• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

The Football News Thread 2023/24

Lycan said:
Kevin Doyle
Click to expand...
Fair one, like legitimately could see him playing for a top 6 club to you don't deserve to get in a League One team in about three years.

Colin Cameron was an overnight drop off but his legs had just gone. Similarly with Stephen Hunt, even giving him the benefit of the doubt you could tell after about three games that we'd made a horrible mistake.
 
Europa League draw

Sparta Prague vs Liverpool
Marseille vs Villarreal
Roma vs Brighton
Benfica vs Rangers
Freiburg vs West Ham
Sporting Lisbon vs Atalanta
AC Milan vs Slavia Prague
Qarabag vs Bayer Leverkusen
 
Roma v Brighton should be fun!

Marseille and Villarreal showing the format is a bit busted, though (not that I have a solution).
 

Get this man to the Prem ASAP.
 
I'll put it on here because it's inappropriate to do so on the RIP thread. The 70s maverick narrative George, Bowles, Worthington, Currie etc as characters and it being the greatest decade in English football as per Hugh Johns and others doesn't stand up to scrutiny for me. We didn't qualify for 2 World Cups and although they were only 16 team tournaments 10 of the teams in Argentina were from Europe. So they may have been characters, they may have had moments of individual skill, but largely they weren't picked for a poor England side across 4 managers and I'm guessing that's for a reason, the same one as Hoddle wasn't in the 80s, and Le Tissier a decade or so later, all about them and not the team. The ultimate YouTube players way before the Internet was invented
 
Last edited:
Tony Towner said:
I'll put it on here because it's inappropriate to do so on the RIP thread. The 70s maverick narrative George, Bowles, Worthington, Currie etc as characters and it being the greatest decade in English football as per Hugh Johns and others doesn't stand up to scrutiny for me. We didn't qualify for 2 World Cups and although they were only 16 team tournaments 10 of the teams in Argentina were from Europe. So they may have been characters, they may have had moments of individual skill, but largely they weren't picked for a poor England side across 4 managers and I'm guessing that's for a reason, the same one as Hoddle wasn't in the 80s, and Le Tissier a decade or so later, all about them and not the team. The ultimate YouTube players way before the Internet was invented
Click to expand...
You can take that view if you wish but as a football fan, players like George, Bowles, Worthington, Currie, Hudson etc were absolutely fantastic entertaining players. I'd still rather watch players with their talent than the vast majority of today's players, most of whom can't kick a ball with two feet. England weren't unsuccessful because of them IMO, it was because we had people in charge who were too scared to take a chance and didn't have a winning mentality. Safety first was their motto and fear of failure the order of the day.
 
Last edited:
100% spot on Squeak !

Management of the England national team post Ramsay (or basically post the 1970 WC as the game was leaving him behind) was abysmal IMO.

And during this period, English clubs were hugely successful in Europe across all 3 tournaments.
 
KiwiWolf61 said:
100% spot on Squeak !

Management of the England national team post Ramsay (or basically post the 1970 WC as the game was leaving him behind) was abysmal IMO.

And during this period, English clubs were hugely successful in Europe across all 3 tournaments.
Click to expand...
Fact was English clubs were hugely successful but none of the mavericks named (Best is the exception to all of this) played for any of the successful teams of the time, so wasn't just England's managers who didn't trust them
Likes of Shankley , Paisley, Revie, Clough (tried Bowles) etc some of the greats didnt want them either.

Between them the only major honour they won was a European Cup Winners Cup for Hudson when he 1st broke into the Chelsea side.
Yes they were skillful & entertaining but when it came to winning stuff they weren't upto it, look at Bowles time at Forest.

Of the others only time they got signed by big clubs is generally a manager rolling the dice when a great team was on the slide & it didn't work
Hudson with Arsenal
Currie with Leeds
 
Donegal Wolf said:
Fact was English clubs were hugely successful but none of the mavericks named (Best is the exception to all of this) played for any of the successful teams of the time, so wasn't just England's managers who didn't trust them
Likes of Shankley , Paisley, Revie, Clough (tried Bowles) etc some of the greats didnt want them either.

Between them the only major honour they won was a European Cup Winners Cup for Hudson when he 1st broke into the Chelsea side.
Yes they were skillful & entertaining but when it came to winning stuff they weren't upto it, look at Bowles time at Forest.

Of the others only time they got signed by big clubs is generally a manager rolling the dice when a great team was on the slide & it didn't work
Hudson with Arsenal
Currie with Leeds
Click to expand...
Bowles was never going to get along with Clough. He was brought in to add depth to their squad and only played 19 times. He was a maverick who wanted to have fun playing the game. He ruled himself out of the 1980 European Cup final when Clough wouldn't let him play in John Robertson's testimonial and that shows where his priorities lay. Far rather help a mate out than worry about medals.

It's understandable that managers didn't particularly want players of this mould but all of them knew they could be game changers or game winners. The managers you mention all wanted a certain type of player and the team ethos was higher than any individual. Also, all of those managers wanted complete control over their players and team. I sometimes wonder how they'd cope with the multi-millionaire players of today.

Personally, I just enjoyed those players for the way they played and the higher skill level they possessed than most of their contemporaries. Doesn't really matter what they won or didn't win in my book. Football was in a different place then when multiple teams could win things. Today, we are obsessed with teams, managers or players and judging them on what they win or don't win. Judgement based on this tells only part of the story.
 
The fact that Trevor Brooking was a regular in the team probably explains why in the late 1970s and early 1980s England underachieved. A neat and tidy player but had he played for Coventry rather than West Ham I suspect he’d have had no caps.
 
Donegal Wolf said:
Fact was English clubs were hugely successful but none of the mavericks named (Best is the exception to all of this) played for any of the successful teams of the time, so wasn't just England's managers who didn't trust them
Likes of Shankley , Paisley, Revie, Clough (tried Bowles) etc some of the greats didnt want them either.

Between them the only major honour they won was a European Cup Winners Cup for Hudson when he 1st broke into the Chelsea side.
Yes they were skillful & entertaining but when it came to winning stuff they weren't upto it, look at Bowles time at Forest.

Of the others only time they got signed by big clubs is generally a manager rolling the dice when a great team was on the slide & it didn't work
Hudson with Arsenal
Currie with Leeds
Click to expand...
Charlie George won a Fairs Cup and a League & Cup Double all with Arsenal (scoring a memorable winner in the 71' Cup Final.

Alan Hudson was unlucky in 1970 as he'd played in every cup match before he was injured for the final.

Stan Bowles best football was when he was playing for QPR in their excellent 70s team. Very unlucky not to win the League in 75/76. I was gobsmacked when he joined Forest as there was no way I could see him and Cloughie seeing eye to eye.

Tony Currie spent most of his best years at Sheffield Utd and by the time he'd joined Leeds in 1976 they were not the force they were in the 60s and early 70s.

This was a time when the best players were not all gobbled up by the few top clubs at the top of the pyramid. Yes there a pyramid but it was far flatter - Squeak's post at 2.28am says it all so well.

The more and more I look back it was simply a totally different game to that of today - pitches, stadiums, fitness management, referees (much inferior today), VAR (???), tackles/fouls (the thuggery has pretty well been eliminated now), and of course money which to summarise had led to a clique of 6/7 clubs that are so financially advantaged over the rest that competing for a major trophy is almost an impossibility.
 
Kenny said:
Everton points deduction changed to 6
Click to expand...
What's the point so ?

Clubs will break the rules if they feel that they worst that will happen is a 6 point deduction .

It also sets the precedent as well for others .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lupo
Premier League 2023-24
Replies
11
Views
921
Wolf Hunting
Wolf Hunting
Lupo
Fan Advisory Board
Replies
9
Views
1K
Paddingtonwolf
Paddingtonwolf
Deutsch Wolf
  • Locked
Luton (H) 27/4 - Build-Up & Match Thread
7 8 9
Replies
175
Views
3K
jd1981
jd1981
darlowolf64
2023/24 Season Fixtures
3 4 5
Replies
92
Views
5K
Butters
Butters
Deutsch Wolf
  • Locked
Chelsea (A) 4/2: Build-Up & Match Thread
17 18 19
Replies
372
Views
8K
Wolf Hunting
Wolf Hunting
Back
Top