we will buy lifestyles is not sustainable. We all know it.

    • Intrepid_passerby@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yup. The whole world can’t sustain our habits in the first world. Gotta be some sort of systemic comprehensive change otherwise our children will inherit an alien planet

      • 006AlecTrevelyan@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        they are just saying the amount of plane rides teams do is bad for the planet too, is that really difficult to understand lol

        • aasfourasfar@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If it was only teams it would be okay. But for big clubs you have thousands of travelling fans as well

          • casce@alien.topB
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Hopefully, many of those travel by train or bus and don’t use planes but yeah, cars suck as well.

        • chuwanking@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Competitions = Money = Tax = Theoretically more ability to invest in green infrastructure.

          A lot of emissions is a money issue. Europe for example is over the curve and reducing emissions. Unfortunately the rest of the world got richer and worldwide emissions keep going up.

          However I hate this stupid argument. Because its a drop of water in an ocean. Honestly not worth the argument.

      • worotan@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Football players have crossed the limits of what they can handle. We can see that because we watch them play.

        The planet has also crossed the limits of what it can handle, but most people are trying to ignore it, and keep eating meat when they like, flying when they like, and consuming as much as they like.

        Climate change pollution keeps rising, every year, despite all the green energy infrastructure that’s been built. People don’t see the collapse of our survivable environment, like they see footballers collapsing because they’ve been overplayed.

        Like with Qatar and the Saudis taking over the World Cup, the next COP talks on how to deal with climate change have been taken over by the USE so that they can make sure we aren’t doing what we need to do and deal with their business model.

        Thought I’d remind everyone that a more important situation is also passing what it can handle. If we don’t reduce consumption seriously, now, all the scientists are saying we face disaster.

        If we don’t stop being ‘entertained’ by the expansion of consumption created by the money spent by oil states, we will be living on a planet that we can’t survive on.

        Hope that’s explained it to you.

        • chuwanking@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’re way to pesismistic. Europe is geographically the least affected area by climate change. Its also the place reducing emissions the most. Ironically funded by european tax, which football contributes to.

          Go speak to the rest of the world and not on a european football competition post. Because they are the ones that will suffer, and we’re the ones reducing emissions.

          we will be living on a planet that we can’t survive on.

          Not true in the slightest. Humans have suffered through far more dramatic climate shifts than even worst case models - whilst being significantly less technologically able. There is 0 risk we cannot survive on this planet in europe.

          Now go back to watching football, might cheer you up. No point being depressed.

  • westbywestbywest@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Was this stretch from August to December different in 2013, 2003, 1993? Up until this point of the season, I’m failing to see what “extra” games there are.

    • DatOgreSpammer@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because they’re different sports. During the Stanley Cup playoffs, you play every other day, even if the last game had 3-4-5 overtimes. MLB regularly does doubleheaders and any regular season game could go on until there’s a winner. Mention a 20 game regular season to NFL players (or try to increase to workload of pitchers) and you’re a dead man.

    • coysburner@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Go look up how much the average distance an NBA player runs in a single game. Then look up how much the average distance an football player runs in a single game.

      Soccer players run up to 3x the distance, do full sprints way more often, and have the added difficulty of dribbling/turning.