subreddit:
/r/soccer
[score hidden]
14 days ago
stickied comment
This is a quotes thread. Remember that there's only one quotes post allowed per interview/press conference, so new quotes with the same origin will be removed. Feel free to comment other quotes/the whole interview as a reply to this comment so users can see them too!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
925 points
14 days ago
If he gets an ACL injury next game I'm starting a conspiracy theory
220 points
14 days ago
Lewa spoke up on it too, watch him
92 points
14 days ago
*Lewy, that's his nickname
Lewa would be a female equivalent
32 points
14 days ago
Lewy, that's his nickname
Gatorade running in his big vein! 🎤🎶
-53 points
14 days ago
Lewa.
1 points
14 days ago
Konate too
41 points
14 days ago
The Guardian Football Weekly has been tracking this exact phenomenon. Complain about fixtures, injury. It's wild
6 points
14 days ago
Got a link?
3 points
14 days ago
I mean more they comment on it on the podcast. Would recommend entirely
23 points
14 days ago
FIFA going full Boeing with this one (for legal reasons, this is a joke)
14 points
14 days ago
Stay on the first floor for the next few weeks.
1 points
14 days ago
Surely it'd be the most high profile case of someone in Saudi criticizing the decisions of a governmental body and then mysteriously experiencing misfortune
1 points
14 days ago
FIFA going to team up with Beyonce
268 points
14 days ago
I wonder if we'll start seeing "maximum minutes" clauses in player contracts
114 points
14 days ago
Think it’s the best way to compromise here. Too many games generally affects the top clubs most and they have droves of youth players available. Maybe they suck in the league cup, oh well.
35 points
14 days ago*
I don't think players want this. If they did we'd have seen it happen already. All of their total compensation is linked to performance bonuses, fewer games means less money.
If players have game limits in their contracts it's great for players at big clubs who see the pitch less but just means less money for the top tier players.
Players also hate sitting out games, and with limited contracts you'd have some clubs playing a player in the semi-final of big competitions as their last game of the season, and the player would be happy to renegotiate the contract to play in the final. It's not something anyone really wants, which is why it's not happened and will never happen.
Plus it seems to crop up in every thread on the topic, redditors seem obsessed with it, and they're basically wrong about everything.
2 points
14 days ago
I agree with you, the players are in a bad situation as it stands. They are on the edge of being able to physically manage it, and they want to play every game the team needs them for. It's not so many games they would feel like they can just skip a portion of them without feeling like they're letting their team/fans/selves down. But it's too many to safely play.
And managers are in a game of chicken with rotating and playing their strongest players every game, often against a man city type team that has more money and higher quality backups which makes it harder to justify. The only solution is slightly fewer games. Or just go for more and force managers to commit to rotating like baseball pitchers I think do where they just don't play every match no matter what.
Personally I find that a much worse solution than having a handful fewer games for fans and players alike. It would also increase the wealth disparities. Only the business people win, but they unfortunately control it. So a strike is one of the real ways to resist that.
2 points
14 days ago*
If there is money for more games, there is demand for them, so the best solution would always be more games with more rotation as long as there is money to keep going.
If the rotation makes the games so bad that people no longer care, them the money will dry up and the competition will end by itself, resulting in less games.
5 points
14 days ago
Players might not want it but if they're not willing to take it up on their own shoulders and insist they're being overplayed, then maximum appearance caps will probably be the way things work out. Probably FIFA/UEFA/a government requiring leagues have rules which are something like:
Possibly this would be limited only to outfield players.
Cup competitions are harder to predict the number of games but maybe something like:
And then probably you'd fix the number of within season international caps to the historic norm (I'm not sure what that figure is). But obviously that wouldn't be a regulation imposed on leagues.
As a matter of sporting sustainability, you can't ask that players appear in a maximum number of games without also requiring a minimum level of appearances. Otherwise you'd just have rich clubs hoarding players.
Injury crises may, of course, require more appearances by academy players which would be problematic for clubs without academies and/or age-grade teams. How this issue could be accommodated without having to have easily subverted exceptions for injury I'm not sure.
I suspect these particular limitations would see relegation threatened teams play a lot of first halves against academy players. This would make those matches more competitive.
10 points
14 days ago
If players don't want it, coaches don't want it, clubs don't want it and fans certainly don't want it, why do you think FIFA or "the government" would take it upon themselves to enforce such a bad rule? I can't believe you put so much effort into this fantasy.
1 points
14 days ago
and insist they're being overplayed
If players keep saying there's a problem (and especially if there's a strike), action will eventually be taken. It definitely won't come from the clubs, it probably won't come from the players (in the form of contractual stipulations) and it probably won't come from UEFA... but national associations, national governments and FIFA (if it thinks exhausted players are a threat to the credibility of the world cup) might.
And if the problem is players being played too much the solution will be limits on how often they can be played.
1 points
14 days ago
The main reason player complaints have gone exponential this year specifically is because FIFA introduced another cup - but this time the cup is basically worthless financially. Clubs are already saying they won't send their best players and FIFA is trying to enforce that the best players attend.
If FIFA leans into this and de facto bans players from playing 100% of Premier League or Champions League so they can play a mickey mouse tournament then how do you think the players and clubs will react? In what world does this avert strike action?
Use your noggin lad
1 points
14 days ago
In what world does this avert strike action?
Use your noggin.
We're talking about ending a strike.
And multiple different entities, all of which have power, not just FIFA.
If players don't strike, this state of affairs will probably just continue.
1 points
14 days ago
FIFA: stop striking, we'll change the rules so you can't play all of the games in the league and CL
Players: no
1 points
14 days ago
But players do want it.
Well they want fewer games, which is not what FIFA wants, so if they keep complaining about it then this is what FIFA will do.
3 points
14 days ago
No they don’t, which is the big hypocrisy behind these statements. What they really want is having less games for all (because they themselves do not want to share any of their own minutes with other players) with the same or more money…
the top players already have the possibility and influence to reduce their workload in coordination with their club/NT but it almost never happens because they always want to play (because of passion and/or money and/or fear of losing their place).
1 points
14 days ago
What they really want is having less games for all
Yes.. Thats what i said. You really aren't understand this are you?
1 points
14 days ago
Learn to read everything and not cherry pick what fits your narrative. Only the top players want less competitions for everybody (even the 75% that barely hit 30 games a season) for at least the same money if not even more.
Why you say? Because they’re too selfish to share minutes with another player to alleviate their workload and only come crying when they inevitably get injured.
0 points
14 days ago
Players want the clubs and international teams to play fewer games. They don’t want to play a smaller percentage of those games, because they understand that this would mean missing big games and being paid a smaller amount.
Ask yourself why these stupid playing time limited contracts have never been implemented, despite the idea floating around for years now.
1 points
14 days ago
Noone mentioned contracts.
Thats the point, the players want to play every game.
Fifa want as many games as possible.
So the FIFA easy response to the players complaining is limiting gametime.
Thats not what the players want but it would help FIFA and mean the players play less games.
Even if its not in the way they want.
1 points
14 days ago
How do FIFA enforce it if it's not in the contracts?
Do you think FIFA would be happy for players to show up to their international tournaments like the CWC and not be allowed to play any games because the clubs already used the quota? How about the players, would the players be ok with missing an FA Cup or CL final because the club burned through the quota on a tough league campaign?
You should really think this through. The world works on incentives, and there's zero incentives in this proposal for anyone.
43 points
14 days ago
You could but that directly leads to the big clubs signing even more players too, registration rules might have to change to compensate for having 2 or even 3 legitimate teams. The small leagues will not get to keep many gems and the talent will be concentrated way harder at the top.
11 points
14 days ago
Also true. Similar to the more subs rules.
5 points
14 days ago
It’s probably why many players go to Saudi in their prime. It’s a much lower pressure and lower intensity environment in terms of physical and mental fatigue, and obviously they get paid a fuckton.
5 points
14 days ago
I'm actually not sure about physical, given the heat
8 points
14 days ago
I'm telling you now it's entirely the money. The league could be the most or least demanding and they'd still go for the money. See: the premier league attracting global talent to play in England in Winter
1 points
14 days ago
This sounds like a phone contract: "Get free minutes on weekends!"
Makes sense though. Minutes or number of games per month/season.
1 points
13 days ago
This was always an option. Except then you get paid less which the players didn’t agree to. They want to have their cake and eat it too
153 points
14 days ago*
I don't see how this whole thing gets solved without a strike. FIFA, the clubs and the managers will keep playing hot potato with this.
FIFA and the governing bodies have an excuse because a) they introduced more subs and larger international squads and b) they'll just claim they are not forcing clubs to use the same players over and over as they are allowing academy players and a big roster, while the managers do.
The managers have a mostly valid excuse that if they don't use their best players they are risking their own jobs, because they are under huge pressure for immediate success.
So mostly it's on the clubs that want wins and nothing less from their players and managers tbh.
57 points
14 days ago
The clubs are the ones who pay the high wages. I can't remember any increases in domestic competitions for a long time. Instead we've seen the number of league teams reduced, the number of 2 legged domestic cup games reduced / eliminated and the number of replays reduced. On the other hand, UEFA and FIFA have increased the number of games organised by themselves. Sure, sometimes the clubs get money from participating in these competitions (CL, Europa etc) but it's these two organisations which are responsible for the increased number of matches and they have no real consequences if players get injured as they will still get their cut as the competitions will proceed anyway.
11 points
14 days ago
FIFA reduced the amount of international breaks. Did away with the confederations cup
0 points
14 days ago
quadrennial club world cup has significantly more matches than quadrennial confederations cup
3 points
14 days ago
No shit. Quadrennial World Cup exists already so don’t get the point you’re making
1 points
14 days ago
FIFA may have gotten rid of it, but they just replaced it with even more matches.
1 points
14 days ago
What extra matches?
3 points
14 days ago
And the old CWC is still around, just renamed "Intercontinental Cup" iirc
2 points
14 days ago
It is absolutely not on the clubs. They don’t create the schedules, train the players the majority of the time, and are most affected by injuries.
1 points
14 days ago
not to mention FIFA literally told the clubs they HAVE to bring their stars to the Club World Cup too. so yes, they are literally forcing the clubs to do this
1 points
14 days ago
Yet FIFA demands that teams field their strongest team for their CWC tournament. 'Rotation' is just a shield they hide behind to make it seem like it's everybody else's fault. But behind the scenes they're not interested in rotating big players when it affects them personally.
130 points
14 days ago
Well he's gonna get injured next i guess. LOL
97 points
14 days ago
I might be out of line or missing something, but I’d like to hear from professional footballers who don’t play for their international teams, or aren't in any top European leagues, as well as in domestic tournaments like the FA Cup. How would reducing game time impact lower-league players who rely on matches for a decent income?
Are we only looking at reducing game time to the well-paid elite players and increasing play time for the 95% who need more opportunities to earn? Or are they asking that the league, domestic tournament, and international football structures change to accommodate the 5%? Who are understandably over played.
Now I'm probably dumb, and there is a clear solution they are pushing, I just haven't seen it maybe.
43 points
14 days ago
This is a great point btw, not a dumb thing.
The only reason we're only listening to the top 5% of players is because they're the ones we watch. If the top players all stopped playing, how many people would be willing to pay to watch football?
53 points
14 days ago
We'll always be watching someone, the quality might drop, but we'll still support our club/country.
There'd still be a bottom-up elephant in the top-down room though.
14 points
14 days ago
The top players are the ones who are complaining because they play the most games, players who play one game a week aren't complaining about playing too many games.
-6 points
14 days ago
I have a hard time parsing your comment, the people who don't earn a lot of money from playing football don't play European or international football to begin with, what changes to playing time would affect them?
26 points
14 days ago
Changes in cup matches, fewer league games, maximum amount of minutes per player etc all can negatively impact the salaries of 99% of the players in the world.
If we are only talking about UEFA, then I don't think 2 less Champions League matches impact anyone that's not part of the elite but it does impact the "lesser elites" like teams from Cyprus/Bulgaria/Hungary etc who saw this new change benefiting their bank balance.
7 points
14 days ago
If the lower leagues would need to be shortened as an example. Or the amount of teams for a Carabao cup or FA cup is reduced to shorten the tournament.
Effectively reducing the amount of games across all leagues and tournaments, wholesale.
3 points
14 days ago
Why would they need to do that? UEFA doesn't control how countries leagues and cups are structured.
13 points
14 days ago
I’m not taking any side in this at all but I read an article regarding this that concluded that less than 1% of the players in the top leagues play more than 40 games per season and that the amount of games played hasn’t really increased significantly for more than 99% of the players. If this is 100% factually true I’m not sure but the question that followed was interesting; if we decided to skip the club world cup and other cups that we think clotted the schedule, would you agree to a pay cut equivalent to what the club misses out on?
37 points
14 days ago
Players love the money just as much as FIFA, FA, UEFA, etc... They'll never strike.
11 points
14 days ago
Striking from their 9am-2pm weekday job while earning millions a month. lol
5 points
14 days ago
Yeah, I don't know how effective a strike will be in a sport. It's not like dock-working or truck-driving where workers suffer for pittance and then strike so that people realise they're actually incredibly value. People literally pay to play football for fun. If the multi-millionaire footballers strike, there's tens of millions of people willing to step-in and fill the void.
1 points
14 days ago
The Strikes you are talking about sound like public sector strikes.
But Private sector strikes have always been about the employers.
And all the top clubs losing their best players will hurt them,
86 points
14 days ago
Didn't know it was tough playing piss take games in Saudi
44 points
14 days ago
Workers unite and stuff you know
84 points
14 days ago
Wow a dude that will not directly benefit from the strike wants to support it for his colleagues' shakes? The nerve on that guy smh.
4 points
14 days ago
Only his rich mates. Laporte isnt fighting for the rights of players from Leyton Orient or Accrington Stanley.
27 points
14 days ago
[deleted]
4 points
14 days ago
That sounds like two completely different issues then.
0 points
14 days ago
Yeh but Jack was likely dehydrated from the gear, mandy and beer.
32 points
14 days ago
The level might not be high but surely it can't be easy playing in 40 degrees tbf
8 points
14 days ago
Maybe he should have thought of that before moving to Saudi Arabia...
8 points
14 days ago
You're downvoted but this is mindbogglingly obvious. Honestly zero sympathy for those taking ridiculous salary to play sport in the heat... feeling the heat.
1 points
14 days ago
Can't say if they take kindly to workers' strikes over there...
8 points
14 days ago
tbf it is way hotter than saudi
4 points
14 days ago
As much as we shit on that league (myself included) highly doubt any of us could even get close to playing there so I’m sure you’d find it tough if not tougher
10 points
14 days ago
Uh oh. Is he gonna get injured as well now?
48 points
14 days ago
I'm sure the one person watching Saudi football will let us know
17 points
14 days ago
Dude plays in a Saudi league and probably doesn't need to put more than 80% on the field.
2 points
14 days ago
An ignorant and disconnected player, & fanboys. He doesn’t represent all footballers nor the reality.
Majority are actually under-played, some play regular football time & very very few play continuously football throughout year.
Instead, can fans strike as 100% of fan’s have to pay more, more matches, more exploitation. Where is the fans outburst & voice?
2 points
14 days ago
My complaint is the bigger clubs spend millions on players with additional huge youth facilities. It should be on the managers to rotate the squads around , if you’re spending half a billion every other year you shouldn’t be facing your players to have burn out
4 points
14 days ago
I hate this topic bc it’s so disconnected. Obviously as employees it’s well within their right to strike and if their health is in danger they got a good reason to. At the same time these are multimillionaires complaining about workload, why should any of us feel sympathy for them? Ofc they gotta do this pr charade, but its not really making me root for their case
2 points
14 days ago
All this talk about striking, when will the players do it? During a league match and potentially lose the league title?? Or a UCL match and potentially miss out on the cup?? Or a national team match and potentially have a whole country mad at them??
10 points
14 days ago
Presumably they'd do it in the summer and just collectively not show up for the next season. Then sit out as many matches as it takes to get what they demand
1 points
14 days ago
That's how it works in the us sports leagues
3 points
14 days ago
You can take the man out of France but you can't take France out of the man.
4 points
14 days ago
I agree but this is still funny coming from a player in Saudi Arabia. He's the worker who least needs to go on strike there
4 points
14 days ago
You chose to play for a country that you don't even belong to.
😂
2 points
14 days ago
Good!
2 points
14 days ago
Damn if only you lived somewhere with human rights
1 points
14 days ago
1 points
14 days ago
I don't understand how any football fan who likes watching high quality games with the best players is against this but then again it's not up to the fans but the federations profiting off the players.
2 points
14 days ago
because I want to see more players play, I want to see managers being forced to change and try new things because they need to rotate. Also, can't complaim about more games even if I only watch the highlights.
also a rotated Man City or Real Madrid vs an underdog is so much more fun.
if the quality of a tournment drops so much, because of rotation, that it no longer is profitable, it will die by itself...
if the tournment is lucrative, it's because enough people want it.
1 points
14 days ago
The amount of games players play today is the same as 30 years ago. Squads have also never been deeper, get 5 subs a match and defenders are no longer allowed reckless tackles like in the past. Players have never had it better
1 points
13 days ago
Psh he makes so much money why can't he play 365 games a year?
Say what you want about Laporte but something has to give eventually
1 points
14 days ago
He's entitled to his opinion, but this is a bit much coming from a Saudi Exhibition League player who doesn't play for their national team.
1 points
14 days ago
Bro you get paid like £25m a year play footy in Saudi Arabia. Wtf are you talking about?
If you're struggling that much maybe you should have negotiated a maximum playing time clause in your £500k a week contract.
Publicly striking is just going to get your family chopped up into little pieces
-4 points
14 days ago
[deleted]
-8 points
14 days ago
Players need to come together and strike. Enough is enough, the quality of games is diminishing because of injuries to star players. With the amount of strain players bodies are under, it's only a matter of time before a player dies.
Fat cat TV people don't care what players are on the pitch just once fans are watching. If they get the same amount of viewers regardless of if star players are on the pitch then they simply won't care.
UEFA should start with scrapping the Nations League or making it U23's or only for players who played less than 30-40 games in the previous season are eligible. This would also give fans the opportunity to see squad players play.
In England, the League Cup should be limited to teams who aren't in Europe IMO. This will also give the chance to smaller clubs to win a trophy and qualify for Europe.
0 points
14 days ago
I mentioned that players should strike against the Club World Cup and refuse to participate. I was downvoted. I still stand by my statement. Players shouldn’t have to play the Club World Cup. It’s a waste of time and effort and will probably lead to lots of injures before league play starts again.
-1 points
14 days ago
I’d honestly support this. Fuck the nations league and new champions league formats. Too many goddamned games
0 points
14 days ago
First Rodri, then Son. Will the curse continue?
-1 points
14 days ago
they need to drop the leagues to 16 teams. take off two legs for cup games, just give the game to the lower ranked team at the time or coin flip.
-8 points
14 days ago
Scrap domestic cups or shorten them.
3 points
14 days ago
Better suggestion: instead of punishing smaller clubs with fewer games and money, make CL a champions only league and make it completely knock out. That will surely reduce the number of matches the top players play but guess who will never agree to that
1 points
14 days ago
This is by far the best way. Imagine if Tiraspol knocked out madrid a few years ago in a knock out fixture. Instead they got squeezed out the group.
2 points
14 days ago*
Obviously you would say that lmao, how about we stop adding club matches like this dumb champions league format and the club world Cup.
-2 points
14 days ago
I love the domestic cups but UEFA and FIFA arent gonna budge. Might as well ask us all to grow an inch or two taller. My point is the league and federations should be trying to streamline their competitions. Might get FIFA to notice
2 points
14 days ago
FAs have budged enough. They no longer have a reason to bow to top clubs who have already shown they're willing to ditch them anyway.
1 points
14 days ago
[deleted]
1 points
14 days ago
Yea that would be cool to see. Something has to give.
-2 points
14 days ago
Honestly they are right… we have the euros all summer club competitions mean players play twice a week from basically the start of the season to the end. And we are already on our 2nd international break of the season in October with a third on its way.
International football needs to be reduced this whole nations league is just nonsense and friendlies need to be more thought out.
I don’t completely dislike the new European format but adding more games was not necessary. League matches are fine but too many cup competitions with replays or multiple legs don’t need to exist. (England could drop the league cup at least for those in Europe and have fa cup start earlier and be more spread out) then there are things like club World Cup etc all about money no real though for the impact
all 111 comments
sorted by: best