Taipan

I am trying to get my head around how the agents conflict of interest issues are or should be handled. Using one current case as an example: It would be perfectly okay for Chelsea to meet with Wayne Bridge's agent, while it would be illegal for Chelsea to meet with Ashley Cole's agent. But Cole and Bridge both have the same agent - Jonathon Barnett. How does that work? My guess is that both parties should limit their discussions to just the issue at hand. In this case the agent should only discuss Bridge and his contract with Chelsea and avoid any discussion of Cole. That situation in general raises some questions, but the Bridge / Cole case seems trickier still. My understanding is that Bridge is content at Chelsea, but if Chelsea sign Cole then he wants to accept an offer to go to Newcastle. In that situation it would be quite reasonable for Bridge's agent to meet with Chelsea and ask what is happening with Ashley Cole. But it would be illegal for Cole's agent to approach Chelsea and ask the same question. How should that work?

I actually think it is the other way around: Physically this league is made to play against Adriano. Adriano has made his name to a large extent by physically overpowering defenders from less physical leagues. Like Drogba. Defenders in England might not be the best technical defenders in the world, but in general they are the strongest and most physical. When facing defenders who don't fall off him whenever he gives them a little hip and shoulder he'll be forced to rely on other parts of his game. That is when the shortcomings in his game will become even more apparent than they are now. Like Drogba. I don't think being physical is in any way a requirement for a striker to succeed in England. Thinking of the most successful strikers - like Henry, Fowler, Owen, RVN etc I think there is only Shearer who you could say had physical presence as a huge part of their game. I think Adriano would be much less effective in England than he has been in Italy - and he has been cack there for 18 months. He'd do better in Spain.

The way I see it is this: Diamond = European formation. Occasioanally in the league as well, but more often than previous seasons: Drogba Shevchenko Ballack Lampard Essien Makelele Cole(?) Terry Carvalho Gallas Cech Points of note: - Ballack (or whoever has that position at the tip of the diamond) has a free role in attack to go wherever he likes. It is the role Deco had at Porto; - The other midfielders have very restricted roles and will not be able to leave their positions at all. In particular for Lampard this means he will not be able to make runs into the box which is where he gets most of his goals; - The LB and RB have far more license to attack than in the more familiar 4-3-3 system. As there are no wingers they are expected to go forward, provide the width and deliver the crosses. Delivering the crosses is a key job for the fullbacks in this formation. Having the right footed Gallas at LB is one of the reasons Chelsea has struggled with this formation. It is also the reason Geremi (who isn't a right back) has sometimes been picked at RB ahead of Ferreira - because he is a far better crosser. He might even get a start ahead of Gallas and Ferreira. - The best Robben and Joe Cole can hope for is a spot on the bench covering Ballack's position. Maybe a start if Ballack is injured, or if he is moved back into the Lampard/Essien positions to cover an injury. SWP has no place in this formation. If he even makes the bench it is only to make up the numbers. In general the diamond packs the middle of the park with a lot of players. The two strikers will be pressing the CBs who will have no time on the ball. It does give the opposition space out wide. Opposition wingers and full backs will get some space and time on the ball. The theory is that it should be very difficult to do anything constructive with it, as when they look to get the ball back inside it is packed with Chelsea players who outnumber the opposition in that part of the field. I think it is a very negative system. It tries to strangle the opposition, rather than defeat them with superior football.

Here it is: link What exactly is your problem with that thread? I think you might have got mixed up with this thread in the Newbies forum - which they use to vet new posters before allowing them to post on the main forum. If anything that thread does credit to Redcafe. Not because of the idiotic views of french88devil, but because after six months and over 870 posts french88devil is still a Newbie and not able post on the main forum. Give Redcafe a little credit for some quality control there.

Barring injury, the first competative game he will play for Chelsea will be against Liverpool. On August 13 in the Charity Shield.

and Ruud Van Nistelrooy, Stam, Robben, Eidur Gudjohnsen (before he went to Bolton), Kezman, Cocu, to name a few... Arnesen has the best record for identifying and developing talent around, which is why Chelsea paid the big money. He was at Spurs for just over a year, and look at his results there from signing largely unknown youngsters.

http://www.footballtransfers.net/ They don't go 10 years, but apart from that limitation they've got the best site with the most information on transfers.

Madness. Of course if someone like Everton or Spurs won the Champions League they would get the same prize money as if another English team won it. But it would be far more difficult for them or another newcomer to win than it would be for a G14 team. The reason is the seedings. A G14 team will get an easier draw. If Spurs finished above Arsenal they would still be guaranteed a far more difficult draw because of the seedings going back five years - a system developed by the G14. Take Arsenal for example. Under the seeding system they are drawn as one of the top eight teams, and have been for years. But they have never progressed past the quarter finals. They have achieved that seeding by getting past the group stage every year, and then twice winning the first of the knockout rounds. That is hardly an impressive performance considering the teams they are drawn with - and that they have usually struggled with the group stages: Arsenal's Champions League Groups: 2000/2001 Lazio Sparta Praha Shakhtar Donetsk 2001/2002 Real Mallorca Panathinaikos Schalke 04 2002/2003 Borussia Dortmund PSV Eindhoven AJ Auxerre 2003/2004 Lokomotiv Moscow Dinamo Kiev Inter Milan 2004/2005 PSV Eindhoven Rosenborg Panathinaikos 2005/2006 Sparta Praha FC Thun Ajax If Spurs or Everton got to the group stage they would have a much harder draw. That is how it works. Of course that favours the established clubs, but they did make the rules so it is hardly suprising.

UEFA get 25% of the CL Money. The clubs (mostly the G14 clubs) get the rest. Look here and here where the 75% of the money that directed to the clubs has gone. Those figures are prize money only and don't include additional sponsorship or gates that those rich clubs receive. That actual benefit to the rich clubs would be much much greater than those figures show. The rich are getting richer. Now for the 25% of the money that UEFA gets. See here for an example of some of those payments, and the criteria (like youth development programs) they use. The Champions League as it exists now is the creation of the G14. That is what the G14 do. In particular the seeding system to assist the established clubs as much as possible, and the allocation of prize money which allocates the vast majority of it to the few clubs that progress past the group stage. The way the finances concentrates the wealth to a few clubs has had a massively desctructive effect on all the football leagues across Europe. You can debate as to the ideal format for the CL as much as you like. But any change that concentrates the wealth among a few wealthy clubs even more than it is now will only have a negative effect on football. Personally, I think the G14 and what they are doing is very damaging football.

The following list is the minutes played per goal scored not including penalties for a selection of strikers. Where a player has scored one or more penalties the figure in brackets is the minutes per goal including penalties. It is for the league only. Note that this is only a selection. There are lots of strikers, particularly from middle and lower ranked teams not included. The list is current as at March 10. 129 - Owen 130 - Crespo 130 - RVN (116) 139 - Henry (123) 146 - Hasselbaink 174 - Robbie Keane (157) 180 - Drogba 189 - Bellamy (165) 196 - Mido (178) 198 - Saha 200 - Helguson (143) 206 - Defoe 209 - Camara 215 - Yakubu (165) 220 - Van Persie 223 - Kanu 235 - Horsfield 240 - Rooney 249 - McBride 253 - Beattie (221) 308 - Sheringham (231) 340 - Baros (283) 397 - Fowler 420 - Crouch 441 - Cisse (331) 490 - Morientes 502 - Heskey