The Decline in Football

It is no doubt been said a lot of times, but the evidence is starting to pile up, and different causes causing different effects.

I think that saying that football is in decline in drastic, but true nonetheless. More accurately, football have been in steady decrease in quality (viewing quality) from the late 80's. Although very slowly at first, it picked up speed after 2006, and we are at the epoch of its rapid decline. I have my own theory on the why, here goes;

The 1990 World Cup:

The 1990 world cup was a milestone for the decrease in number of goals. So called defensive football ruled the tournament. Being a fan of tactical football, I would not call that a decline. However; Maradona's Argentina did not play defensive football. Argentina's 1990 campaign is a blueprint of cynical football, that team played for the draw, using every dirty trick in the book to help them, knowing that their clown of a penalty saving expert would make their odds on penalties high.

The success of that team showed the world the shortcut for victory. Before that tournament, teams that did not play football could not expect to win. The 1990 Argentina showcased that cynical football does indeed work, and that when you are simply not good enough, cheating your way to victory is preferable.

Fifa's refusal to incorporate technology to refereeing:

Fifa's insistence on the "human error" caused too many heartbreak's to mention in one post. If I research thoroughly, I would be able to write a whole encyclopedia on the subject. This being the Milan section, I will mention three incidents relating to Milan and Italy.

Italy vs. South Korea
This match is a showcase of the effects of 1990 Argentina. S. Korea employed the same tactics Argentina ironically used to defeat Italy in 1990. That however came second to the shameful refereeing in the match. In two incidents, a video technology would have changed the outcome of the match. The correct Italy goal which was ruled offside, and the Totti red card which should not have been given.

Milan vs. Liverpool 2005
Video technology would have shown the ref that Gerrard dived, and such the whole comeback may not have been completed. The tears of Maldini could have been spared.

Milan vs. Barca 2006
Human error again robbed Milan from a perfectly legitimate goal by Sheva

P.S: I am not picking fights here, I am just stating simple facts, I am sure more teams have had there share of misfortune.

The Decline of the East Europe:

With Croatia 1998 being the last decent side to emerge from east Europe, one cannot but imagine the talents that were left undiscovered because of the turmoil. And it is not only nations, but no longer do the once feared teams of the east have anything to be feared off. Russia are in a new renewal, but is that enough to cover for the lack of talent there.

The Capitalistic Model:

Big teams get bigger, while small teams get smaller. The disparity between the CL and the EL is ridicilous. The financial rewards of the CL, as well as the media exposure would ensure that CL teams would always stay financially healthy, while smaller EL teams would always lack the resources to push for a CL spot, and if so would lack the resources to stay there.

Traditional teams are rooted and impossible to topple, while new teams need ridiculous amount of cash to compete. This would not be a major problem if there were big 6 teams in every league. But what we are seeing is a polarization of income, with the future more probably being a La Liga model rather than Seria A.

Discussion on the problems of the Capitalistic model can be seed by the almost biyearly western world financial collapse.

The Market's Inflation:

Look above for the reasons.

The Oil Money:

Bored business men dipping their wallets in the market causing among other things, the above.

Higher Stakes:

As in the difference between winning the CL and coming second. Fickle fans, band wagoners (who are a great source of income), media coverage, club appeal, etc. These higher stakes cause clubs to invest on proven talent instead of unproven talent. This cause the latter to stagnate.

This also promotes a higher usage of the 1990 Argentina model. See the Clasico's for evidence.

Disgraceful Plastic Balls:

In Fifa's attempt to promote offensive football, they have done the opposite. The new rules and the new balls cause the game to evolove into hoof ball. No longer do good defensive tactics manage to work, but now tactics are thrown out of the window, and desperate defending and box crowding is used instead.

The difference between the two:

Tactical football: Italy 2006, Inter 2010

Anti-football: See WC 2010;

More Reasons:

There are many more smaller reasons, but I believe the above are the main culprits.

Discuss

this should be in the general section

This topic deserves a wider public than at our MILAN forum, and the admins have the tools to move it to the general section... so get to work boys! :idea:

That article is 100% true mate

This is a great post, someone move it to GS.

Great post bro, I agree in most parts and it was well worth reading. On a side note, pls don't move this to the gen section... flamers and spammers galore will descend on this post like fleas. If ppl want to read this, they should come here.

Brilliant post.

Bear-Felix wrote:Brilliant post.

Brilliant sig

I have a long reply in mind, but it's 2 AM here I'm gonna write it tomorrow.

I gave Lord Spencer his deserved (+) and his is a fantastic, comprehensive post, but I don't agree with it at all.

How can we tell if Football is getting worse?

I bet none of you guys can watch a 1978 world cup game for 90 minutes straight, it's too boring and sometimes wondrous in the way the players look so unbelievably dumb, misled, selfish, clueless, tactically naive, slow, lazy and overly confident.

Football is getting more and more beautiful everyday, and gritty games such as Holland-Portugal in WC 2006 or Uruguay-Ghana in WC 2010 happen more often than in the past, let alone the fact that this Barca team play the beautiful game in its true meaning, as beautiful as it could ever get.

The era during which the best Football ever is played isn't in decline, is it?


Oil money, on the plus side, is making things tough for big boys but it certainly could be more functional and smartly spent as it can buy players and even trophies but not history and tradition.

Refereeing mistakes are getting more and more easy-to-see because superb slow motion cameras can detect the smallest of gaffes, and please don't tell me those fat, coat-wearing referees of 1950s are anywhere near today's fit and skilled referees.

As for tactical or defensive/offensive Football, it's a cycle.

Once in a while a weird team like Greece in Euro 2004 park the bus and run twice as much as their rivals and win the tournament, and sometimes a nice attacking side like Spain 2008/10 take the trophy home.

If Football is declining, why all the countless talented players all over the world? Why is there an Alexandre Pato in 2007 and a Neymar in 2010?

Why are Leo Messi and CR7 scoring for fun to break records and gutsy teams like Uruguay and Ghana go that far in the world cup to our admiration and amazement?


No Sir, Football isn't in a decline.

We only say this because we are too in love with our sweet memories of the past, that's what I think.

@Iras;

I can confidently say that the last exciting tournament I saw was the 2007 CL. Although the 2010 Inter run was good watching material, that tournament was bad in general. It is true that our notions of the past cloud our judgment, but 3 years of consecutive decline in quality cannot be denied; I am not talking out of my hat here;

let us look at your arguments:

"How can we tell if Football is getting worse?"

it is true that this is a hugely relative matter, while it got worse for me, it might have gotten better for you. There are few objective methods to correctly analyze the "quality" of football. But here goes;

The Maldini effect:

our own legend started his career at the age of 16. He was highly rated at 17. And an undisputed starter at 18. Totti, Del Piero, Raul, Scholes, Giggs, R. Carlos, Ronaldo, Rivaldo, Figo, and many more great players had similar starts to their careers. The only one of today's generation that can come close is Messi, who only became a starter ate 20-21.

I don't doubt that El Sharrawi would have been a starter at the 1990's, whereas he would be a squad player at most now.

It goes without saying that this contributes to the wasting of talent. Which is why we have only TWO players butting heads on the who is the best stage (Messi and CR), when we had countless legends competing for the title in the years past. Some use it as testament to the two's dominance, if the internationals have taught us anything; it is more a testament of the general lack of quality competition.

Competition:

Never would anybody have dreamed that a team can win their world cup the Arsenal style; and I don't mean the current Arsenal, but the old 1-0 Arsenal. Spain did exactly that. I struggle to understand how this football can be "the best football". Not to mention Paraguay, who are currently in the Copa final without winning any game.

"I bet none of you guys can watch a 1978 world cup game for 90 minutes straight, it's too boring and sometimes wondrous in the way the players look so unbelievably dumb, misled, selfish, clueless, tactically naive, slow, lazy and overly confident."

Again, this is a matter of opinion, but the 1978 WC was the worst of the world cups in its era. The 1970, 1974, 1982, 1986 world cups all contained the best football I have ever seen. From the 1970 Brazil and Italy teams, the magical dutch of Cruyff and the typical Germans of 1974. The fabulous Brazil of 1982, and the amazing Azzuri of Rossi and co.

Compare that to the 1990 WC, which signaled the beginning of the change, and the 2010 WC which shows the culmination of the change. Sure there have been decent world cups in between, but I am not blasting the last 20 years. I am just stating that a continuation of the trend would signal trouble for us fans.

"Football is getting more and more beautiful everyday, and gritty games such as Holland-Portugal in WC 2006 or Uruguay-Ghana in WC 2010 happen more often than in the past, let alone the fact that this Barca team play the beautiful game in its true meaning, as beautiful as it could ever get."

the Holland Portugal match was a mess, more a battle than a match, the only thing gritty about it was the grinding of my teeth due to the horror on screen. A bleak comedy more than a match. The Uruguay-Ghana match I agree on, one of the highlights of 2010.

As for Barca, it is easy to play beautiful football against Mallorca and Sporting. I frankly did not see that beautiful football against top quality clubs. (don't get me wrong Barca fans, I concede that you are the strongest now, but your beautiful football myth is blown out of proportion by the media)

"Refereeing mistakes are getting more and more easy-to-see because superb slow motion cameras can detect the smallest of gaffes, and please don't tell me those fat, coat-wearing referees of 1950s are anywhere near today's fit and skilled referees."

True that, but my point was not that mistakes increased, but that mistakes are having more effect now. Back in the past, more goals were scored, so one disallowed goal would not have the disastrous effect it does now. Also, this is the more infuriating because of how easily it can be fixed (which brings me to the whole corruption of FIFA and how that contributes to the trend).

"As for tactical or defensive/offensive Football, it's a cycle."

Some teams will play tactical, others will play offensive. What I have trouble with is the cynical football, and the crowding the box football. Both products of winning at all costs mentality. The former is just plain dirty, and I am sure non of you would like his team to play as such. The latter is made a must for weak teams to grind draws or unlikely victories, or by other teams because the pace of the ball makes it extremely difficult to play tactical football.

"Once in a while a weird team like Greece in Euro 2004 park the bus and run twice as much as their rivals and win the tournament, and sometimes a nice attacking side like Spain 2008/10 take the trophy home."

The Greece 2004 team was more attacking than the Spain 2010 team. Watching Spain 2008 was fun, watching them 2010 made my eyes bleed.

"If Football is declining, why all the countless talented players all over the world? Why is there an Alexandre Pato in 2007 and a Neymar in 2010?"

Funny how both Pato and Neymar flopped in CA, and how Pato continues to strut his stiff vs. Bologna, but fails to shoot once at target vs. Manchester. And I am failing to see the countless talent emerging, all I am saying is the already emerged talent fading away.

"Why are Leo Messi and CR7 scoring for fun to break records and gutsy teams like Uruguay and Ghana go that far in the world cup to our admiration and amazement?"

Lack of competition for Messi and CR contribute a lot to their dominance. The gulf in class between Barca and RM with the rest of the league is also a major factor. Gutsy teams always did and always will go far in the WC. It is teams like Paraguay which dive their way to the final with no victory that I have problems with.

"We only say this because we are too in love with our sweet memories of the past, that's what I think."

That can also be said the other way around. "We cannot say that the past was better because we are too much in love with what we have now"

In the end, my opinion is not mine alone, but is the culmination of reading countless articles by prestigious football analysts, including Maldini Sr., Altobeli, Alakhdar BiLeaf (very famous around here), De Boar, and others

South Korea cheated. It was not the fault of FIFA technology, but rather, those scumbags disgustingly put their selfish needs above the beautiful game.

An article written with sheer brilliance. Kudos to you Spence.

OK, Lord Spencer, I get it. I finally got your point.

Your problem is with national team games and tournaments. Yeah, it seems to me that you are most worried about national teams' decline in quality, clubs less.
Now I can say I agree with you a bit!

You see, a good pundit during the world cup 2010 in our local TV once said, "People have every right to criticize the quality of this tournament, because they are used to awe-inspiring displays that they regularly watch in Champions League."

He had a point. The world cup wasn't any lower in quality compared to its predecessors, the thing is people can't stand the way teams like Italy and Brazil played in the world cup because even smaller clubs like Dynamo Kiev and Shakhtar play great Football in Champions League and so everybody expects to see even better games in an event that's much bigger compared to Europe's top club competition.

Messi played 60 games for Barcelona in 2010-11 and almost immediately got back in training ground to prepare for Copa America.
If you ask me, his dead body played for Argentina and I was really afraid that our very own Thiago Silva might suffer severe long-term injuries after his long Serie-A campaign.

Too many games during a European season have made national team fixtures look like monsters in the closet for players, as their careers are threatened by them and secretly, many players don't even wanna play for their countries anymore, and some of them put in less effort for their countries.


It makes me happy to see you quote parts of my post and that you care about what is said about your own post, but you don't convince me.

E.g. I don't understand the meaning of "Some teams will play tactical, others will play offensive. What I have trouble with is the cynical football, and the crowding the box football."

What is that supposed to mean?
Teams have the right to choose their own path, they can win effortlessly or after a brutally fatiguing 120 minutes.

One of the most exhilarating, breathtaking matches I've ever seen in my life was the second leg of Inter-Barca in 2009-10 Champions League semis.

The way Mourinho had organized his team to clear every ball as powerfully as they can and the way Maicon, Lucio, Samuel, Cambiasso and others led by Zanetti fought for the result as if their children's lives depend on this one particular match made me understand Football is beyond skills and tricks and mesmeric quick-passing games, I learned that it's more about passion and will.

Or you said, "As for Barca, it is easy to play beautiful football against Mallorca and Sporting. I frankly did not see that beautiful football against top quality clubs."

You mean Goal.com labelled 2011 UCL final's game between ManUTD and Barca as "Game of the decade" for nothing?

Wasn't it Barca who kicked Dynamo Kiev's butt 6-1 in aggregate to reach the semis?
Didn't Barca smash five past Casillas in first Clasico of the season? Or maybe you just don't consider Real Madrid a "top quality club"?

Waste of talent has existed before too, it's just that we are aware of the current examples and I frankly have not enough knowledge of the past talents who didn't flourish, I trust you don't too because their names don't stay alive.

As far as I remember undone prodigies of late 1990s and early 2000s, I can mention Kluivert, Van Hooijdonk, Saviola, Recoba, Denilson, Aimar and McManaman.

I don't remember early 1990s and before, but I'm cocksure there have been a lot of them.

On the Holland-Portugal thing we apparently can't ever agree, because I watch Football to be entertained and entertaining that game was, it was riveting to me.

And I don't think there was much competition for every great player of an era or generation, Ronaldo in 1997, Maradona in 1986, Beckenbauer in 1974 and many others in past decades were unrivaled when they collected their individual awards.


Thanx for replying to my post, you are a favorite writer of mine here regardless of our disagreements.

Thanks Iras, and I respect your opinions regardless of whether they disagree with mine or not.

To clarify the point you did not understand about "cynical football, and crowding the box football"

By cynical football, I am referring to the style of play used by Argentina in 1990. A style then copied by teams because of its effectiveness. Here are the main branches of the philosophy:

1-Win regardless of the method.
2-Waste as much time as possible.
3-Dive whenever the ref is not in sight.
4-Break play by tactical fouls whenever possible.
5-Trash talk the opposition.
6-Defend and wait for penalties.
7-If all fails, break play with fouls even if carded.

I am sure this is not something enjoyable to watch. Such style is now influencing many tactics on the modern game. Harsher punishment for such acts as diving and play acting would do much to counter the spread.

As for crowding the box defending:

Not is extreme cases like the inter vs. Barca match where Inter were a man down and had to crowd the are to stop Barca, but matches like the first CL Clasico. Simply, Mourinho is a smart man, and he knew that stopping Barca's 3 pronged attack is very difficult, especially when you have high speed balls. The flight speed of the ball caters for the fast pace of the offense over the defense (which also needs to move backwards) making hoof balls dangerous.

Carlo Garaganase from Goal wrote an excellent analysis on this tactical change in the game.


"You mean Goal.com labelled 2011 UCL final's game between ManUTD and Barca as "Game of the decade" for nothing?

Wasn't it Barca who kicked Dynamo Kiev's butt 6-1 in aggregate to reach the semis?
Didn't Barca smash five past Casillas in first Clasico of the season? Or maybe you just don't consider Real Madrid a "top quality club"?"

Goal.com have always made us laugh with their headlines, especially when 2011 is part of the new decade, and not the last (would you seriously compare that final to the 2005 CL final), so it is of course the game of the decade, since there are still 9 games to be played yet.

As for the RM thrashing, that was the only match that I saw where Barca played against a top team in the majesty they torment smaller teams like Dynamo Kiev (yes, Dynamo is a small team).

Again, Barca are the strongest team now, but this media overrating is natural to this era.

"And I don't think there was much competition for every great player of an era or generation, Ronaldo in 1997, Maradona in 1986, Beckenbauer in 1974 and many others in past decades were unrivaled when they collected their individual awards."

Exactly, it would be one being the best for 1 year, and then it changes, this is not the case now. and 1974, you had Cryuff and Beckkenbauer. In 1997, Del Piero, Batistuta, Maldini, all had their chances of being the best that year. Next year, it is going to be CR7 and Messi all over again, and probably the next as well.

Brilliant! This should go to the General Section though

I have been meaning to make a thread about this for over two years, ever since Goal.com lithium. But somehow I never created it, but now another person has created it and here's my chance to give my humble opinion on this matter.

My hero Gianni Rivera in 1998: "There is a strong risk that we will be overcome by too much money, in our society materialism has won. This is the football of financiers"

Boy, oh boy how right he was but more on that later.

The quality of football has decreased significantly, the last great international tournament was 1998. It was full of magical moments, Croatia 3 - 0 Germany quarter finals, The beginning of Italy vs France rivalry in the quarter finals, Bergkamp's goal vs Argentina, Davids goal vs Yugoslavia, Denmark close to upset Brazil, so many good matches. 98 WC was the last truly great WC, the quality of football dropped from that time. 2002 was exciting because of underdogs upsetting the favourites, and two of the upsets are because of South Korea being disgustingly favoured by the referee. 2006 was a tournament dominated by drab horizontal play, only Italy matches (ironically) were the ones which put you on the edge of your seat and 2010 was ruined by ultra defensive football, abysmal refereeing, persistent fouling and a disgraceful beach ball.

And it's not just international touraments but club leagues and competitions too. Remember a time when AC Milan, Inter Milan, Juventus, Roma, Lazio and Parma would fight over the league for the entire season? When Real and Barca wouldn't destroy every team 8-0 in the La Liga and the gap between second and third was 1 point except for 27 points? When La Liga had the likes of Valencia, Atletic Bilbao and Super Depor competing for the title instead of a two horse race consisting of Real Madrid and Barcelona? Remeber when footballing powerhouses (Marseille, Ajax, Red Star Belgrade, Borussia Dortmund) existed outside of Italy, Spain and England and Bayern Munich? A match between 1st place and 6th place used to be highly competitive and nowadays it is labelled as warmups. And the quality of those matches, compare them to the quality of matches nowadays. It's like comparing The Godfather to Max Payne. Compare UEFA Champions League 2003 to UEFA Champions League 2011. The difference in the quality of the matches is vast. Money has destroyed competiton in football, plastic balls have destroyed quality.

How often do you see a perfect through ball which Zico, Platini, Mazzola and Mardaona used to with their eyes closed? How often do you see some chip the ball over 4 defenders to the path of a running striker which Baggio, Totti, Socrates and Rivera would do with a bored expression on their face? How often do you see someone bend it like Beckham? How often do you see a a curling free which Roberto Carlos,Beckham, Juninho and our beloved metronome Pirlo would do every time they too a free kick. What has chaged. Quite literally football has changed. Before it was a simple pure leather Adidas Tango ball now it is a flashy colourful plastic synthetic ball, a minor change surely that will have little to no effect on the game. But far from that. The balls nowadays travel too fast, they are very light and bounce a lot. These attributes of synthetic footballs have made trequatistas, registas and fantasisti endangered species just like poaching has made tigers endangered species. We all laugh at Cristiano Ronaldo for blastic the ball at aeroplanes but is it really his fault? The synthetic balls travel so fast and are so unpredictable that all long range screamers are hit and hope instead of pure skill, placement and power. Synthetic balls have also affected long range passes and the first touch of a player, these plastic football are ruining the beautiful things of the beautiful game.

Another vital factor which has changed football is unavoidable and was beyond anyone's control is that football has evolved. The God With The Ponytail Roberto Baggio said it perfectly, nowadays skill is the secondary factor. Strength, athleticism and other physical attributes come first. Compare Carlos Tevez in Corinthians to Carlos Tevez in Manchester City. Compare Cristiano Ronaldo in his early Manchester United days to the Real Madrid Cristiano Ronaldo. Compare our golden boy Alexandre Pato 2007 to Alexandre Pato 2011. Compare Alessandro Del Piero 90s to Alessandro Del Piero 2000s. Compare Ronaldo O Fenomeno pre injury to Ronaldo O Fenomeno post injury. These are just a few examples on how footballer have evloved their physical attributes to catch up to the modern game. Before the top defenders in the world relied on game reading interception, nowadays most of the top defenders rely on their reactive senses and athleticism. Evolution has made footballers uglier but more effective.

Quality of players over the year have also decreased. Andrea Rannochia and Leonardo Bonucci are touted as Italy's new Nesta/Cannavaro partnership. At Bonnuci's age, Cannavaro didn't let Alan Shearer (who some say is the greatest player of the Premier League Era) have a sniff at the ball and Nesta at Rannochia's age became one of the best defenders in the world while Rannochia concedes 5 goals against Schalke 04 and Bonucci is the defender of a team which finished 7th. While Maldini at Santon's age was a starter at one of the greatest teams in football history, Santos struggles to gain starts at relegation battlers Cesena. Is Alessandro Matri even comparable to Christian Vieri? Can Alberto Aquillani hold a candle to Andrea Pirlo? Is Salavtore Sirigu fit to don Buffon's gloves. And it's not like these players were one in a million. Before them there was Dino Zoff, Roberto Baggio, Franco Baresi, Gaetano Scirea, Claudio Gentile, Gianni Rivera etc. And it's not like Italy is the only country lacking in talent. Is De Jong even half the player Edgar Davids was? Is Mexes comparable to Lilian Thuram? Is Dani Alves, Maicon and Marcelo who only know how to attack and is average at defending equal to Cafu and Roberto Carlos? Does Ever Banega have 1/4th the creativity of Juan Roman Riquelme?

In the start of my post, I quoted Gianni Rivera who said there is danger that football will be overcome by too much money. Money has destroyed competition in football. For a small club to be a big club without a massive takeover nowadays is only possible in Football Manager, not in the real world. Whenever a small club rise due to a successful youth academy, a good manager, shrewd bargains etc they are just cruelly bought down back to earth. Either their prized assets are taken away from them (BOTH players and managers) or they are drowned in debt. And with 50 million world class superstars arriving in big clubs every Sunday, how do you possibly beat them? Football is the most popular sport in the world, and this has caused foreigners to invest in football. Clubs which do not have billionaire oil barons as owners have to take loans just to save themselves from relegation and as a result drown in debt. There are a few exceptions but mostly newly promoted clubs manage to stay at top flight for only a mere season or two. Money has destroyed competition in football.

So in conclusion, football has changed and for the worse. This is majorly due to lack of player quality, plastic footballs, evolution of game and money. The beautiful game has lost a lot of it's beauty, but that doesn't mean all is lost. Look at Germany vs Italy 2006 World Cup Semi Final and you'll see at some points it is still beautiful. And no matter what, it will forever remain my religion.

I think part of the decline is due to the shift in mentality.

It used to be you play football for glory, but now you play football for money.

Just compare the prestige of winning UEFA cups back in the 90s compared to Europa League. Even winning a Winners Cup in the 90s were treated as a huge achievement back then...

Great post, I think you are right football has been in decline, I'll write my reasons as soon as I get off office.

@Iras
" Refereeing mistakes are getting more and more easy-to-see because superb slow motion cameras can detect the smallest of gaffes, and please don't tell me those fat, coat-wearing referees of 1950s are anywhere near today's fit and skilled referees "

True but I guess his initial point is, what difference does it make if you detect it after the match?
In the past refs did'nt get many mistakes cause "diving" was a shameful act, this another reason for football decling.

I have to agree with Spencer on many points, but I must say you and many other posters here are looking only on the negative side of things. Yes, the difference between WC 2010 and 1998 makes you wanna cry when you see the huge drop in quality. But there are bright points. Turkey, in Euro 2008. Uruguay and Ghana in WC 2010. Holland and Spain in 2008. Germany in 2010. There are still bright points for football. There are young gems being found frequently. Ganso, Neymar, El Shaaraawy, and more. Football quality may have dropped in some places, but one has to admit it has risen considerably in other areas. Yes, watching Cruijf and Holland's total football in 1974 was beautiful. But is watching Barcelona destroy other teams with their near perfect passing and movement not? Messi and Barcelona's mesmerizing football is not so far off from world class teams like Cruijf and 1974 Holland and Zico and 1982 Brazil. There is beauty in the beautiful game still.

I'm thinking of making separate thread in GS and to get a wider opinion on my views.

Here we go....let's work on that neg rep. (Please let me go )

Spencer?

LORD SPENCER

Okay.

LORD SPENCER.

But seriously Spencer is fine, or Lord.

Lord is the translation of my name into English from it's native language.

Lord Spencer is a character I created a long time ago. Really liked the name so it stuck.

Lord Spencer wrote:But seriously Spencer is fine, or Lord.

Lord is the translation of my name into English from it's native language.

Lord Spencer is a character I created a long time ago. Really liked the name so it stuck.

What's your name, then. 'Less you mind, of course.