Friends of Fulham

General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: jarv on May 19, 2011, 03:59:54 PM

Title: Question, opinions on the transfer market, Brit v Foreign.
Post by: jarv on May 19, 2011, 03:59:54 PM
I read a statement this week (again) about foreign imports being cheaper to buy than Brits.
My question is WHY are brits more expensive (if it is true).?
The England team almost picks itself these days and many players are really very average.
Academies seem to be failing, most produce players that find their way to the likes of Bournemouth or Doncaster rovers.
Surely the feeder should be in the opposite direction.
Championship players purchased by Prem teams often seem to fail and disappear after one season.
Trophyless Arsenal still field a team of foreigners exciting to watch, very few Brits make the team.
Even 'arry who likes english players has Defoe and Crouch as bit part players now. So why do they cost so much?

Dembele? I think an outstanding buy for Fulham at a reasonable rate (by today's ridiculous prices). Name a Brit with his skill, maybe Adam Johnson at his best (another bit part player who cost more).
If Dembele cost 5 mill. (not sure on that) why would you pay 15 for Defoe, 11 for Crouch and silly money for Young at Villa who is, at best,, a decent winger. (but he is English of course).
Title: Re: Question, opinions on the transfer market, Brit v Foreign.
Post by: finnster01 on May 19, 2011, 04:04:02 PM
The only logical explanation Mr Jarv that I can think of is that people pay a premium for "Home Grown" talent which doesn't necessarily mean English, in fact you could theoretically be English and not a "home grown" player. In fact, if I am not mistaken a young player with Hargreaves background would be a good example of an English not qualify as a home grown.

The other thing I can think of is they all have English agents who know how far they can push (or pad) the envelope.

In any event, I agree Mr Jarv. It is all a load of bollocks :035:
Title: Re: Question, opinions on the transfer market, Brit v Foreign.
Post by: sipwell on May 19, 2011, 04:04:23 PM
Probably because you need to have a minimum number of home-bread players.
Title: Re: Question, opinions on the transfer market, Brit v Foreign.
Post by: sweek on May 19, 2011, 04:16:06 PM
It's called the "England tax". If you play in England you'll get a lot more media attention, more people watching you and therefore more clubs interested in you. If there's more interest then your price goes up.

That and the game here is a little different compared to the continent - more physical and faster - some players that did really well in Europe come here and flop (Kesman at Chelsea for example) - with English players you can avoid that risk but the prices are still ridiculous and I hope Fulham get their new players for the right price from elsewhere.
Title: Re: Question, opinions on the transfer market, Brit v Foreign.
Post by: finnster01 on May 19, 2011, 04:20:51 PM
Quote from: sweek on May 19, 2011, 04:16:06 PM
It's called the "England tax". If you play in England you'll get a lot more media attention, more people watching you and therefore more clubs interested in you. If there's more interest then your price goes up.

That and the game here is a little different compared to the continent - more physical and faster - some players that did really well in Europe come here and flop (Kesman at Chelsea for example) - with English players you can avoid that risk but the prices are still ridiculous and I hope Fulham get their new players for the right price from elsewhere.
Talking about risk. You can pretty much guarantee any English player abroad is a massive flop
Title: Re: Question, opinions on the transfer market, Brit v Foreign.
Post by: HatterDon on May 19, 2011, 04:53:44 PM
English players are overpriced. They are overpriced because their athletic prowess is overrated -- by the English press -- because they are English.

As I've said on here before, if you define a player as being "world class," in that he can fit into any club's 25-man squad and immediately improve it, then the only World Class English player is Ashley Cole. Despite the obscene market valuation and ridiculous wages paid to his teammate, John Terry, even Stevie Wonder can see that he has been the weakest member of Chelsea's back four for a good three seasons now. Alex and David Ruiz have to play their positions and half of his, and, yet he's the first name on the England team sheet. I watched more than half of the matches played in the last World Cup, and were it not for Jamie Carragher, John Terry would have been the WORST CB on display in South Africa.

Title: Re: Question, opinions on the transfer market, Brit v Foreign.
Post by: ImperialWhite on May 19, 2011, 05:05:26 PM
Quote from: HatterDon on May 19, 2011, 04:53:44 PM
English players are overpriced. They are overpriced because their athletic prowess is overrated -- by the English press -- because they are English.

As I've said on here before, if you define a player as being "world class," in that he can fit into any club's 25-man squad and immediately improve it, then the only World Class English player is Ashley Cole. Despite the obscene market valuation and ridiculous wages paid to his teammate, John Terry, even Stevie Wonder can see that he has been the weakest member of Chelsea's back four for a good three seasons now. Alex and David Ruiz have to play their positions and half of his, and, yet he's the first name on the England team sheet. I watched more than half of the matches played in the last World Cup, and were it not for Jamie Carragher, John Terry would have been the WORST CB on display in South Africa.

Seems like an overly high bench mark for "World class" - because it's saying that unless a player could walk into the Barcelona squad, he isn't World class. I think:

Rooney
Joe Hart
Gerrard
Lampard
Ashley Cole
Leighton Baines

(and in the future probably Wilshere)

would all walk into most national sides (no, probably not a World Cup winning side, but I don't think it's fair to say that a player can only be considered World class if he'll win you a World Cup).
Title: Re: Question, opinions on the transfer market, Brit v Foreign.
Post by: FC Silver Fox on May 19, 2011, 05:07:20 PM
From Finnster : Talking about risk. You can pretty much guarantee any English player abroad is a massive flop

[/quote]

That's not quite true, Finnster. Who was our youngster we loaned out to a Scandinavian club? He developed his game a lot, scored a few goals and was very much appreciated by his club.  Can't remember his name offhand.

I think more of our young players could benefit from a season in another European league. ok, it wouldn't be one of the top leagues but they'd certainly learn a lot from playing regular first team football.

Title: Re: Question, opinions on the transfer market, Brit v Foreign.
Post by: clintclintdeuce on May 19, 2011, 05:17:31 PM
Quote from: ImperialWhite on May 19, 2011, 05:05:26 PM
Quote from: HatterDon on May 19, 2011, 04:53:44 PM
English players are overpriced. They are overpriced because their athletic prowess is overrated -- by the English press -- because they are English.

As I've said on here before, if you define a player as being "world class," in that he can fit into any club's 25-man squad and immediately improve it, then the only World Class English player is Ashley Cole. Despite the obscene market valuation and ridiculous wages paid to his teammate, John Terry, even Stevie Wonder can see that he has been the weakest member of Chelsea's back four for a good three seasons now. Alex and David Ruiz have to play their positions and half of his, and, yet he's the first name on the England team sheet. I watched more than half of the matches played in the last World Cup, and were it not for Jamie Carragher, John Terry would have been the WORST CB on display in South Africa.

Seems like an overly high bench mark for "World class" - because it's saying that unless a player could walk into the Barcelona squad, he isn't World class. I think:

Rooney
Joe Hart
Gerrard
Lampard
Ashley Cole
Leighton Baines

(and in the future probably Wilshere)

would all walk into most national sides (no, probably not a World Cup winning side, but I don't think it's fair to say that a player can only be considered World class if he'll win you a World Cup).


Rooney walks into any national side. But Joe Hart? wouldnt be the 4th keeper for us Yanks!
Title: Re: Question, opinions on the transfer market, Brit v Foreign.
Post by: Rupert on May 19, 2011, 06:39:46 PM
Quote from: finnster01 on May 19, 2011, 04:20:51 PM

Talking about risk. You can pretty much guarantee any English player abroad is a massive flop


And, for the benefit of our Paris St Germain readers, the same is likely to be true of any English based Americans transferred to France this summer. Leave him alone.
Title: Re: Question, opinions on the transfer market, Brit v Foreign.
Post by: HatterDon on May 19, 2011, 08:00:01 PM
Quote from: ImperialWhite on May 19, 2011, 05:05:26 PM
Quote from: HatterDon on May 19, 2011, 04:53:44 PM
English players are overpriced. They are overpriced because their athletic prowess is overrated -- by the English press -- because they are English.

As I've said on here before, if you define a player as being "world class," in that he can fit into any club's 25-man squad and immediately improve it, then the only World Class English player is Ashley Cole. Despite the obscene market valuation and ridiculous wages paid to his teammate, John Terry, even Stevie Wonder can see that he has been the weakest member of Chelsea's back four for a good three seasons now. Alex and David Ruiz have to play their positions and half of his, and, yet he's the first name on the England team sheet. I watched more than half of the matches played in the last World Cup, and were it not for Jamie Carragher, John Terry would have been the WORST CB on display in South Africa.

Seems like an overly high bench mark for "World class" - because it's saying that unless a player could walk into the Barcelona squad, he isn't World class. I think:

Rooney
Joe Hart
Gerrard
Lampard
Ashley Cole
Leighton Baines

(and in the future probably Wilshere)

would all walk into most national sides (no, probably not a World Cup winning side, but I don't think it's fair to say that a player can only be considered World class if he'll win you a World Cup).


But a player that would improve any club side in the world IS a fair benchmark. The only English players close to Ashley Cole country are Rooney and Ferdinand.

Lampard? Gerrard? There have to be 25-30 better midfielders just making their living in England and Europe.

Baines is remarkable because he's the only other decent English left back anyone can think of. Wilshere hasn't accomplished anything as of yet. He's a talented midfielder, but he's woefully indecisive in front of goal and he telegraphs his distance passes. I'm sure he'll become a fine player, but he's nowhere near it yet.

Finnster's comment about an English player being guaranteed to flop is pretty accurate. Only Hargreaves has excelled for a top European club recently, and he only went there because nobody in England fancied a Canadian national who couldn't get capped by his home country.

There was a time when an England game day squad was composed of players who were in the top 25-30 players in the league. Nowadays, you got your Cole, your Rooney, your Hart, your Gerrard, your Ferdinand -- and pretty much everyone else is the 5th or 6th best player on his own team.
Title: Re: Question, opinions on the transfer market, Brit v Foreign.
Post by: clintclintdeuce on May 19, 2011, 10:09:03 PM
Not too long ago Stevie G was the best in the world in my opinion.