₦airaland Forum

AirborneLacer: What has Class got to do with current form?

Gotze and Costa shits on Rooney at the moment.

Maybe you should explain this ya class theory

To know how good a player is, you shouldn’t look to his rating. It only shows, generally, how popular he is, allowing you to compare him with the others. The overall rating is NOT an average or an reflection of the all attributes. It isn’t derived from the actual technical, mental and physical attributes. It represents the players’ reputation. EA Sports assigned the ratings to the players according to the league that they play, the club, the performances and the role they have in their teams.

Katsumoto: That there is the crux of the debate - why was Makelele unable to that when he played for Madrid and Chelsea? Your position, based on what you are stating, is that Makelele didn't do it because he was given instructions. I posit that Makelele didn't do it in the tougher leagues because he was limited. Paul Ince wasn't even a box-to-box DMF but he scored many goals for united; why couldn't Makelele do that? Ditto for Hamann at Newcastle and Liverpool.

And yes, I do have Jesus.

Katsumoto: First - I don't see the difference between what you stated and how I phrased you. The key point to note in your statement is that box-to-box is given license to bomb forward while anchor isn't given that license.

Second - a defender can operate as a center forward ..... with varying levels of efficiency off course (your words and logic). Since the level of efficiency is not so important, I wonder why coaches don't replace strikers with defenders when the strikers are not delivering. Why not switch the roles of Torres and Cahill? Just a thought.

If you of course agree that efficiency is important do you mind explaining why Vieira was selected more times than Makelele for France? Or why Davids started more games than Aron Winter when both were in the Dutch Team?

Katsumoto: In essense your point is that all MFs have the ability to be box-to-box? The only difference between MFs is with instructions giving to them and not actual ability? Ok thats a new one and its noted.

Katsumoto: We all know the differences between an anchor and a box-to-box MF. Box-to-box is an upgarde on an anchor because the box-to-box can defend as well as attack. If you could buy a car would you buy one without air-conditioning or one with air-conditioning? Both will get you from Lagos to Ibadan but only one will give you comfort in 30 degrees heat.

Why was it Vieira who replaced Deschamps in the French squad and not Makelele? Makelele got into the French squad before Vieira but it was Vieira who replaced Deschamps, became captain, and had over 30 more caps than makelele despite being 3 years younger and making his debut 2 years after Makelele? Simply because a box-to-box MF is better than an anchor. Almost all box-to-box MFs are starters for club and country - Gerrard, Vidal, Toure, Vieira, Keane, Davids, Matthaus, Pogba. Davids played with Zidane, arguably the greatest of his generation; why was Davids not asked by his coaches at Juvey to just sit in front of the back four in an ultra-defensive league? Keane played with Scholes; why was there a need for Keane to move forward. Yet Makelele played with lampard and still refused to move beyond the center circle.

Yes we were shown footage of Makelele in Nantes; now show us footage of Makalele advancing in Celta Vigo, Madrid or Chelsea.

Katsumoto: Davids played the same game as Makelele and did more; it wasn't different. Davids, Keane, Vieira were all anchor men who HAD the ABILITY to go forward in top tier football. We have seen footage of Makelele doing the same in a second tier French league but not in Spain or England. Davids started in the second tier as well but moving to a top league (Seria A), he did not become limited. He excelled at Juvey.

Makelele played a different game in France than what he played in Spain and England because he was simply limited. Essien who replaced Makelele went forward more than Makelele or why wasn't Essien also just a sitter

Bale changed position to enhance the skill he has; Makelele didn't change position; he only stopped going forward in superior leagues possibly because his coaches and himself likewise realised he didn't have what it took to play box-box in top tier football.

Mikel is another example of a Makelele; he regressed as a footballer. Whatever Mikel may have done in Norway, he never attempted to replicate at Chelsea. Was it not the same Mikel we saw at the WC who kept slowing the Nigerian game down and did fork all?

Training and actual matches are very different things. The pressure and opposition are different. We can all do things when we have time to do it without the concomitant pressure. The best students at Uni don't usually become the most successful in life.

Anyway I have made my point; I won't belabour the point any further.

Makelele was an excellent anchor but he wasn't the best because he was limited, at least in a top tier league.

Katsumoto: I think you missed my point.

The anchor men who are better than Davids were all able to showcase their skillset in all the leagues they played in. If Makelele could only showcase more skillset in France but not in Spain and England, then he is limited. Davids, Rijkaard, Matthaus, Vieira, Simeone, etc all did it at the highest level; why was Makelele only able to show his skills in France?

Like I said, championship players are able to score magnificent goals in the championship but not in the premiership - the quality of opposition is key in determining whether you have a skill or not. If you take your 5/6 yr old nephews and their friends for a kick-about, I am sure you would display Messi like skills.

Katsumoto: The quality of the league matters. Why is it that players that score incredible goals in the championship can't replicate such goals in the premiership. Don't teams who win the Championship, move up to the Premiership, end up being relegated? Don't get me wrong, Nantes was a good team but shoe get size.

The french league is second tier in Europe. What did Makelele do in Spain and in England? and what was is consistency?
What are his stats in terms of goals, assists, key passes?

Isn't it ironic that a Chelsea supporter has to use footage from when Makelele played for Nantes to showcase his 'skills'? After Nantes he went to Marseille, Celta Vigo, Real Madrid and then Chelsea.

Sagamite: [s]You are a cretinous person!

So you are a person's person lap-dog? [/s]

Sagamite: You are a cretinous person!

Are you him to be explaining what he meant?

So you mean your position is so low, you are not a mere person, you are a spokesman of a person?

Sagamite: Cretinous person, why do you continue trying to be like Sagamite?

Who calls bbw curves juice?

You cannot be me. You are too dumb.

MizMyColi: Boo, you knew, all this while of the unique relationship I have with him.

You should know also that when I talk of marriage and kids, they're just jokes, I mean! He didn't ask me to marry him like you did.
Agreed, He's someone I really like, but its on an entirely different pedestal compared to what I have with you.

I thought we had an understanding of these things.
I admit though that I might have crossed the line on several occasions, I'm sorry. I'll work at it.

Its strange, but I feel somewhat pained

Guapo, I am your friend, your e-wife. (Except you now consider me differently)

afrodoc2: LOL
U don come back from pub already?

afrodoc2: Elampiro see me too o
Tomorrow now no go cry say ayagayagayo o!
For this one we dey support u o

PietroRico: Na di maria cause all this one so.
The dude isn't worth £60m.
We overpaid. Simple.

But then again, clubs(especially the big ones) overpay for 75% of their players these days.

We all saw the amount with which porto and lazio bought martins indi and de Vrij(two players linked. with us by the press at different points in time). Peanuts!

Had united's interest been real, we Would have been made to pay times 3.

The long and short of the whole issue is that over paying is now a norm in today's market.

4llerbuntu: kai. im tired.

so please link how this u have posted binds a player to a club/compels him to move to another club.

clearly it is clubs that participate in the FA's competitions. so quite naturally a player will not register himself with the FA.

so when club a buys the right to register a player, and acquire the right to use this player for economic gain (that is use this player in that FA's competitions), how then does the club compel the player to work for them?

so if they buy the 'federative' rights, how does this bind a player who decides that he would rather spend his time on the beach in brazil?

u do realize this is not a master slave scenario right?


lord....... this is remarkably hard

4llerbuntu: "Buy the contract"

"Assign the rights under the contract"

"terminate the contract"



looools for days. this is puretrips

"they don't buy the contract", the don't assign the contract", but they buy the economic rights under the contract?

kai. man utd thread is a wonderful place

Therefore, in order to characterise “economic rights”, it is necessary to refer
to the concept of “federative right”. The “federative right” is the right of a
club to register, by virtue of an employment contract, a player with a national
federation or professional league in order to allow him to participate in the
official competitions organised by such sporting organisations. Clubs only
hold this federative right due to this employment relationship.
The “economic rights” are linked to the federative right since they refer to
the financial income arising from a transfer of a player’s federative right.
Put in other words, they are the pecuniary rights of the assignment of the
federative right of a player from one club to another.

4llerbuntu: no wonder!!

this dolt does not even understand what an assignment of rights under a contract means.


this free legal lecture i'm giving you sef.........


dunce, when a contract is assigned, the assignee adopts the position of the assignor. that is, he steps into the place of the assignor, and becomes entitled to exercise the rights of the assignor, and is obligated to take up the burden borne by the assignor under that contract.

it is as if there is a replacement of 'persons'.

what this effectively means is, using your manyoo and chelsea analogy, chelsea will become entitled to exercise whatever rights manyoo had under that contract. chelsea takes the place of manyoo. you can as well replace the name of manyoo with chelsea under it.


you know how coogar owns a house and the C of O is in his name.
then he sells to you and gives you the C of O. now it will still be in Coogars name at the time, obviously, till you change it to your name.

in that period that you had not changed it, the property is still yours as you have a deed of assignment stating that coogar has transferred it to you, inspite of the fact that coogar's name is still on the title.



now as i painstakingly explained earlier, a players contract is a MULTI-PARTY AGREEMENT meaning you have to carry along the player when making this deal, otherwise the player may decide to resile and go to court to be extricated from it.



i have deliberately refrained from throwing insults with you. i advice you do same. not only are you making a mockery of you self with your illogical and unlearned arguments, but you are also looking like a fool with all the ad-hominems


damn, don't think i ever met anyone this obtuse

A contract between Man Utd and Rooney cannot be enforced by Chelsea Unless Chelsea can show a document that states that Man Utd has assigned their rights to them!

raumdeuter: WHat determines the value of a player are

1. The current skillset of the player

2. Prices/avalaibilty of comparable players with same skills

3. Lenght of contract

4 Speculated future improvement

5. Need of the buying team(How important is the role he needs to fill) and How important is the role he is currently filling for his old team - These would affect his valuation

6. Marketability

7 Other miscellaneous factors

4llerbuntu: i doubt if you even read to comprehend.

when man yoo and chelsea do their agreement in writing, how does that agreement bind rooney or compel rooney to be obligated to chelsea?

smh.

A contract between Man Utd and Rooney cannot be enforced by Chelsea Unless Chelsea can show a document that states that Man Utd has assigned their rights to them!

4llerbuntu: you do know contracts are assignable ......... right?....

if there is no assignment, how does the player get released from his contract original? they terminate it how? without the players consent
or they all just pretend it does not exist?

or is a football contract only about "economic rights' without more?


ok. no need to pursue this further.

you don't have the knowledge nor the nous to argue this effectively. keep quoting a wikipedia article that uses american legal terminology for your half-assed assertion.

4llerbuntu: To transfer a player you will

i. Buy what is leftover of the contract.

this is because upon execution, the player is entitled to the entire sum in the contract (unless some release clause in included which reduces the club's exposure)

secondly, the rights which the club has over the player cannot be exercised by the purchaser under that contract as they are not a party to the contract! A contract between Man Utd and Rooney cannot be enforced by Chelsea unless Chelsea can show a document that states that Man Utd has assigned their rights to them!

therefore, what enables them to exercise this rights is the proof of assignment. This is what sharp agents have over young players at the start until a club purchases it. E.G THIS IS WHAT SHITTU HAD WITH MIKEL THAT ENABLED HIM SELL TO MAN UTD RATHER THAN CHELSEA. THEY HAD NOT SIGNED THE ASSIGNMENT OF HIS RIGHTS OVER MIKEL YET.