Trending now:   Arsenal  •  Liverpool  •  Manchester United  •  Chelsea  •  Tottenham Hotspur  •  Real Madrid  •  Barcelona  •  Manchester City  •  Bologna  •  Sheffield Wednesday

Premier League

Leagues /  England  / Premier League 

Latest Premier League Videos & Podcasts

Fulham v Watford
21 hours ago


Share your thoughts
Comments
Page 1 of 1638
I think we’ve all known for a while now that PSG are frauds but jeez that was just embarrassing. Maybe it was the Anfield factor because Liverpool weren’t playing their best and yet PSG seemed to be jogging about. They didn’t have any sort of coherent plan of attack. It was like watching Burnley if Burnley cost 750 million.

It’s just an experiment in extreme branding at this point. Same with Neymar. You ask top3 players in the world and so many people would shoehorn Neymar in there. If you really think about it and watch him play I mean the guy ain’t it. He’s not the best dribbler, passer shooter anything. He just has cool hair, style, name recognition and a brilliant PR team behind him. I’d rather watch league 2 than PSG.
But that is exactly what the owners want from PSG. Brand exposure and advertising. They are domination France and goes far in Europe. IMO its all about PR for such owners.

When it comes to Neymar, he was s**t agaisnt Liverpool but he is a world class player. He is just lazy, and he is not Ronaldo to be able to pull that off. I can see him at Madrid very soon.
+1
his international goals record for brazil speaks for itself, neymar is a top top player but he probably shouldn't have left barca, french league sucks and you wont improve without rigorous challenge and competition.
^ Pretty much

@Khessler, Neymar at Barca was top 3 but Neymar at PSG isn't. Everything you mentioned that he isn't, he was at Barca. Par the goals, he was one of the best dribblers in Europe, a nightmare for defenders as you remember how he owned us when Barca played us in UCl a few years back.

The thing about him is, he still hasn't hit his peak. His still only 26 but he really should force a move out of PSG but I really don't how that would even happen. Who ever bothers to make a move better be ready to break the transfer fee record once more.
Better clear your day b/c you'll want to watch Zlatan's 500th goal all damn day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lSQbN0O80o

Him and Rooney are both lighting up the MLS this year. Call it the retirement league and say anything else about the quality, but these stars on the tail end of their career are making this sport into something great here in the states!
+3
Wow, you weren't exaggerating, that was sensational. Yep that and the Rooney tackle/assist to save the empty netter were really amazing
+2
Yeah only a small handful of players have probably ever scored a goal like that so nonchalantly, and it was his 500th! True showman.
+1
Awesome roundhouse kick! Walker, Texas Ranger would be proud.
+2
Ahh Walker Texas Ranger, now that's a legend right there.
+3
https://talksport.com/football/422103/rb-leipzig-wheel-of-fortune-fines/

Leipzig's managers crazy wheel of fortune for punishments
We broke the 500mil pound mark when it comes to revenues. Just 70mil short of United's revenues. Its about time we signed a 100mil pound player and fans from other clubs can't complain about us spending anymore because with that sort of income we must flex our muscles. 10 years of hard work is paying off.

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/manchester-city-break-500-million-barrier-revenues-report-104m-profit-after-premier-league-title-a8536256.html

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-soccer-england-mci-revenue/man-city-break-500-million-pounds-revenue-barrier-idUKKCN1LT2J2
+1
I think your muscles have been pretty flexed recently no?
+4
If you consider Chelsea bought a GK more expensive than any of our forwards, Liverpool has several players more expensive than our 60mil Mahrez, United has several players more expensive than our most expensive player. Other European giants like PSG, Barca, Juventus etc have all bought several players over 100mil mark but we have none. Its about time we splash the cash!
+1
Ummmm...
We splash enough cash buddy lol!

I see the point your trying to make but honestly, who gives a flying f*** what anyone else thinks. If City bought a player for 150mil, I wouldn't care what other fans think about it because most fans are hypocrites anyways. They'll judge you for doing one thing but when they do the exact same thing, their going to justify it like theirs no tomorrow.
+2
Why can't you boast your s**t in your own forum. Seriously 99 percent of the posts you make in this premier league page are about your own club and how fantastic they are. I used to look forward to the pl page and now it's always revolving around city. Not just because they're the champions, but bc someone has a bit of a problem.
+6
Probably no one will hear him?
It's the same point he makes every other day on this forum...
+2
Exactly. Every post is about money. It's so old...
+6
@Shaymoose17 out of everyone i least expected this from you cos you were one of my favourite fans on this forum but this rant? whats been happening to you lately? something must have happened...and as far as the "premier league" page is concerned incase you didnt know Man City is part of the "premier league" ..."I used to look forward to the pl page" are you serious? this page is always dead! last post is always a week or two ago!

So relax take it easy and if there is something you don't like don't read it! don't look at it! ignore it! and most importantly don't comment on it!
Everybody's patience runs out eventually. Just try to have a conversation that is not about money. This page used to be pretty active with many different subjects. Now it is LITERALLY the same stupid argument every time. It gets old.
+2
He's plastic and proud! Fair play ha
+4
@BluFFmaster in your last post you said "we are all plastic..." don't include me in that section! you might be plastic I'm not ;)
My words should have been better. I don't like coming across as a dick, which I'm sure I did. But it's like the same topic from you in here just worded differently. This forum page was great with a collection of great topics and now it's overrun by 50m fees this and financial that and it just sucks ppl in bc you always have to 1 up and keep it going... The money portion of football is the least appealing aspect of it all. Talk about the game, the plays, the players, right ever-reliable poor refereeing, etc. Keep on talking about the same thing if you want on here, I won't join in, and it won't matter to anyone anyways. Just fed up with the perennial arrogant posts from the same user when there are dozens of other contributors offering conversations with quality substance.
+3
No! I can't believe City splashed out 60m for Mahrez! Nearly as much on Laporte! I used to have it from VERY good sources that City NEVER spend more than 50m a player! Unbelievable, really makes me question the club's principles if they're gonna let other clubs walk all over them like that.

I guess money changes people. It'd be one thing coming from a club like United or Chelsea or Liverpool where revenue covers it yet players are generally so expensive that we're triple-handedly ruining football, but coming from a club like City where there used to be such moral standing on top of the transfer market high ground? Shocking to say the least. Football is ruined if City, our last bastion of responsible and non-inflationary spending, has fallen.

@Shaymoose, how could you be so mean?
+5
I am not myself Joey, Arsenal are winning away games...
+1
And to think I used to respect you as an internet persona.
+1
I've become a warrior with my new keyboard purchase...it's all downhill from here.
+2
I can't speak for everybody, but I can say I could not care any less how much teams spend. Every big team buys expensive players. Leave it at that. Please come up with something interesting to talk about or go outside and kick a ball against a wall or something
+1
Ah man I'm so glad we're back on this subject again. It's been so long since we last discussed City's spending habits.

I for one am sick to death of this being regurgitated and rehashed ad infinitum.

First it was that City never spent more than £50m on a player. Then it was that you never spent more than £50m on a defender. Then it was that none of your signings were world records.

What next, I wonder? When City do eventually spend £100m on some bang average Joe I'm sure there will be a well-thought out justification about how City are the beacons of integrity and how everyone else is ruining the sport with fees that City would never pay.

Can I book tickets for this in advance? Sounds riveting!
Guys, guys guys!!!

This one person has all of you wrapped around his lil finger. Shame on you all
So he thinks, Tomi, so he thinks....
Lol
https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/11495937/premier-league-footballers-could-be-forced-to-pay-agents

Might dissuade super agents from wanting to do business in England but sounds f*cking amazing because agent fees are getting out of hand. And it's these greedy bastards angling and agitating top players to move so frequently so they can get another big payday. Big yes to these reported changes.
+1
I think it is a good idea to replace fees by a regular salary paid by the player(their employer). However I don't See the greed of agents reducing. They will just want a huge amount for their salary, which will skyrocket players salaries. An other result can be to do their mega transfers to other League which isunlikely since noone has the money the EPL has through out the League.

To introduce this through out Europa with a salary cap would be best.
I highly doubt wages would go up significantly enough to cover the cost of agent fees. Pretty sure the best paid players make like 15 million pound a season, agents can make 30-40M in one deal. Also wages are the biggest fixed cost a club has, so they keep those numbers stable relative o their revenue.

There's also the control aspect of it, paying your agent millions and millions out of your own pocket gives player less incentive to switch clubs.

Also love the idea of agents making their money over the length of the contract, so if they decide to ship their player to the next club early, then the agent probably loses money.
Best FIFA men's player of the year finalists:
1. Ronaldo
2. Modric
3. Salah

I'm not a Messi fanboy but to not include him (and Ronaldo) on this list is just criminal.
+2
Messi didn't even loose a game in the league when he played and the one game he didn't play Barca lost, Messi should've been there no doubt
+2
Would take off Ronaldo as well. Personally tired of seeing the same guys lift the same title. Might as well mail the trophy to them and scrape the award show.
+1
If no games played in Spain count, you can say he doesn't deserve it.

But Leo has been the best player in La Liga and the Copa by SO much, it's just clear bias he's not included. He arguably had his second best season ever in Spain, after 2011-2012.

Ronaldo was really poor the first half of the season, but hey, he scored in some big games everyone saw near the end of the season.

Also disappointed KDB's consistent world class performances never got the appreciation they deserved. 12 goals and 21 assists last season for him only tell half his story. People overvalue goals and assists underrate everything else.
+2
"Most expensive Premier League transfers in today's money" - interesting read:

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11662/11490165/most-expensive-premier-league-transfers-in-todays-money
+1
Andriy Shevchenko was the best in the world but Chelsea ruined him. Chelsea having spent the most on transfers sounds about right.
+2
Followed by Liverpool who is trying without success to buy the League since 1992 lol...
+2
Interesting read. Gives really good perspective of how the transfer market has changed. Graeme Le Saux was bought by Chelsea for £5m in '97 (a record back then) which equates to £72m in todays day. Incredible.

It doesn't take into consideration certain factors. Teams such as man city, were basically switching between premier league, league 1 and league 2 until 2003-ish.
And also $heikh only came in at 2009. So basically this article comparing other big teams from '92 (roughly '97 for chelsea) and city from 2009.

Amazing how close $heikhs team have come to the top in such a short time. Thanks for sharing.
+2
@Rajmahal Amazing how a Russian Oligarch's (Roman Abramovich's) team have come to the top in such short time.

And why does it matter whether teams were switching between leagues ? you now you can buy players even when you are in the lower league?
+1
"And why does it matter whether teams were switching between leagues ? you now you can buy players even when you are in the lower league?"

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the money from advertising, tv, sponsors etc is quite a lot less when in lower divisions. So there is nothing stopping them from spending money, except for the fact they don't have it?

For example, teams in league 2 are basically like club football teams. Their games are not televised and they don't really have sponsors. So they don't generate much revenue to spend on players. Does that make sense? Let me know, I'm usually not the best at explaining things 😅

What are your thoughts? Would love to hear back from you. Cheers.
+1
Lol typical post for this forum. Please stop beating this horse, you killed it long ago.
+4
@Rajmahal you have completely missed my point. Just because a team is in a lower division doesnt mean they have some sort of ban from signing players...they can still spend money and sign players if they want to.

This is a more accurate assertion of which club spends how much and which club inflates the market etc unlike the ones that @Bazinga posts here just to favour his agenda and specifically picks certain years of transfer market.
@FootballisCity aka the poor man's Snitch
Chelsea spent the most on transfers but have won the most also lol. Whats your point? Atleast we were making UCL semi-finals before Roman came in, yall were getting beat 8-1 by Middlesborough before your Arab moneys and nowhere near UCL football. Also you bring up Shevchenko, I can bring up Robhino. Stop acting like Chelsea and City are sooooo different, we both plastic cuh. Oh, actually there is one small difference, one club has won the Champions League, retained the league title, won a proper domestic double, while the other is still trying to do all/any of the above.
+3
Have we become so irrelevant than people dont even talk s**t about us now? Cmon.

Ok, Ill stir the pot. We make our own moeny.. while some dont!

You are welcome.
@BluFFmaster you can't compare the Robinho saga to the one of Shevchenko's ... Shevchenko was a balon d'OR winner! he was the best in the world when he was in his prime, nobody could get anywhere near him where as Robinho never even made the shortlist of balon d'OR let alone win it. Robinho was an average player before he moved to City and he was an average player when he left City. And i never said Chelsea were wrong to spend the most on transfers it brought you trophies perhaps you missed my point this is a better assertion of how clubs spend compared to the one @Bazinga pulls out of his a** and only posts certain years of the transfer window that will favour his agenda. In statistics the bigger your sample the more power on your study so the more years are considered when it comes to transfer the more legit that assertion is, where as if you just pick 3 years of the transfer window like @Bazinga does thats a poor study and has no meaning whatsoever.

@Yaldho sorry mate but thats still boring stuff ... City also makes a lot of money in fact the stats from a year ago the difference was just 100mil between City's and United's revenues. United was at 574mil and City was at 472mil or something like that, this year the gap will be even closer once they post the stats. We make more than Chelsea even though they have won the champions league in the past. But again this is boring stuff.
+1
Well if by revenue you mean deals you singed with companies owned by the same group that owns City, then you are correct.
+2
Yaldho answered Footballiscity's 2 para story in just 1 line LOL!

Anyways i'm not even trying to waste space on this page discussing same topic again and again with these guys...let the city fans delusion continue. Cheers
@Bazinga you sound salty. From now on anytime you bring up the bulls*t stats of yours from 2015 2016 2017 I will have this link under my sleeve. You got exposed here you only choose those transfer windows that fit your agenda but look at overall picture you club has been inflating the market for over 20 years City has been inflating it for just 3 years see the difference?

@Yaldho no its not the deals we signed** with companies owned by the same group. We are the only Premier League team that has been consistently making the Champions League. We are the only premier league team in the top 10 of European teams according to UEFA coefficient partly due to us consistently making the Champions League. We signed a deal with Puma that is 3 times what Nike is paying us and there are many more reasons....reasons a City fan that follows the club would know, but I'm not gonna list them all here cos I ain't got no time for that. Give United 10 more years max and you will be making the same revenues as Liverpool or Arsenal is making which is still not bad but definitely not the most. Ask your fellow United fan SIF he will tell you City has been a self sustaining club for a few years now. We have been posting profits, we broke even the year after we made the semi finals of Champions League.

City owners purchased the club for 260mil 10 years ago today the club is valued at 3 BILLION that is a 2.74 Billion profit from all the investments they have made and the club will only get bigger and more expensive.
+1
ok
Good
I know City is self sustaining now but lets not pretend how City got there. Everyone here knows City bankrolled cash into the club and when it became tough to do so, they used loop holes like Naming rights, club sponsors to bring money in which did not support the actual market value of the club at that time. Everyone knows this. I was just pointing this out just for fun. No need to debate this topic. Like you said, everyone knows about this and its boring.

I predict United will bring in more revenue than City 10 years from now. In fact since SAF retired, we have become even bigger in the financial side of things. If there is one this Man Utd is good at, its finance. So i have no fears in that department. We dont need success to bring in money.
Yeah city will bring in more money if your owner gets the rest of his family to sign dubious sponsorships lol
@Yaldho of course everyone knows City bankrolled cash into the club. As Pep Guardiola said the owners didnt wanna wait 20 years for success they wanted to speed it up thats why they invested. IMHO it was a clever idea they bought the club for pennies now its worth billions. Oil will either run out one day or will be worth nothing once electric cars become more popular then all these Sheikhs will have no other means of income and having a self sustaining club is always a good investment. My point was TODAY the club is self sustaining. TODAY we don't have to offer players mad wages like we did back in the days for the likes of Tevez Robinho and co to convince and bring them to the club. TODAY we can sign stars like Jesus Gabriel, Sane, Mendy, Mahrez etc and pay them 60 - 70K per week and they are more than happy with those type of wages cos its THE CLUB they wanna play for cos this club will guarantee champions league football and trophies. TODAY we don't have to offer players 500K per week (cough Sanchez) in order to bring them to the club.

If you don't win the premier league or the champions league in the next 10 years your revenues will go down for sure. And lets be honest City Liverpool and Chelsea are head and shoulders above United. Plus its very unlikely your club will be playing Champions League football every year from today on let alone win it. Gone are the days when your only opponent was a selling club like Arsenal.

Its thanks to the owners and the financial institution of City that the club is self sustainable TODAY and it wins trophies attracts the best coaches and players.

@SIF i would rather have so called "dubious sponsorships" than be in a massive debt and have most of my income go into interest rates, I wouldn't be so proud of that.
I think your keyboard is broke. It keeps typing 'today' in capital letters.

"of course everyone knows City bankrolled cash into the club" This was my point when i said some clubs did not make their own money. You agreed. So lets move on to more exciting topics.

I have already made this point but ill take greedy Glazers over a monarchy that has a very checkered humans rights history. So lets not go down that road of comparing owners. Its a loosing battle for both sides.
+2
Our revenue is not 474mil I take that back its actually over 500mil now with a reported 10.4mil pounds profit

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/manchester-city-break-500-million-barrier-revenues-report-104m-profit-after-premier-league-title-a8536256.html

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/manchester-city-smash-500million-revenue-13239035
Of course you would, anything is better than being mediocre midtable club you would be without the billions of your owner. You'd take anything rather than go back to your club's real, actual stature.
+2
There is so much appalling refereeing in this league, and no repercussions for refs. How is Rashford's headbutt any different from that Burnley's player's headbutt. But one gets a red and the other gets a yellow.
Apparently the yellow for Bardsley was for something said or an aggressive gesture, not the confrontation. But you're absolutely right in that Bardsley deserved a red too, either for the leg swipe or the headbutt.
Rashford head butted him first though you have to take that into account and Bradsley simply held up his head, it was a reaction to an action ... Rashford should have kept his cool and just walked away
Footballiscity, bardsley went back into a head butt confrontation after rashford did the initial one. He should've been sent off too. But yes, I do see your point of view in a reaction to an action. But football is like life, there is no right in doing a wrong. That's what I love about this sport...it mirrors the principles we hold in real life.
+1
Rashford should have kept his cool although he dint deserve red...why take chances and lose 3 games when you are already not getting enough game time.
It was a harsh red card but he should know better. He could have cost us the game.
@Footballiscity, yeah but Bardsley kicked him before that lol, that kick alone could have been red card worthy.
He’s a naive boy
+1
Both should have seen red
+1
Reactions to actions get red all the time. KevMo is right, both should have been sent off. Rashford's was the right call, Bardsley's wasn't
Bardsley experienced, exactly knew what he was doing and Rashford fell for it, so with experience he'll learn to not react to those.
Respec respec *Ali G voice*
+2
Remember, if you are subscribed for pro +, cancel and send a complaint.
+5
I'm still a pro member even though I cancel my like 4 or 5 years ago lol
+1
They still owe me 25$ :)
+2
i dunno about you but i submitted a complaint and request for a refund via paypal and got it.


Premier League Stats

Premier League Results

Sun 23rd September
Sat 22nd September
Mon 17th September
Sun 16th September
Sat 15th September
Sun 2nd September

Premier League Fixtures

Sat 29th September
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
Sun 30th September
v.
Mon 1st October
v.

Top Goalscorers

 
A. Mitrović
5
E. Hazard
5
S. Mané
4
S. Agüero
4
R. Lukaku
4
G. Murray
4
Pedro
3
R. Pereyra
3
M. Arnautović
3
Richarlison
3

Seeing Red

A. Wan-Bissaka
1 1
Richarlison
1 1
N. Matić
1 1
W. Morgan
1 1
P. Højbjerg
1 1
J. Vardy
0 1
J. Hogg
0 1
I. Hayden
0 1
P. Jagielka
0 1
A. Smith
0 1

Premier League Table

Form
PTS
GD
GA
GF
L
D
W
Pl
Pos
18
12
2
14
0
0
6
6
1
16
16
3
19
0
1
5
6
2
16
10
4
14
0
1
5
6
3
13
5
6
11
1
1
4
6
4
12
5
7
12
2
0
4
6
5
10
0
9
9
2
1
3
6
6
10
-1
11
10
2
1
3
6
7
9
1
10
11
3
0
3
6
8
9
1
9
10
2
0
3
5
9
9
0
6
6
1
3
2
6
10
7
-2
6
4
3
1
2
6
11
6
-1
9
8
1
3
1
5
12
5
-3
11
8
3
2
1
6
13
5
-3
9
6
3
2
1
6
14
5
-5
13
8
3
2
1
6
15
4
-3
10
7
4
1
1
6
16
4
-6
11
5
4
1
1
6
17
2
-4
8
4
4
2
0
6
18
2
-11
14
3
4
2
0
6
19
2
-11
14
3
4
2
0
6
20
C/L  C/L Qualifying  UEFA Cup  Relegation 

In the Premier League Forum

by gfcz69
8 comments
2 comments
9 comments
1 comments
6 comments

   
Kick4Life - changing lives through football