AndyRM
Elder Goth
Like AndyRM, you're not reading my post very accurately. (bit odd, as it was Andy's post I was quoting! but it's not important ... )
It's three words, I'm not really sure what I've missed?
Like AndyRM, you're not reading my post very accurately. (bit odd, as it was Andy's post I was quoting! but it's not important ... )
It's three words, I'm not really sure what I've missed?
Reports. Not league(s). [Other parts of the UK have reporters, not just England ]
Thanks, I'm aware.
My point was specifically about English reporting, perhaps that wasn't clear enough.
OK, good - we got there in the end! :P
I am sceptical that no other parts of the Union make such comments - hence my post.
Person in England knows more English teams than foreign teams is one of your metrics?But as those subjective judgements accumulate, you can on balance of probabilities label something as the best.
That's a pretty strong argument for "best" and I don't even watch football.
- 5 out of the top 10 clubs with the most fans are in the EPL*
- 6 of the top 10 clubs with the most money are in the EPL*
- 5 out of the top 10 clubs who are watched most around the world are in the EPL*
Another way of looking at it is to ask someone like me how many teams they can name in the major leagues. I can name quite a few in the EPL, two in La Liga and one in the Bundesliga. I suspect that this would be repeatable in many countries around the world.
*Although this is only 50% or 40% the remaining teams are split between La Liga, Bundesliga and the Brazilian league.
Purely taking the European Cup example, 6 different English sides have won it, which is a record, compared to 2 Spanish and that's with a 5 year ban from European competition.
There's nothing subjective about that.
What is subjective is importance you place on that metric compared to the fact Spanish clubs win it far more often than English clubs.
People are making subjective assessments of which metrics they think are more important
Well, yeah, I guess if you want to be pedantic about it, but a wider selection of clubs from England have won the European Cup, objectively that is true.
So yes, I'd say that the EPL is stronger based on that alone.
Out of interest, how would you judge the strength of a league?
Thanks, I'm aware of the difference... My point, again, is that England has produced more European Cup winners than any other country. That doesn't diminish Real's impressive record, but two winners from a country is objectively not as good as six.
I don't see how you can't to be honest. Obviously I have no stats to back it up, but I reckon that most football fans compare the league their team is in to their equivalents.
no, that is a subjective judgement especially when comparing leagues
This is all very reminiscent of the otherpointlessprotracted discussion we had with spen666, earlier on this thread:
[
Everyone: the "97" shirt guy is clearly a dick and guilty as hell
Spen: ahhh ... but it will be almost impossible to prove that!
] ... repeat x N ... until ...
Judge: yup, he's clearly guilty. And a dick.