The Football Thread - Season 2011/2012 - Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Teams like Barca and Madrid also get incredible tax 'allowances' which help them fund there facilities.
 
tiler65 said:
Teams like Barca and Madrid also get incredible tax 'allowances' which help them fund there facilities.
Click to expand...

Does that apply to every team in La Primera?

Talking of Spanish teams, 1st leg of La Segunda play offs tonight. My team, Hércules, drew at home. Very disappointing!
 
Ricardodaforce said:
Does that apply to every team in La Primera?

Talking of Spanish teams, 1st leg of La Segunda play offs tonight. My team, Hércules, drew at home. Very disappointing!
Click to expand...

I don't think it does, my term used is a little white lie as I do not believe it is a tax allowance but more like a donation. IIRC about 12 years ago , Madrid had their £90m tax bill scrapped in return for some property dealings which by some 'other' coincidence are now back in the hands of Madrid.

La Primera need Barca and Madrid. (like SFA need Celtic & Rangers) This country has shown that we are more than just a 2 club nation.
 
tiler65 said:
I don't think it does, my term used is a little white lie as I do not believe it is a tax allowance but more like a donation. IIRC about 12 years ago , Madrid had their £90m tax bill scrapped in return for some property dealings which by some 'other' coincidence are now back in the hands of Madrid.

La Primera need Barca and Madrid. (like SFA need Celtic & Rangers) This country has shown that we are more than just a 2 club nation.
Click to expand...

I also believe part of their success is due to them being able to negotiate their own TV deals. I'm sure I read that. Could be wrong though!
 
Real Madrid's training ground was 're-classified' by the City Council to development land, thereby vastly increasing its value. They sold part of the now very valuable land to the City, and sold the rest for for €480 million, clearing their debts and leaving a healthy surplus, enough to buy Zidane, Figo, Ronaldo and Beckham plus a magnificent new training complex.

The EU started an investigation into the deals, as to whether it was a form of state subsidy.
 
Vantage said:
It's an era, mate. Its the fact you don't like the way football is heading! I do:razz:
Click to expand...

Do you ?

Or do you like that fact that Chelsea benefit ?

Chelsea are where they are today because they fell into the crappy bargin basement bin at around the time Abramovich felt like buying a toy for peanuts. It could have been any one of half a dozen clubs so it's worth remebering that you are where you are now because you were worth zip and won the lottery.

Same goes for City but at least the buyers were clever enough to know that of all the 'dud' clubs to revive - the one that would make the biggest story would be the one that (without buying them) involved Manchester United the most.
 
Last edited:
TriggerHappy said:
I'm not disgruntled about the success of these clubs. Indeed, I think the more competitive domestic and international leagues are the more enjoyable they are to watch, but to simply throw endless cash at something until you're finally at a comparable level is a **** way for a club to make a name for itself.
Click to expand...

dinners said:
Do you ?

Or do you like that fact that Chelsea benefit ?

Chelsea are where they are today because they fell into the crappy bargin basement bin at around the time Abramovich felt like buying a toy for peanuts. It could have been any one of half a dozen clubs so it's worth remebering that you are where you are now because you were worth zip and won the lottery.

Same goes for City but at least the buyers were clever enough to know that of all the 'dud' clubs to revive - the one that would make the biggest story would be the one that (without buying them) involved Manchester United the most.
Click to expand...

I do love the fact that Chelsea have benifited from money injections. I've supported them since I was knee hight to a grass hopper and like many many other supporters of other teams I have been through up's and downs and downright depressing times with them at live games and watching in the arm chair.

What comes with todays immediate success (9 odd years to get to where we are today) is the constant barrage from other supporters and non-supporters(:bang:) about the cash and therefore any congratulation for success always comes with a bad taste. Sometimes I really wish it had not happened. I find myself a little jealous that the likes of Man U and Arsenal ect: can claim that they built their clubs from ground up over decades to get where they are now. I look back to the days of Ruud Gullit as manager and the great players we had around that time. Winning the FA cup and the players he signed. Also winning the final of the cup winners cup. I'm very found of that time but, I'm also delighted about this era too and the success that's come with it.

I don't like the fact that Man City have followed suit to Chelsea but, that's because I just don't like them. Ever since I was a kid I never liked that sky blue kit :cuckoo: I'd rather it of been any other team except them. I'm sure any other supporters, except Man U or Arsenal supporters, would love to see a multi billionaire turn up at their club.

So the money thing gets on my nerves really. Chelsea supporters have to live with the stigma of 'You only won because of the money you have!' which is fairly obvious statement in all its forms that I hear it. Winning the lottery is superb but, it does change peoples opinions of you and that sucks!
 
Manuel Preciado was appointed as coach at Villareal on Wednesday. He died a few hours ago.
 
Just had to google him as I hadn't heard of him. 54 years old. So young!
 
dinners said:
the one that would make the biggest story would be the one that (without buying them) involved Manchester United the most.
Click to expand...

:lol:

I had to read that twice to actually believe you wrote that. Do you not see the arrogance of what you just wrote?
 
Typical man u fan viewpoint. It's just jealousy and fear that they are no longer top dog. Things change. I'm all for the monopoly of clubs at the top to change, man u spent loads winning the title in the past and stealing other teams best youth players at a young age. For me it makes the league interesting and any cash injection to the league is a good thing. I'm completely neutral as my team aren't challenging top four (well we did this year..!) and somehow we've become the best examples of player recruitment on a budget in the league
 
So if the Glazers had sold to the Qatari Royal Family and Utd were spending even more than City no-one would have any complaints?? I think not
 
joescrivens said:
:lol:

I had to read that twice to actually believe you wrote that. Do you not see the arrogance of what you just wrote?
Click to expand...

It was deliberately 'tongue in cheek' Joe although reading back over it I can see that it didn't read that way.;)
 
adam* said:
Typical man u fan viewpoint. It's just jealousy and fear that they are no longer top dog. Things change. I'm all for the monopoly of clubs at the top to change, man u spent loads winning the title in the past and stealing other teams best youth players at a young age. For me it makes the league interesting and any cash injection to the league is a good thing. I'm completely neutral as my team aren't challenging top four (well we did this year..!) and somehow we've become the best examples of player recruitment on a budget in the league
Click to expand...

It's certainly not jealousy from my point of view although I can only speak for myself.

I thought last season was really exciting and have no gripe with teams being bought over and given huge investment.

My only gripe (if you can call it that) is when people bang on about the fact that United, Arsenal and Liverpool also used to spend loads of money but fail to appreciate the fundemental difference.

Jjm said:
So if the Glazers had sold to the Qatari Royal Family and Utd were spending even more than City no-one would have any complaints?? I think not
Click to expand...

If United became the next sugar daddy club then I wouldn't have a problem with that.

I would prefer it if we can continue to be competitive on the back of being a successful business though.
 
adam* said:
Typical man u fan viewpoint. It's just jealousy and fear that they are no longer top dog. Things change. I'm all for the monopoly of clubs at the top to change, man u spent loads winning the title in the past and stealing other teams best youth players at a young age. For me it makes the league interesting and any cash injection to the league is a good thing. I'm completely neutral as my team aren't challenging top four (well we did this year..!) and somehow we've become the best examples of player recruitment on a budget in the league
Click to expand...

Monopoly of CLUBS?

If you read back through the last page or so you will see a breakdown of what has been spent by the top clubs and Man U are certainly not the top spenders.

Stealing players? That is a bit strong, any proof? Man U have a very good youth system and many players playing in the top flight were once United trainees even though they never made the 1st XI especially on a regular basis. You need the best players to compete and Utd have been fortunate that many players wanted to go to Utd whether being 12 or 25 years of age.

One thing over the years I noticed is that when Utd were buying a player the price would always shoot up.....the same thing is happening for City now too.

The financial side of football is lob sided but it is almost impossible to stop now because of the investment behind it.
 
So he's not on the team :shrug:
Isn't it time to try some new blood and try to move English football forward?
Can't believe that everyone thinks England's success depends on one person - what's the point of having an England manager when everyone in the media is an armchair manager?
 
When someone bumps off John Terry I will be happy :)
 
gramps said:
So he's not on the team :shrug:
Isn't it time to try some new blood and try to move English football forward?
Can't believe that everyone thinks England's success depends on one person - what's the point of having an England manager when everyone in the media is an armchair manager?
Click to expand...

i think you'll find it's pretty much just the media giving the impression that the country is in uproar regarding ferdinand. The majority of the country realise he is at the wrong end of his shelf life
 
I agree it's the media whipping it up.

His omission for 'footballing reasons' makes no sense after the season he's had but the manager is free to select who he wants.
 
whether it was for footballing reasons or not, there was no way that hodgson could have called him up when cahill got injured. He said it was for "footballing reasons" so those reasons are the same 2 weeks later, you can't then go back on what you have said.

Even if it is for the unfinished racism problem, I don't think it would have been wise to have terry and ferdinand both in the team. So you got to pick the one who is better - that's john terry. I'd have done the same thing as hodgson.
 
So, coverage will be shared between ITV and BBC - anybody know if they will be available online to watch as well?

I've watched champions league games on my laptop (ITV player) before, but not so sure of BBC's stance.

Anybody know?
 
PMK said:
So, coverage will be shared between ITV and BBC - anybody know if they will be available online to watch as well?

I've watched champions league games on my laptop (ITV player) before, but not so sure of BBC's stance.

Anybody know?
Click to expand...

regardless of what the bbc and itv provide you can watch it all for free at www.tvcatchup.com
 
Annoyingly I'm on a train tomorrow during the first game. Here's hoping my journey keeps me in good 3G signal and I can watch it on my phone!
 
dinners said:
I agree it's the media whipping it up.

His omission for 'footballing reasons' makes no sense after the season he's had but the manager is free to select who he wants.
Click to expand...

joescrivens said:
whether it was for footballing reasons or not, there was no way that hodgson could have called him up when cahill got injured. He said it was for "footballing reasons" so those reasons are the same 2 weeks later, you can't then go back on what you have said.

Even if it is for the unfinished racism problem, I don't think it would have been wise to have terry and ferdinand both in the team. So you got to pick the one who is better - that's john terry. I'd have done the same thing as hodgson.
Click to expand...

I agree

Just that 'football reasons' was a daft statement to make because on ability and form he should clearly have been selected. By not selecting him it was therefore obviously not football reasons.
 
dinners said:
I agree

Just that 'football reasons' was a daft statement to make because on ability and form he should clearly have been selected. By not selecting him it was therefore obviously not football reasons.
Click to expand...

why was it daft? If he had said it was for "team gelling" or something else alluding to the fact that it was to do with making sure there was no animosity in the team hodgson and the team would have been under fire even more form the media about it. By saying "football reasons" it enables them to more easily avoid questions with more straight forward answers so as not to be dragged further and further into the debaucle of the matter - just look at what the media are already doing, if he'd alluded to other things it would have been even worse.
 
I've said why I thought it was daft.......

'football reasons' was a daft statement to make because on ability and form he should clearly have been selected. By not selecting him it was therefore obviously not football reasons.

.....which leads people to speculate and the press to have a field day.

He could have just said that he was wanting to keep the 2014 World Cup in mind or that he was concerned with so many games in a short period of time. Might not be the case or even justified but at least it would be an opinion that made his omission credible.
 
dinners said:
He could have just said that he was wanting to keep the 2014 World Cup in mind or that he was concerned with so many games in a short period of time. Might not be the case or even justified but at least it would be an opinion that made his omission credible.
Click to expand...

aren't they 'footballing reasons' then? :suspect:

They read like footballing reasons to me
 
joescrivens said:
aren't they 'footballing reasons' then? :suspect:

They read like footballing reasons to me
Click to expand...

That's my point.

He could have given (albeit invented) a specific footballing reason to make us think he actually had one rather than just saying 'football reasons'.

It's because nobody can think of a good 'football reason' that the press have had a field day about what the real reason may be.
 
Last edited:
redddraggon said:
How do I join the TP league? What's the pin?
Click to expand...

The pin is 8005520. Once you've made your team there's a drop down menu on the bar above called Leagues+, hover your cursor over that and click on join/create league. Enter the pin or Talk Photography into the join section and you should be in :thumbs:

Be interesting to see who you all select!
 
dinners said:
That's my point.

He could have given (albeit invented) a specific footballing reason to make us think he actually had one rather than just saying 'football reasons'.

It's because nobody can think of a good 'football reason' that the press have had a field day about what the real reason may be.
Click to expand...

Hang on, you make it sound like when he was asks he just said "footballing reasons" and made no other comment. He did further elaborate in his initial press conference, I was watching it live. He mentioned the lack of football Ferdinand had played over the last year, especially for England having only been included once since the world cup. It came across to me that it was that he felt at international level he didn't think ferdinand could cut it anymore.

Whether he was telling the truth or not is up for debate, but that's what he said, the media just ignore all of the elaboration of the reasons and stick wi the ambiguous term "footballing decision" because it makes a better story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top