blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 20, 2025, 10:58:45 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2262345 Posts in 66605 Topics by 16991 Members
Latest Member: nolankerwin
* Home Help Arcade Search Calendar Guidelines Login Register
+  blonde poker forum
|-+  Community Forums
| |-+  Betting Tips and Sport Discussion
| | |-+  Martin O Neil
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 ... 14 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Martin O Neil  (Read 31967 times)
Snowball
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1455


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: December 09, 2012, 01:32:43 PM »

Celtic and rangers are only big clubs in Scotland.
That confirms it, Celtic are the biggest Club the World has ever seen.
Back to MON chat.
Logged
Snowball
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1455


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: December 09, 2012, 01:44:32 PM »

Fan base is clearly a good measure, not the measure but a good one.

and Celtic are clearly a massive club, you only need to look at any home Champions League match to see that.


In England there are plenty of big clubs outside the premiership and plenty of small ones in. In that, I would argue that fan base is much more important tnat the league you are in to argue which teams are big or not. Not that it matters!



Good post although I would add Celtic's away support which has consistently took huge Numbers all over Europe, when you consider where our Supporters core Base is in Geographical terms to mainland Europe only a Handful of Clubs can compete in that terms.
"Football without Fans is nothing"
Logged
Alverton
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1010



View Profile
« Reply #47 on: December 09, 2012, 01:59:52 PM »

Big/small club discussion is always fairly redundant, as its all relevant.  My football watching life has been the '93-94 onwards, so therefore I can't rate some teams history as highly as for example Tighty can. 

MON has always been slightly overrated, but is still a solid mid table manager.  Sunderland imo are only a Darren Bent and a bit more depth in defence away from being a fairly safe midtable side.
Logged
Teacake
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2526



View Profile
« Reply #48 on: December 09, 2012, 02:03:35 PM »

Celtic and rangers are only big clubs in Scotland.

Couldn't disagree more.

They're the weakest they've ever been, but they are huge clubs.

Rangers are at the weakest they have ever been, they went into admin and ultimately liquidation and a new club was formed in the summer that now plays in the 4th tier of Scottish football.

Celtic are in the last 16 of the CL and virtually debt free, we stand to make in the region of €30m from the CLthis season. We operate on a Moneyball type model, buying low and selling high, Wanyama, Forster and Hooper were signed for a combined total of around £5m if we had to sell them we would get around £30m. We do this because of the lack of revenue generated from the SPL, the country that we play in is the only thing holding us back.

If there was a 20 team European League Celtic would absolutely be in it.
Logged
bobby1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9573



View Profile
« Reply #49 on: December 09, 2012, 02:05:05 PM »

O Neil looked shot on MOTD last night, tho the question that annoyed him was pretty crass.
Logged

“The two most important days in your life are the day you are born and the day you find out why.”
Teacake
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2526



View Profile
« Reply #50 on: December 09, 2012, 02:06:49 PM »

Big/small club discussion is always fairly redundant, as its all relevant.  My football watching life has been the '93-94 onwards, so therefore I can't rate some teams history as highly as for example Tighty can. 



That's a good point, you get the impression that some people think Sky invented football.
Logged
Alverton
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1010



View Profile
« Reply #51 on: December 09, 2012, 02:12:10 PM »

Big/small club discussion is always fairly redundant, as its all relevant.  My football watching life has been the '93-94 onwards, so therefore I can't rate some teams history as highly as for example Tighty can. 



That's a good point, you get the impression that some people think Sky invented football.

More my age and Sky football concidentally started when I started watching.  Has Sky been bad for football overall?
Logged
david3103
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6089



View Profile
« Reply #52 on: December 09, 2012, 02:13:15 PM »

given the extent of the Scots diaspora it's hardly surprising that the two biggest Scottish clubs have a lot of far flung support.

the aussie and US 'Scots' are more likely to assert their link to the auld country by supporting whichever of the Old Firm best fits their religious and or political sense of themselves.

as for MON, daresay he'll always find a club to employ him but doubt it will ever be a big one in future
Logged

It's more about the winning than the winnings

5 November 2012 - Kinboshi says "Best post ever on blonde thumbs up"
bobby1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9573



View Profile
« Reply #53 on: December 09, 2012, 02:13:49 PM »

Big/small club discussion is always fairly redundant, as its all relevant.  My football watching life has been the '93-94 onwards, so therefore I can't rate some teams history as highly as for example Tighty can. 



That's a good point, you get the impression that some people think Sky invented football.

absolutely, it is embarrassing the way they portray football, especially records/achievements pre the Premier league.
Logged

“The two most important days in your life are the day you are born and the day you find out why.”
George2Loose
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15127



View Profile
« Reply #54 on: December 09, 2012, 02:16:12 PM »

Personally think Sky's coverage over the years has been excellent and contributed to the overall success of the PL.
Logged

Ole Ole Ole Ole!
celtic
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 19178



View Profile
« Reply #55 on: December 09, 2012, 02:17:27 PM »

given the extent of the Scots diaspora it's hardly surprising that the two biggest Scottish clubs have a lot of far flung support.

the aussie and US 'Scots' are more likely to assert their link to the auld country by supporting whichever of the Old Firm best fits their religious and or political sense of themselves.

as for MON, daresay he'll always find a club to employ him but doubt it will ever be a big one in future

Or maybe they support the team that their family supported?

I am less religious than Kinboshi.
Logged

Keefy is back Smiley But for how long?
bobby1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9573



View Profile
« Reply #56 on: December 09, 2012, 02:24:35 PM »

Personally think Sky's coverage over the years has been excellent and contributed to the overall success of the PL.

It's a sport tho not a soap opera, you cannot just change the script of football pre 92/93 and act like it didn't happen.

I cannot think of a better example than the insistence that last years top league title was the closest title triumph ever simply because they want to ignore the game pre Prem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liverpool_0%E2%80%932_Arsenal_(26_May_1989)
Logged

“The two most important days in your life are the day you are born and the day you find out why.”
celtic
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 19178



View Profile
« Reply #57 on: December 09, 2012, 02:26:22 PM »

Personally think Sky's coverage over the years has been excellent and contributed to the overall success of the PL.

It's a sport tho not a soap opera, you cannot just change the script of football pre 92/93 and act like it didn't happen.

I cannot think of a better example than the insistence that last years top league title was the closest title triumph ever simply because they want to ignore the game pre Prem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liverpool_0%E2%80%932_Arsenal_(26_May_1989)

Loved that game. One of the few times I have jumped out my seat, whilst watching as a neutral.
Logged

Keefy is back Smiley But for how long?
bobby1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9573



View Profile
« Reply #58 on: December 09, 2012, 02:33:07 PM »

Personally think Sky's coverage over the years has been excellent and contributed to the overall success of the PL.

It's a sport tho not a soap opera, you cannot just change the script of football pre 92/93 and act like it didn't happen.

I cannot think of a better example than the insistence that last years top league title was the closest title triumph ever simply because they want to ignore the game pre Prem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liverpool_0%E2%80%932_Arsenal_(26_May_1989)

Loved that game. One of the few times I have jumped out my seat, whilst watching as a neutral.

Could literally have been the turning point for football, after the horrors of that season the emotion was unreal. I think most neutrals wanted Arsenal to win but felt guilty because if you could have wished a happy ending for any club that season it would have been Liverpool. The title was won on goals scored after they finished level on points and goal difference yet anyone that doesn't remember this has been told repeatedly that last seasons title was the closest ever. Just putting a different name to the league doesn't change the historic days before.


and it also featured one of the few genuine sporting comms that was so simple and so perfect in Brian Moore's 'its up for grabs now' as Thomas went thru the middle and scored.

Put that perfect piece next to Phil Thompson shouting 'shoooooootttt' every 2 minutes on Soccer Saturday in an attempt to generate some fake excitement when a striker has missed by 4 yards.

« Last Edit: December 09, 2012, 02:39:48 PM by bobby1 » Logged

“The two most important days in your life are the day you are born and the day you find out why.”
The Baron
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9558


View Profile
« Reply #59 on: December 09, 2012, 03:22:17 PM »

Celtic and rangers are only big clubs in Scotland.

Couldn't disagree more.

They're the weakest they've ever been, but they are huge clubs.

Rangers are at the weakest they have ever been, they went into admin and ultimately liquidation and a new club was formed in the summer that now plays in the 4th tier of Scottish football.

Celtic are in the last 16 of the CL and virtually debt free, we stand to make in the region of €30m from the CLthis season. We operate on a Moneyball type model, buying low and selling high, Wanyama, Forster and Hooper were signed for a combined total of around £5m if we had to sell them we would get around £30m. We do this because of the lack of revenue generated from the SPL, the country that we play in is the only thing holding us back.

If there was a 20 team European League Celtic would absolutely be in it.


Sorry I meant in terms of personnel on the pitch. But as Celtic pointed out you have had weaker squads than your current one.

Basically Celtic and Rangers need to be in the English leagues.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 ... 14 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.102 seconds with 20 queries.