YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Discussion on LUFC and absolutely anything... welcome to the Dark Side
User avatar
eric olthwaite
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:14 pm
Location: Over there, behind that bush

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby eric olthwaite » Fri Jan 08, 2021 3:48 pm

Oheddieeddie wrote:From today’s presser
Those teams they give a nutrient to the pyramid of the league


They're horseshit, but we need them to grow our strawberries.

Now that's how you throw shade.
Member of a clique

User avatar
Quiffy
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 6:56 pm

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby Quiffy » Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:39 pm

increasing doubt, decreasing hope, even my imaginary friend went and changed his mind.

jackos
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:49 am
Location: Stockholm

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby jackos » Tue Jan 19, 2021 9:55 pm



Traditional Socialist Bastard

User avatar
Oheddieeddie
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:35 pm
Location: Tacky with sweat and poisonous particulates.

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby Oheddieeddie » Wed Jan 27, 2021 8:34 pm


User avatar
eric olthwaite
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:14 pm
Location: Over there, behind that bush

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby eric olthwaite » Thu Jan 28, 2021 12:55 pm

Interesting article with a couple of references to God.
Member of a clique

User avatar
eric olthwaite
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:14 pm
Location: Over there, behind that bush

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby eric olthwaite » Sat Feb 06, 2021 12:30 pm

Member of a clique

User avatar
Ponte
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 9:36 am
Location: Between a rock and a hard place.

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby Ponte » Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:10 pm


Mindo
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 9:19 pm

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby Mindo » Tue Feb 09, 2021 7:16 pm

eric olthwaite wrote:Nice


Some of the US publications produce excellent commentary, but their insistence on referring to football clubs as singular entities really grinds my gears.

"Newcastle has won only one of its last 11 Premier League games". Grrrrrr

Arnieb
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 8:06 am

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby Arnieb » Tue Feb 09, 2021 7:58 pm

Mindo wrote:
eric olthwaite wrote:Nice


Some of the US publications produce excellent commentary, but their insistence on referring to football clubs as singular entities really grinds my gears.

"Newcastle has won only one of its last 11 Premier League games". Grrrrrr



I don't mind the singular. I think it seems grammatically the correct option and the British preference for a plural is just a regional oddity.

The article is good. After Bielsa I now appreciate I don't just want to watch Leeds to win, it has to have more meaning, and yes the beautiful game is the reason.

User avatar
Terre Harte II
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2019 5:52 pm
Location: Middle of Nowhere, USA

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby Terre Harte II » Wed Feb 10, 2021 12:13 am

Mindo wrote:
eric olthwaite wrote:Nice


Some of the US publications produce excellent commentary, but their insistence on referring to football clubs as singular entities really grinds my gears.

"Newcastle has won only one of its last 11 Premier League games". Grrrrrr


How should it read? I'm a writer and I wouldn't know another way to write that sentence.
"The supporters, the only thing to them is that they love their club.
The only thing the receive in exchange is emotions.
For this reason, the supporter is the best thing in football." - Marcelo Bielsa

Eddies Boots
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 5:07 am
Location: Arizona

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby Eddies Boots » Wed Feb 10, 2021 12:21 am

Terre Harte II wrote:How should it read? I'm a writer and I wouldn't know another way to write that sentence.


You would go with Green Bay lost its last game.
The Green Bay Packers lost its last game?
Or lost their last game?
Or Green Bay lost their last game - with the 'Packers' assumed?
Or acknowledgement that its a group noun.

Son of Leeds
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 4:13 pm

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby Son of Leeds » Wed Feb 10, 2021 7:07 am

Some of the US publications produce excellent commentary, but their insistence on referring to football clubs as singular entities really grinds my gears.

"Newcastle has won only one of its last 11 Premier League games". Grrrrrr


I've heard objections to new usage many times, but this is a rare event: an objection too old. Collective nouns can be 'is' or 'are', but as a single entity containing plural members the standard usage was 'is': few people used it, and eventually Those Who Insist gave up correcting people when they got it wrong. 'Are' is now common usage.

North American language is generally more retentive of old forms. Canadians do like their subjunctive. That might be the French-speakers among them.
Leeds United is ruining my life.

User avatar
Devi
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 6:15 pm
Location: Crystal Palarse

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby Devi » Wed Feb 10, 2021 8:34 am

Arnieb wrote:After Bielsa I now appreciate I don't just want to watch Leeds to win, it has to have more meaning, and yes the beautiful game is the reason.


It was the line “Leeds stands for something: a way of playing, a series of assumptions about how the game should be, a theory, a creed, an ideal.” that nailed it for me.

That is the Bielsa brand I’ve fallen for.
I like it. What is it?

User avatar
FER
Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 8:44 am
Location: Hanging Out The Back Of Winona Ryder

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby FER » Wed Feb 10, 2021 12:59 pm

Mindo wrote:
eric olthwaite wrote:Nice


Some of the US publications produce excellent commentary, but their insistence on referring to football clubs as singular entities really grinds my gears.

"Newcastle has won only one of its last 11 Premier League games". Grrrrrr


Happens in Europe too. For me, it takes away that sense of belonging. It turns the club into a 'thing' rather than something which many fans believe 'belongs' to them.

Eddies Boots wrote:
Terre Harte II wrote:How should it read? I'm a writer and I wouldn't know another way to write that sentence.


You would go with Green Bay lost its last game.
The Green Bay Packers lost its last game?
Or lost their last game?
Or Green Bay lost their last game - with the 'Packers' assumed?
Or acknowledgement that its a group noun.


I would go with Green Bay lost their last game, because they're a bunch of shit cheesehead bastards who should be thrown out of the league. :salute:
Squareball Prediction League Champion 2004/2005

User avatar
Oheddieeddie
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:35 pm
Location: Tacky with sweat and poisonous particulates.

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby Oheddieeddie » Wed Feb 10, 2021 3:05 pm



I mean this is just beautiful. I love this man

User avatar
eric olthwaite
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:14 pm
Location: Over there, behind that bush

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby eric olthwaite » Wed Feb 10, 2021 3:06 pm

Terre Harte II wrote:
Mindo wrote:Some of the US publications produce excellent commentary, but their insistence on referring to football clubs as singular entities really grinds my gears.

"Newcastle has won only one of its last 11 Premier League games". Grrrrrr


How should it read? I'm a writer and I wouldn't know another way to write that sentence.


Obviously there are differences in established use of language across the board - eg French French vs Canadian French or whatever - but this one's particularly proprietorial. We think we 'own' English BECAUSE WE FUCKING INVENTED IT (well, sort of) and Americans think they're right because they're Americans.

Think it's interesting if you break it down to subgroup nouns in football. In English English you'd say, 'Leeds haven't lost possession for fifteen minutes' rather than 'Leeds hasn't . . .' But would you say 'the Leeds midfield haven't lost possession' or 'the Leeds midfield hasn't lost possession'? It's less clear to me, there.
Member of a clique

User avatar
Bobbycollins
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:52 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby Bobbycollins » Wed Feb 10, 2021 3:24 pm

eric olthwaite wrote:
Terre Harte II wrote:
Mindo wrote:Some of the US publications produce excellent commentary, but their insistence on referring to football clubs as singular entities really grinds my gears.

"Newcastle has won only one of its last 11 Premier League games". Grrrrrr


How should it read? I'm a writer and I wouldn't know another way to write that sentence.


Obviously there are differences in established use of language across the board - eg French French vs Canadian French or whatever - but this one's particularly proprietorial. We think we 'own' English BECAUSE WE FUCKING INVENTED IT (well, sort of) and Americans think they're right because they're Americans.

Think it's interesting if you break it down to subgroup nouns in football. In English English you'd say, 'Leeds haven't lost possession for fifteen minutes' rather than 'Leeds hasn't . . .' But would you say 'the Leeds midfield haven't lost possession' or 'the Leeds midfield hasn't lost possession'? It's less clear to me, there.

Fewer clear.

Son of Leeds
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 4:13 pm

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby Son of Leeds » Wed Feb 10, 2021 3:32 pm

Even the Leeds midfield hasn't kept possession that long, Eric. They've performed wonders, admittedly.

Just to enlighten or confuse as the case may be.

Personally, I'm fond of the third person plural used as a non-gender third person singular. 'Someone spilt my pint. They should take come back and buy me another.'
Leeds United is ruining my life.

User avatar
eric olthwaite
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:14 pm
Location: Over there, behind that bush

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby eric olthwaite » Wed Feb 10, 2021 4:15 pm

Son of Leeds wrote:They've performed wonders, admittedly.


Yes, it has.
Member of a clique

User avatar
Terre Harte II
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2019 5:52 pm
Location: Middle of Nowhere, USA

Re: YES that Mad Bastard Bielsa's brand of football IS good enough for Leeds United

Postby Terre Harte II » Wed Feb 10, 2021 6:14 pm

Eddies Boots wrote:
Terre Harte II wrote:How should it read? I'm a writer and I wouldn't know another way to write that sentence.


You would go with Green Bay lost its last game.
The Green Bay Packers lost its last game?
Or lost their last game?
Or Green Bay lost their last game - with the 'Packers' assumed?
Or acknowledgement that its a group noun.


The way sportswriters are taught - and the Associated Press stylebook has codified it - is that you use “its” when referring to a team by its city. You use “their” when the nickname is invoked.

So in your example above, No. 1 is the one that’s correct.

Also, once you write “Green Bay Packers” you never write that again. That’s considered a first reference and after first reference, “Green Bay” and “Packers” are acceptably interchangeable, but with the proper use of “its” and “their” used depending on your choice.

Where it gets complicated for American writers is in English football, where nicknames aren’t an official distinction like they are here.

The way it was parsed historically is that a historical baseball team like “the New York Athletic Club” was considered a singular entity, so “its” came into common usage.

American sports nicknames were informal up to the interwar period much as they are in the UK to this day. Sportswriters often invented the nicknames to spice up their writing, they came into common usage and then the teams adopted them for marketing potential. The genesis, though, was that nicknames offered a chance to refer to a team as plural, so that’s how “their” became the choice.

That distinction has been passed down in the 100 years or so since and it is now common.

I can understand how a UK native would think that’s weird as the same historical path wasn’t followed in the two countries. In your case, it seems the official club name became acceptably plural where we had nicknames do that job for us.
"The supporters, the only thing to them is that they love their club.
The only thing the receive in exchange is emotions.
For this reason, the supporter is the best thing in football." - Marcelo Bielsa


Return to “The Square Ball”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Arnieb, Eddies Boots, moscowhite and 63 guests