Foreign Vs British players

An Extremely Boring Man

Retired 39,9999 not out
Newbie
Joined
Dec 3, 2000
Messages
39,656
Location
London / Oxford
Reading through all the fantasy stuff about getting this and that fancy foreigner, it strikes me that many on here does:

a) not realise the value and importance of having Bristish players

b) underrate British players

If I had a choice between buying a Brit or a foreigner, e.g. Ferdinand or Nesta, I'd choose the Brit every time!
 
I agree... the foreign players, especially those coming from S. Europe, Asia, Africa or S. America, are prone to having difficult time adjusting to the English game so I think that United (or all English teams for that matter) should always first consider buying British and then N.European...

It's like with those players doing well in the WC, like the Senegals and the Japs... Sure they're performing at the highest level with their National teams but that doesn't mean they'll perform well in the PL...

So this summer I'm hoping we'll be buying British.. with Rio and Duff topping the wanted list..
 
Every player is an individual so each case should be judged seperately, whether British or foreign. I reckon Stan Collymore has to be one of the most troublesome players in this generation.

Juninho had a great time as a S.American here.

But at the moment there are really no foreign players I want (except Cisse/Mexes/Ronaldo) so I'm waiting for the likes of Duff, Rio, Defoe etc etc also.

Not because they are British, but because they bring what we need, such as solidity, steel, determination etc.

Would you choose Southgate over Nesta? Mills over Thuram? Heskey over RVN? Its not British everytime, its quality everytime.

If you were to try and prejudice your squad improvement, you'd be missing out on many great players.
 
Originally posted by ShAoLiN_ChRoNiC:
<strong>Every player is an individual so each case should be judged seperately, whether British or foreign. I reckon Stan Collymore has to be one of the most troublesome players in this generation.

Juninho had a great time as a S.American here.

But at the moment there are really no foreign players I want (except Cisse/Mexes/Ronaldo) so I'm waiting for the likes of Duff, Rio, Defoe etc etc also.

Not because they are British, but because they bring what we need, such as solidity, steel, determination etc.

Would you choose Southgate over Nesta? Mills over Thuram? Heskey over RVN? Its not British everytime, its quality everytime.

If you were to try and prejudice your squad improvement, you'd be missing out on many great players.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'm not saying that we should only buy Brits, but that we must be careful not becoming a new Chelsea. We haven't bought an British first team player for a very long time (is Cole the last one?).

The examples you are using are daft, because those players are on different levels to each other. Rio and Nesta ain't.
Click to expand...
 
I reckon you always need a core of British players...even better of they're local to the club

Tho I also think where the foreign cnuts are from makes a big difference..
 
Originally posted by Red devil's haircut:
<strong>I agree... the foreign players, especially those coming from S. Europe, Asia, Africa or S. America, are prone to having difficult time adjusting to the English game</strong><hr></blockquote>

That leaves Australasia, N. Europe and the US of mutha feckin A by my reckoning. Oh, and Canada. Can't forget Canada. Oh and the Caribbean too.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by An Extremely Boring Man:
<strong>

I'm not saying that we should only buy Brits, but that we must be careful not becoming a new Chelsea. We haven't bought an British first team player for a very long time (is Cole the last one?).

The examples you are using are daft, because those players are on different levels to each other. Rio and Nesta ain't.</strong><hr></blockquote>It was daft on purpose - because what you're saying is daft.

Rio is a good player, Nesta is a good player. You choose which one suits you best. Nationailty doesnt come into it, culture/attitude perhaps does - but thats on an individual level. How did you decide Rio over Southgate? You would use the same method to choose between Nesta and Rio. Its an individual basis, player v player, not british v italian.

Chelsea buy mediocre players sprinkled with one or two former great players (i.e. big names). Any team buying mediocre players would end up like them, its not because they are foreign. British mediocre is just as bad as foreign mediocre.

You dont set out to buy British, you set out to patch up weaknesses in your squad, and you will go to the individual who does so best. This person's location/origin is of no consequnce. Alex needed a new assistant, he went around the world to look, he found Quiros, doesnt matter where he came from, he was the best and so he was brought in.

In other words what you're trying to say is, dont buy mediocre - which is pretty much common knowledge.

Your other argument may be to invest in local youth players. Which is very important, but not always successful, and even then the youth team can consist of many nationalities. Whoever does the job best.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Dans:
<strong>

That leaves Australasia, N. Europe and the US of mutha feckin A by my reckoning. Oh, and Canada. Can't forget Canada. Oh and the Caribbean too.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The Australians seem to be doing OK in the UK... Viduka and Kewell the best examples...

Players from Scandinavia and Holland don't seem to have any problems adjusting to the English game.. the French are OK but they'll complain every chance they'll get.. over bad weather, too many games and personal treatment (Petit & LeBoeuf)...

IMO the language is the biggest barrier... The Scandinavians and the Dutch speak good English whereas the Roman (language) speaking people don't...
Click to expand...
 
Duff isn't British <img src="graemlins/nono.gif" border="0" alt="[No No]" /> <img src="graemlins/angel.gif" border="0" alt="[Angel]" />
 
Originally posted by ShAoLiN_ChRoNiC:
<strong>It was daft on purpose - because what you're saying is daft.

Rio is a good player, Nesta is a good player. You choose which one suits you best. Nationailty doesnt come into it, culture/attitude perhaps does - but thats on an individual level. How did you decide Rio over Southgate? You would use the same method to choose between Nesta and Rio. Its an individual basis, player v player, not british v italian.

Chelsea buy mediocre players sprinkled with one or two former great players (i.e. big names). Any team buying mediocre players would end up like them, its not because they are foreign. British mediocre is just as bad as foreign mediocre.

You dont set out to buy British, you set out to patch up weaknesses in your squad, and you will go to the individual who does so best. This person's location/origin is of no consequnce. Alex needed a new assistant, he went around the world to look, he found Quiros, doesnt matter where he came from, he was the best and so he was brought in.

In other words what you're trying to say is, dont buy mediocre - which is pretty much common knowledge.

Your other argument may be to invest in local youth players. Which is very important, but not always successful, and even then the youth team can consist of many nationalities. Whoever does the job best.</strong><hr></blockquote>


So, if Man United one day field a team without any Brits, you wouldn't think it mattered?
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by thumper:
<strong>Duff isn't British <img src="graemlins/nono.gif" border="0" alt="[No No]" /> <img src="graemlins/angel.gif" border="0" alt="[Angel]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

I know, but in footballing terms there are no difference between the Irish and the Brits in the way they have been brought up and have been cultured.
Click to expand...
 
I would think that British players have gotten crap or we have somehow failed in the transfer market.

We want the best, this will usually include some British players at least - so we have nothing to worry about.

If a day comes when British players are so crap they cant get into our team, so be it. I wouldnt weaken my squad just so we can be patriotic.

Like I said, each position is analysed individually, each player is analysed individually. If we had in each position the best individual on the planet, and it happened to be none of them were British, would you complain? Would you say "weaken our squad so we can be more British"?

If they were all British - my opinion would be the same because each player is the best, thats all that matters on the pitch.

Dont post things like this that will alienate most of our squad and contradict your own loyalties. With such a view we would not have won anything, you must realise much of our success is down to foreigners. All of which were brought in because they can do the job better than most in the world.
 
Originally posted by ShAoLiN_ChRoNiC:
<strong>I would think that British players have gotten crap or we have somehow failed in the transfer market.

We want the best, this will usually include some British players at least - so we have nothing to worry about.

If a day comes when British players are so crap they cant get into our team, so be it. I wouldnt weaken my squad just so we can be patriotic.

Like I said, each position is analysed individually, each player is analysed individually. If we had in each position the best individual on the planet, and it happened to be none of them were British, would you complain? Would you say "weaken our squad so we can be more British"?

If they were all British - my opinion would be the same because each player is the best, thats all that matters on the pitch.

Dont post things like this that will alienate most of our squad and contradict your own loyalties. With such a view we would not have won anything, you must realise much of our success is down to foreigners. All of which were brought in because they can do the job better than most in the world.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You obviously don't understand what I mean.. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by ShAoLiN_ChRoNiC:
<strong>

Perhaps you can improve your use of language in future? :p </strong><hr></blockquote>

I don't think it's my language that's the problem, I think it's your capabilities of reading what others are saying that's the problem.

As for your latest essay, here's a few thoughts:

1) A team will never have all the best players. It's not about having the best individual players. It's about creating the best possible team.

2) In no way have I written anything that could "alienate most of our squad". BTW, that's rich coming from - the worst critic of Man United players on here!

3) I haven't said we should not be buying foreign players. We just have to be careful not to lose a British core, as I reckon that is invaluable to a British team. Also, often I reckon a British player would be the better option, even if the foreign option is possible the better player. This is because of the culture.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by An Extremely Boring Man:
<strong>

I don't think it's my language that's the problem, I think it's your capabilities of reading what others are saying that's the problem.

As for your latest essay, here's a few thoughts:

1) A team will never have all the best players. It's not about having the best individual players. It's about creating the best possible team.

2) In no way have I written anything that could "alienate most of our squad". BTW, that's rich coming from - the worst critic of Man United players on here!

3) I haven't said we should not be buying foreign players. We just have to be careful not to lose a British core, as I reckon that is invaluable to a British team. Also, often I reckon a British player would be the better option, even if the foreign option is possible the better player. This is because of the culture.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Spot on mate!

Each league has its own style of play and not all foreignors are suited or can easily adapt to that stlye of play. The french and scandinavians seem to do the best here, they cope with its tough physical nature and hectic pace. The sad fact is the skillful ball players like the south americans find it hard to cope with how tightly they are marked, they do better in Italy where there is lots of space. Also home country players have a greater sense of pride and appreciation of local rivalries, and are more likely to perform against teams like Leicester, or in Manchester derbies - this is crucial to do well in the premiership. The problem is in the Champions League where there is a clash of styles, and the trick is to find a style that either suits both leagues, or develop two styles that the players are comfortable with.
Click to expand...
 
If the British player fits into the team/league more, no matter what the reason (culture or otherwise) - then isnt he the better player? Thats my whole point.

Like I said, Collymore was British and he fit in nowhere. Cantona fit in nowhere but here. Fowler didnt fit in at his home team. But RVN fits in here perfectly. I'd prefer RVN before Collymore because he was more suitable to this team, rendering him the best choice i.e. best player for us. Its not a difficult concept. In other cases the British player will be better because they fit in better. But its all down to individual differences regardless of nationality.

More important are attitude, ability, personality etc etc - the right attributes can be found in any person in any part of the world.


As for me, I criticise/analyse those who do something wrong or perhaps dont perform, with the aim of finding a solution - whats wrong with having high standards and discussing your team?

Suggesting things such as "what will happen if we field a team with no British" is just stupid - my comment about best 11 was hypothetical and was made in retaliation to yours.

If that happens it means that every player on the pitch (foreign) is better than their British equivalents available to us. Why? because if the British were good enough then they'd push the foreigner out of the team.

Comprende?? Perhaps I am being too complex for you and should write using smaller words and sentences.
 
Originally posted by ShAoLiN_ChRoNiC:
<strong>If the British player fits into the team/league more, no matter what the reason (culture or otherwise) - then isnt he the better player? Thats my whole point.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

But you don't know that before a player plays in England..
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by ShAoLiN_ChRoNiC:
<strong>
Comprende?? Perhaps I am being too complex for you and should write using smaller words and sentences.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah, big shot, that's it

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laugh Out Loud]" />
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by An Extremely Boring Man:
<strong>Reading through all the fantasy stuff about getting this and that fancy foreigner, it strikes me that many on here does:

a) not realise the value and importance of having Bristish players

b) underrate British players

If I had a choice between buying a Brit or a foreigner, e.g. Ferdinand or Nesta, I'd choose the Brit every time!</strong><hr></blockquote>

i too would prefer rio cause he will get into our style easily
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Davo:
<strong>I reckon you always need a core of British players...even better of they're local to the club

Tho I also think where the foreign cnuts are from makes a big difference..</strong><hr></blockquote>

reallY? i dont think so where they come from makes a big diff. as long as they perform
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by An Extremely Boring Man:
<strong>
But you don't know that before a player plays in England..</strong><hr></blockquote>

*sigh*

Your entire argument has gone down the drain.

You dont know if any player will perform for you no matter the nationality/origin. We know Anelka suits the English league - doesnt mean he'll be a success everywhere.

What are the attributes that will succeed in England? I think you'll find that watching a player closely can reveal if he can do it on the pitch.

The gamble comes in regarding weather and living conditions - will the foreign guy live with it? This requires a good judge of character.

But gambles exist for every transfer - will this player fit in? Will he get injured? Will he cause trouble?
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by nmfaiz_2001:
<strong>

reallY? i dont think so where they come from makes a big diff. as long as they perform</strong><hr></blockquote>

As long as they perform then no it doesn't..

But the team's more likely to perform with a local core IMO, and the South American players etc are less likely to adapt as someone from France..
Click to expand...
 
Ultimately we want the best players regardless of nationalilty. Realistically, we should always look to buying players from the British Isles before we look to Italy, Argentina, France etc. Unfortunately the amount of quality players becomes limited in England when there are 4-5 big clubs competing for the best players.
 
Some foreigners are however, more acceptable than others....
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>Ultimately we want the best players regardless of nationalilty. Realistically, we should always look to buying players from the British Isles before we look to Italy, Argentina, France etc. Unfortunately the amount of quality players becomes limited in England when there are 4-5 big clubs competing for the best players.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Spot on

But that's the case in every country, only a small number of clubs in each country competes for the top players from each country.
Click to expand...
 
And of course, its not just about the fact that United are an English club. Players who speak English, are adapted to the local culture,and are already acclimated to playing in the Premiership have a tremendous advantage over foreigners. Forlan is the obvious example. A 22 year old kid with limited English skills, no experience in the Prem is going to take some time go grow and gain confidence with the ebb and flow of the squad, whereas a player like Ferdinand or Duff could come in, hit the ground running right away, and make an significant impact immediately. These factors have to be taken into account, in addition to a footballers raw talent, and training attitude IMO.
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>Forlan is the obvious example. A 22 year old kid with limited English skills, no experience in the Prem is going to take some time go grow</strong><hr></blockquote>

Raoul, I agree with your point overall, except that Forlan speaks good English. At least I know the school he went to teaches English from the time you are ~6 years old. It might be rusty in terms of fluency and accent but he should certainly be able to communicate to the level you need when playing football (does accent affect "Man on!"?). Listening/understanding orders should be no problem, except when confronted with some dodgy accent (teachers in Uruguay speak a phlegmatic English few Brits actually speak!).
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by ShAoLiN_ChRoNiC:
<strong>If the British player fits into the team/league more, no matter what the reason (culture or otherwise) - then isnt he the better player? Thats my whole point.

Like I said, Collymore was British and he fit in nowhere. Cantona fit in nowhere but here. Fowler didnt fit in at his home team. But RVN fits in here perfectly. I'd prefer RVN before Collymore because he was more suitable to this team, rendering him the best choice i.e. best player for us. Its not a difficult concept. In other cases the British player will be better because they fit in better. But its all down to individual differences regardless of nationality.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Shao, you were doing so well... Yes, some players fit certain league´s better because of the way they play. Some Brits might be better suited for a Continental league, for instance. True, nationality is not a determining factor.

Now, when you compare whether Nesta or Rio are better fits for United, on the Rio column you will place better communication, tried and tested in the EPL style of play, etc. Maybe Nesta continues to be a better option, then you sign Nesta obviously, because he looks a better choice irrespective of the fact Rio has those things in his favour. (Personally I would go for Rio though).
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by antohan:
<strong>

Shao, you were doing so well... Yes, some players fit certain league´s better because of the way they play. Some Brits might be better suited for a Continental league, for instance. True, nationality is not a determining factor.

Now, when you compare whether Nesta or Rio are better fits for United, on the Rio column you will place better communication, tried and tested in the EPL style of play, etc. Maybe Nesta continues to be a better option, then you sign Nesta obviously, because he looks a better choice irrespective of the fact Rio has those things in his favour. (Personally I would go for Rio though).</strong><hr></blockquote>

Thanks ant, I think...when did I stop doing so well?? :confused: Probably when I started slagging him off huh? I'm sure he's fine ;) It was just annoying to have to explain the same thing over and over.

I didnt compare Rio to Nesta, I said you shouldnt choose Rio cos he was British, you'd make a choice based on Rio at OT VS Nesta at OT.

Now I cant judge them as accurately as Fergie, but I would choose Rio for reasons I've gone through elsewhere, pretty similar to your reasons tho.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by ShAoLiN_ChRoNiC:
<strong>Alex needed a new assistant, he went around the world to look, he found Quiros, doesnt matter where he came from, he was the best and so he was brought in.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I hope he turns out as the best but it's too early to judge.

On the general theme:- The ability of the player is obviously the main factor. If the players are similar I would prefer the British based player. I don't think foreigners always comprehend the stature of the club.

Imagine if we had Blanc, Brown, O'Shea and Ferdinand or Nesta/Thuram?Ayala. If Fergie decided to play two of the first three, I think Ferdinand is more likely to accept it than a foreigner. A high profile foreigner might take it as an insult so Fergie could be tempted to play the foreigner when he would prefer to use Brown or O'Shea. Perhaps this happened last season with Veron.

I'm not saying that United are different to other foreign clubs. Supporters of any club will say "No player is bigger than the club" but if they haven't grown up knowing the club will players always appreciate that? Do we realise how important River Plate, Boca Juniors, Flamengo, Fluminese, Nacional and Penerol are in their countries?
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by An Extremely Boring Man:
<strong>


So, if Man United one day field a team without any Brits, you wouldn't think it mattered?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Smiecheal
Irwin
Blanc
Johnsen
Silvestre
Keane
Cantona
Olsen
Yorke
Solksjear
Van Nistilroy


I think the fans might turn up.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Travis Bickle:
<strong>

Smiecheal
Irwin
Blanc
Johnsen
Silvestre
Keane
Cantona
Olsen
Yorke
Solksjear
Van Nistilroy


I think the fans might turn up.</strong><hr></blockquote>

No-one says the fans wouldn't turn up.

But having no British players in the team would matter - a lot.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Travis Bickle:
<strong>

Smiecheal
Solksjear
Van Nistilroy


I think the fans might turn up.</strong><hr></blockquote>

They would, but would also be very disappointed finding these three nobodies in the team

;)
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Travis Bickle:
<strong>

Smiecheal
Solksjear
Van Nistilroy


I think the fans might turn up.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I second what AEBM said. Who are these people?
Click to expand...
 
It doesn't matter where a player comes from, it's his attitude on the pitch that will dictate whether he will be a success or not.If a foreigner comes in to a club and isn't any better than a comparable brit, then it's the management who must shoulder the blame, not the player.

I used to be of the opinion that British players would always perform better than a foreign player coming in to a good team, but that just isn't true, probably never has been, the game is littered with foreign players who have come in and made a big difference to an already good team.

I think it is true to say that originally, foreign players were seen as a cheaper option, but with tv cash dwindling, that won't be the case anymore, as British players are having to lower wage expectations to find a team.

At the end of the day, you go for the best players, at the best value, who you think can improve your squad, regardless of nationality.

Like Rio and Damien and Roberto Carlos. :)
 
Are Keane and Irwin really foreigners in terms of style of play? Is there a major Irish league where players like the Duffs, keanes, Hollands and Irwins shine or are they spotted as raw talent and brought over to youth team set-ups?

Yes, technically they are Irish and therefore not British but they normally master their skills in youth teams all over England. Therefore, they are sort of 'BRITISH BASED PLAYERS' if you choose not to be anal about terms.

Same with Dwight Yorke. He was brought over to england in his teens and only developed in england.

Not so for RVN or Cantona or Blanc who mastered their footballing skills in their own leagues with different formations and style of play.

I think that was the crux of the initial chat about british based vs foreigners.

And on the British vs Foreigner tread, I agree it shouldnt matter as long as the player is best for that position and has all the attributes that will allow him to fit in to the style of play but without losing his own skills.
;)
 
Shaolin Chronic writes: ...Cantona fit in nowhere but here.....
______________________________

Not true Cantona was very successful with Marseille....it was his style of play but his character that did not allow him to be successf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.