|
Post by baconburger on Jun 8, 2024 17:00:27 GMT
No you described Man City leaving the Premier League other premier league clubs joining them and the premier league collapsing. It’s just fantasist bollocks. So what about progressive fans who follow efl clubs you’re just going to dictate to them or else they can fuck off and support Man City ? How’s about you fuck off and support Stafford Rangers if someone has to fuck off at all. You see I’m not in favour of diluting our fan base even to get rid of conservatives like you. So I guess you’ll just have to keep sucking the mop. Man City getting kicked out of the Premier League is not fantasist bollocks - it could happen. The big Premier League clubs getting behind a European Super League actually happened so a group of them swanning of with Man City to form super league v2 isn't fantasy bollocks either. It's certainly speculation and it may not happen but it isn't beyond the realms of possibility. I'm not dictating anything - I'm speculating on something happening that would sort out the problems caused by Man City and their owners trying to bully the Premier League and the UK government into allowing Man City to cheat the system and buy sporting success and demeaning football as a competitive sport. It also happens to resolve the problem of what a divided fanbase want from football. I'm not diluting the fanbase - it's already divided between "traditionalists" like me and "modernists" like you. I'm offering an amicable solution - you are offering a mop to suck for those of you that don't accept your vision. I'm offering people a choice - it's you who want others "to suck the mop" and put up with a version of football that has nothing to do with sport and everything to do with money and consumerist entertainment. I'm not the bully - you are. All you do is shout down and insult anyone who disagrees with you. And you couldn't string together a coherent argument to defend your position even if you wanted to - you misrepresent or misunderstand everything that anyone says and you just regurgitate the same old crap. You're offering an amicable solution by taking a club I've supported for over 40 years hostage to your views, what's amicable about that? It's not my vision I'm really not that original I simply prefer the imperfect reality than the backward vision of you and people like you conservative traditionalists. Neither am I offering anyone anything I'm saying you'll just have to suck the mop because things don't appear to be going to go your way and haven't been for a number of decades, I'm not foolish enough to think I have any influence over these issues other than to offer my take on them, launching a campaign to stop the tide coming in is more a speciality of your type. Incidentally when has sporting success not been bought in football, certainly not in my lifetime (57 years). I certainly don't bully anyone, I make sure that it's clear there are other opinions contrary to traditionalists claiming ownership of "Our Game". Keep on fantasising it's all about to implode, the sky will fall in and the Sun won't rise and Luddites shall rule the Earth.
|
|
|
Post by Pottersfan on Jun 8, 2024 22:16:15 GMT
Man City getting kicked out of the Premier League is not fantasist bollocks - it could happen. The big Premier League clubs getting behind a European Super League actually happened so a group of them swanning of with Man City to form super league v2 isn't fantasy bollocks either. It's certainly speculation and it may not happen but it isn't beyond the realms of possibility. I'm not dictating anything - I'm speculating on something happening that would sort out the problems caused by Man City and their owners trying to bully the Premier League and the UK government into allowing Man City to cheat the system and buy sporting success and demeaning football as a competitive sport. It also happens to resolve the problem of what a divided fanbase want from football. I'm not diluting the fanbase - it's already divided between "traditionalists" like me and "modernists" like you. I'm offering an amicable solution - you are offering a mop to suck for those of you that don't accept your vision. I'm offering people a choice - it's you who want others "to suck the mop" and put up with a version of football that has nothing to do with sport and everything to do with money and consumerist entertainment. I'm not the bully - you are. All you do is shout down and insult anyone who disagrees with you. And you couldn't string together a coherent argument to defend your position even if you wanted to - you misrepresent or misunderstand everything that anyone says and you just regurgitate the same old crap. You're offering an amicable solution by taking a club I've supported for over 40 years hostage to your views, what's amicable about that? It's not my vision I'm really not that original I simply prefer the imperfect reality than the backward vision of you and people like you conservative traditionalists. Neither am I offering anyone anything I'm saying you'll just have to suck the mop because things don't appear to be going to go your way and haven't been for a number of decades, I'm not foolish enough to think I have any influence over these issues other than to offer my take on them, launching a campaign to stop the tide coming in is more a speciality of your type. Incidentally when has sporting success not been bought in football, certainly not in my lifetime (57 years). I certainly don't bully anyone, I make sure that it's clear there are other opinions contrary to traditionalists claiming ownership of "Our Game". Keep on fantasising it's all about to implode, the sky will fall in and the Sun won't rise and Luddites shall rule the Earth. 57 years ? I had you down at about 25.
|
|
|
Post by biddulphchav on Jun 10, 2024 14:39:55 GMT
Slightly unrelated but I heard Kevin DeBrunye just tother day indicating he's thinking of going to Saudi for 2 years because he can earn more there in 2 years than he has in his whole career to date. Or summat like that. Don't know what to make of it really. On the one hand I think fair play to you pal. On the other I think you greedy twat. Is this really what we envisaged football to be... And I've heard Simon Jordan predicting there is way more capacity in the value of the overall football market. Meaning these crazy salaries are going to get way crazier. I'm aware of young kids round Manchester whose parents are being bought large houses round Bramhall wilmslow etc so they can take their kids into their academies. Its bonkers. I'm beginning to think money could really be starting to destroy the soul of football but that its an inevitable consequence at this stage..money talks I guess.. Totally impractical of course but I wish when Stoke played Bolton for example it was with teams packed with lads from just Stoke and Bolton. To me that would be a more entertaining event. Real passion 😃 Guess I'm a traditionalist and bacon will be telling me off shortly 😃 I think it’s sad that football has become a business. For me it’s not what sport is really about - the amount of money involved feels obscene in a way and I struggle with the inevitable consequence of that much money in the sport - the greed. On the flip side, the money has improved the quality of the football on offer. The level of play is higher now than it’s ever been. The stadiums, on the whole are much improved, and the match day experience is just miles better. The game has and continues to evolve. I do miss the old days, the romance of it. But it’s moved on, and nothing will stop it. If there is enough appetite, people will start going to non league and that will blossom and may eventually replace some parts of the higher leagues given enough time. Edit: loved when the players were local but looking back over recent times, we’ve not produced many that were exciting to watch. Andy Wilkinson, Carl Dickinson, Tom Edwards?! Could we have attracted Bojan, Arnautovic, Shaqiri without all the money?
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jun 10, 2024 14:50:39 GMT
Slightly unrelated but I heard Kevin DeBrunye just tother day indicating he's thinking of going to Saudi for 2 years because he can earn more there in 2 years than he has in his whole career to date. Or summat like that. Don't know what to make of it really. On the one hand I think fair play to you pal. On the other I think you greedy twat. Is this really what we envisaged football to be... And I've heard Simon Jordan predicting there is way more capacity in the value of the overall football market. Meaning these crazy salaries are going to get way crazier. I'm aware of young kids round Manchester whose parents are being bought large houses round Bramhall wilmslow etc so they can take their kids into their academies. Its bonkers. I'm beginning to think money could really be starting to destroy the soul of football but that its an inevitable consequence at this stage..money talks I guess.. Totally impractical of course but I wish when Stoke played Bolton for example it was with teams packed with lads from just Stoke and Bolton. To me that would be a more entertaining event. Real passion 😃 Guess I'm a traditionalist and bacon will be telling me off shortly 😃 I think it’s sad that football has become a business. For me it’s not what sport is really about - the amount of money involved feels obscene in a way and I struggle with the inevitable consequence of that much money in the sport - the greed. On the flip side, the money has improved the quality of the football on offer. The level of play is higher now than it’s ever been. The stadiums, on the whole are much improved, and the match day experience is just miles better. The game has and continues to evolve. I do miss the old days, the romance of it. But it’s moved on, and nothing will stop it. If there is enough appetite, people will start going to non league and that will blossom and may eventually replace some parts of the higher leagues given enough time. Edit: loved when the players were local but looking back over recent times, we’ve not produced many that were exciting to watch. Andy Wilkinson, Carl Dickinson, Tom Edwards?! Could we have attracted Bojan, Arnautovic, Shaqiri without all the money? Agree with most of that. It's not perfect but on balance the improvements have been overall positive. I think the standard of play is technically higher but don't think the game is more entertaining, in fact I think in that aspect it's going in the wrong direction. Seems somehow overly patient, they're losing with minutes to go but just keep playing the same way does my fucking head in.
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Jun 10, 2024 14:51:13 GMT
Slightly unrelated but I heard Kevin DeBrunye just tother day indicating he's thinking of going to Saudi for 2 years because he can earn more there in 2 years than he has in his whole career to date. Or summat like that. Don't know what to make of it really. On the one hand I think fair play to you pal. On the other I think you greedy twat. Is this really what we envisaged football to be... And I've heard Simon Jordan predicting there is way more capacity in the value of the overall football market. Meaning these crazy salaries are going to get way crazier. I'm aware of young kids round Manchester whose parents are being bought large houses round Bramhall wilmslow etc so they can take their kids into their academies. Its bonkers. I'm beginning to think money could really be starting to destroy the soul of football but that its an inevitable consequence at this stage..money talks I guess.. Totally impractical of course but I wish when Stoke played Bolton for example it was with teams packed with lads from just Stoke and Bolton. To me that would be a more entertaining event. Real passion 😃 Guess I'm a traditionalist and bacon will be telling me off shortly 😃 I think it’s sad that football has become a business. For me it’s not what sport is really about - the amount of money involved feels obscene in a way and I struggle with the inevitable consequence of that much money in the sport - the greed. On the flip side, the money has improved the quality of the football on offer. The level of play is higher now than it’s ever been. The stadiums, on the whole are much improved, and the match day experience is just miles better. The game has and continues to evolve. I do miss the old days, the romance of it. But it’s moved on, and nothing will stop it. If there is enough appetite, people will start going to non league and that will blossom and may eventually replace some parts of the higher leagues given enough time. Edit: loved when the players were local but looking back over recent times, we’ve not produced many that were exciting to watch. Andy Wilkinson, Carl Dickinson, Tom Edwards?! Could we have attracted Bojan, Arnautovic, Shaqiri without all the money? I think part of my problem is bending my head around players earning 400k a wayk. I don't want to go full on socialist or anything but 400k a wayk is an incredible sum of money for twatting a football about on a satdee afternoon 😆 And Simon Jordan reckons it'll become a lot more when the market moves onto mobile devices on a subscription or ppv basis. Somehow the money needs to be spread through football better. Fuck me I'm becoming a Corbynite 😆
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2024 14:56:31 GMT
I think it’s sad that football has become a business. For me it’s not what sport is really about - the amount of money involved feels obscene in a way and I struggle with the inevitable consequence of that much money in the sport - the greed. On the flip side, the money has improved the quality of the football on offer. The level of play is higher now than it’s ever been. The stadiums, on the whole are much improved, and the match day experience is just miles better. The game has and continues to evolve. I do miss the old days, the romance of it. But it’s moved on, and nothing will stop it. If there is enough appetite, people will start going to non league and that will blossom and may eventually replace some parts of the higher leagues given enough time. Edit: loved when the players were local but looking back over recent times, we’ve not produced many that were exciting to watch. Andy Wilkinson, Carl Dickinson, Tom Edwards?! Could we have attracted Bojan, Arnautovic, Shaqiri without all the money? I think part of my problem is bending my head around players earning 400k a wayk. I don't want to go full on socialist or anything but 400k a wayk is an incredible sum of money for twatting a football about on a satdee afternoon 😆 And Simon Jordan reckons it'll become a lot more when the market moves onto mobile devices on a subscription or ppv basis. Somehow the money needs to be spread through football better. Fuck me I'm becoming a Corbynite 😆 The entertainment industry is a law to itself. If people are willing to pay them and others are willing to pay to watch them, then their salaries seem justified. I work my arse off but not one person is going to pay money to see me do it.
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jun 10, 2024 15:05:03 GMT
I think it’s sad that football has become a business. For me it’s not what sport is really about - the amount of money involved feels obscene in a way and I struggle with the inevitable consequence of that much money in the sport - the greed. On the flip side, the money has improved the quality of the football on offer. The level of play is higher now than it’s ever been. The stadiums, on the whole are much improved, and the match day experience is just miles better. The game has and continues to evolve. I do miss the old days, the romance of it. But it’s moved on, and nothing will stop it. If there is enough appetite, people will start going to non league and that will blossom and may eventually replace some parts of the higher leagues given enough time. Edit: loved when the players were local but looking back over recent times, we’ve not produced many that were exciting to watch. Andy Wilkinson, Carl Dickinson, Tom Edwards?! Could we have attracted Bojan, Arnautovic, Shaqiri without all the money? I think part of my problem is bending my head around players earning 400k a wayk. I don't want to go full on socialist or anything but 400k a wayk is an incredible sum of money for twatting a football about on a satdee afternoon 😆 And Simon Jordan reckons it'll become a lot more when the market moves onto mobile devices on a subscription or ppv basis. Somehow the money needs to be spread through football better. Fuck me I'm becoming a Corbynite 😆 There should be more than enough money in the game for clubs to make a profit look after the pyramid and grass roots and the stars of the show still get the majority of the money as they should. Don't fucking ask me how you achieve that mind.
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Jun 10, 2024 15:05:22 GMT
I think part of my problem is bending my head around players earning 400k a wayk. I don't want to go full on socialist or anything but 400k a wayk is an incredible sum of money for twatting a football about on a satdee afternoon 😆 And Simon Jordan reckons it'll become a lot more when the market moves onto mobile devices on a subscription or ppv basis. Somehow the money needs to be spread through football better. Fuck me I'm becoming a Corbynite 😆 The entertainment industry is a law to itself. If people are willing to pay them and others are willing to pay to watch them, then their salaries seem justified. I work my arse off but not one person is going to pay money to see me do it. I get that. But 400k a week at one end of our 4 pro leagues and 1k a week at the other simply doesn't sit right with me. They ain't 400 times better are they...
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Jun 10, 2024 15:10:19 GMT
I think part of my problem is bending my head around players earning 400k a wayk. I don't want to go full on socialist or anything but 400k a wayk is an incredible sum of money for twatting a football about on a satdee afternoon 😆 And Simon Jordan reckons it'll become a lot more when the market moves onto mobile devices on a subscription or ppv basis. Somehow the money needs to be spread through football better. Fuck me I'm becoming a Corbynite 😆 There should be more than enough money in the game for clubs to make a profit look after the pyramid and grass roots and the stars of the show still get the majority of the money as they should. Don't fucking ask me how you achieve that mind. There should be enough money you're right. Something definitely needs to be done to push more of it down the leagues. Especially into grass roots facilities. The facilities some kids have to contend with at grassroots level is shameful..
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jun 10, 2024 15:11:02 GMT
The entertainment industry is a law to itself. If people are willing to pay them and others are willing to pay to watch them, then their salaries seem justified. I work my arse off but not one person is going to pay money to see me do it. I get that. But 400k a week at one end of our 4 pro leagues and 1k a week at the other simply doesn't sit right with me. They ain't 400 times better are they... I personally believe in floors and ceilings. I understand there needs to be incentive but one person just isn't worth hundreds and thousands of times more than another but the people at the bottom are stupid as fuck and want to be just like the people at the top instead of things being more equitable whilst retaining incentive. Morons.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2024 15:24:31 GMT
The entertainment industry is a law to itself. If people are willing to pay them and others are willing to pay to watch them, then their salaries seem justified. I work my arse off but not one person is going to pay money to see me do it. I get that. But 400k a week at one end of our 4 pro leagues and 1k a week at the other simply doesn't sit right with me. They ain't 400 times better are they... I agree, they are not. However, entertainment isn’t really about quality, it’s about viewership. The PL is watched by tens of millions of people around the world. League 2 is watched by 20 people and their dogs.
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Jun 10, 2024 15:30:45 GMT
I get that. But 400k a week at one end of our 4 pro leagues and 1k a week at the other simply doesn't sit right with me. They ain't 400 times better are they... I agree, they are not. However, entertainment isn’t really about quality, it’s about viewership. The PL is watched by tens of millions of people around the world. League 2 is watched by 20 people and their dogs. But wouldn't the overall quality improve if the guys at the bottom were paid better and weren't thinking whether to take a part time job to get a better standard of living. I know a grand a week is a decent salary but not when you bust your leg badly and career is over at 24..
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2024 15:42:58 GMT
I agree, they are not. However, entertainment isn’t really about quality, it’s about viewership. The PL is watched by tens of millions of people around the world. League 2 is watched by 20 people and their dogs. But wouldn't the overall quality improve if the guys at the bottom were paid better and weren't thinking whether to take a part time job to get a better standard of living. I know a grand a week is a decent salary but not when you bust your leg badly and career is over at 24.. I’m not sure that it would to be honest, no. I don’t think that the reason that Langstaff isn’t as good as Haaland is because he isn’t earning the same. I also am not sure if it is the PL’s responsibility. If I go to the cinema and watch a film because I like a specific actor, should they receive less money so that more can go to a low budget film that doesn’t make the cinema? The money would definitely help the actors develop. Those actors also work hard but are not a reason why I spent the money in the first place. I think that things can be made more fair across the country by a) creating reserve leagues again and adding some sort of meaning to the games (allowing clubs a better opportunity to build their own talent); b) limiting how many loans a player can take at any one club (stopping clubs buying players simply to loan them out), and c) drastically limiting how many loans a single club can give out at any one time (same reason as b).
|
|
|
Post by Middle White Stripe on Jun 11, 2024 3:32:17 GMT
What is meant by over-inflating the value of sponsorship deals? Is it the case of on paper a deal is stated at 50 million but in reality 10 million is paid to the owner or paid to a player etc meaning it's true value is £40 million? or am I barking up the wrong tree?
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jun 11, 2024 7:02:18 GMT
What is meant by over-inflating the value of sponsorship deals? Is it the case of on paper a deal is stated at 50 million but in reality 10 million is paid to the owner or paid to a player etc meaning it's true value is £40 million? or am I barking up the wrong tree? Don’t think that’s the case. They’re trying to limit the value of various sponsorships to somewhere in the same ball park as comparable clubs can achieve so Etihad can’t sponsor Man City shirts for a billion a year or something. I just don’t get it because it’s nothing to do with stopping clubs getting into financial peril and if they wanted a level playing field that would be relatively simple to achieve without all these bogus rules that end up looking like we like this money but we don’t like that money. They need to work out what the rules are meant to achieve and be clear about it.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Jun 11, 2024 7:11:40 GMT
What is meant by over-inflating the value of sponsorship deals? Is it the case of on paper a deal is stated at 50 million but in reality 10 million is paid to the owner or paid to a player etc meaning it's true value is £40 million? or am I barking up the wrong tree? As I understand it sponsors give money to a club in order to get exposure and reflected glory by association with the club and this can be givrn a monetary value to the sponsor. So let's say a shirt deal is actually worth £50 million in terms of benefits to the sponsor then Man City are being charged with doing a deal worth £100 million with a company that is actually under the umbrella of the clubs owners - its a way of pumping money into the club that shows up as income in the accounts which otherwise would have been accounted for as investment from the owners and would have different FFP implications.
|
|
|
Post by Middle White Stripe on Jun 11, 2024 7:28:23 GMT
What is meant by over-inflating the value of sponsorship deals? Is it the case of on paper a deal is stated at 50 million but in reality 10 million is paid to the owner or paid to a player etc meaning it's true value is £40 million? or am I barking up the wrong tree? Don’t think that’s the case. They’re trying to limit the value of various sponsorships to somewhere in the same ball park as comparable clubs can achieve so Etihad can’t sponsor Man City shirts for a billion a year or something. I just don’t get it because it’s nothing to do with stopping clubs getting into financial peril and if they wanted a level playing field that would be relatively simple to achieve without all these bogus rules that end up looking like we like this money but we don’t like that money. They need to work out what the rules are meant to achieve and be clear about it. That's what I thought regarding financial peril. It also screams to me of if all the clubs went bankrupt the no prem no income. Almost self preservation.
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jun 11, 2024 7:54:59 GMT
What is meant by over-inflating the value of sponsorship deals? Is it the case of on paper a deal is stated at 50 million but in reality 10 million is paid to the owner or paid to a player etc meaning it's true value is £40 million? or am I barking up the wrong tree? As I understand it sponsors give money to a club in order to get exposure and reflected glory by association with the club and this can be givrn a monetary value to the sponsor. So let's say a shirt deal is actually worth £50 million in terms of benefits to the sponsor then Man City are being charged with doing a deal worth £100 million with a company that is actually under the umbrella of the clubs owners - its a way of pumping money into the club that shows up as income in the accounts which otherwise would have been accounted for as investment from the owners and would have different FFP implications. Good money and bad money it’s laughable they either want a level playing field or they don’t. Just make a set budget for 1st team football operations and give reverse parachute payments to promoted teams based on their previous accounts. You’d get a better competition but would likely lose star players to other leagues or you could have a player auction like the IPL with a budget cap so the stars get evenly distributed or whatever they do in America in football and grid iron I know they have control to protect the competitive integrity but I don’t have an interest in them so don’t understand the detail. But if they just want to have their pick of world stars barring the likes of Real Madrid obviously a financial free for all is the way to go just protecting clubs by measures like forward funding and allowable debt ratios. These things are pretty simple once you’re clear about their objectives, football at the moment is anything but.
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jun 11, 2024 8:11:38 GMT
Don’t think that’s the case. They’re trying to limit the value of various sponsorships to somewhere in the same ball park as comparable clubs can achieve so Etihad can’t sponsor Man City shirts for a billion a year or something. I just don’t get it because it’s nothing to do with stopping clubs getting into financial peril and if they wanted a level playing field that would be relatively simple to achieve without all these bogus rules that end up looking like we like this money but we don’t like that money. They need to work out what the rules are meant to achieve and be clear about it. That's what I thought regarding financial peril. It also screams to me of if all the clubs went bankrupt the no prem no income. Almost self preservation. It’s a complete fucking muddle at the moment. Hopefully as soon after the election is possible they’ll get the independent regulator thing through and things can start getting bought into some sort of more credible plan that can’t be blocked by self interest or maybe I’m way too optimistic about how radical that might be.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Jun 11, 2024 8:34:28 GMT
As I understand it sponsors give money to a club in order to get exposure and reflected glory by association with the club and this can be givrn a monetary value to the sponsor. So let's say a shirt deal is actually worth £50 million in terms of benefits to the sponsor then Man City are being charged with doing a deal worth £100 million with a company that is actually under the umbrella of the clubs owners - its a way of pumping money into the club that shows up as income in the accounts which otherwise would have been accounted for as investment from the owners and would have different FFP implications. Good money and bad money it’s laughable they either want a level playing field or they don’t. Just make a set budget for 1st team football operations and give reverse parachute payments to promoted teams based on their previous accounts. You’d get a better competition but would likely lose star players to other leagues or you could have a player auction like the IPL with a budget cap so the stars get evenly distributed or whatever they do in America in football and grid iron I know they have control to protect the competitive integrity but I don’t have an interest in them so don’t understand the detail. But if they just want to have their pick of world stars barring the likes of Real Madrid obviously a financial free for all is the way to go just protecting clubs by measures like forward funding and allowable debt ratios. These things are pretty simple once you’re clear about their objectives, football at the moment is anything but. I agree with you about one of aims of FFP is to level the playing field - ie ensure that the club with the biggest wallet don't just buy success and kill off the competition. However I suggest you float the idea of a player auction as a poll on here and see what happens. Man City's legal challenge is that the Premier League's rules are illegal in terms of the UKs anti competition laws (which is the legal case won by the backers if the Super League in the European Court). The problem is if you apply free market economics to football the outcome is what you get in other areas of life where the free market is king - the big players use there financial clout to make it impossible for the small players to compete and either drive them out of business or buy them out. If Man City get their way that is exactly what would happen in football - they would pump in more and more money knowing full well it would kill competition and drive thise daft enough to compete out of business. In setting up the independent football authority even the Tories recognised that allowing football to operate in an unfettered free market would decimate the football league structure and deprive communities of a big part if their identity. As you say its one of the things the incoming Labour government needs to get up and running ASAP.
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jun 11, 2024 8:44:16 GMT
Good money and bad money it’s laughable they either want a level playing field or they don’t. Just make a set budget for 1st team football operations and give reverse parachute payments to promoted teams based on their previous accounts. You’d get a better competition but would likely lose star players to other leagues or you could have a player auction like the IPL with a budget cap so the stars get evenly distributed or whatever they do in America in football and grid iron I know they have control to protect the competitive integrity but I don’t have an interest in them so don’t understand the detail. But if they just want to have their pick of world stars barring the likes of Real Madrid obviously a financial free for all is the way to go just protecting clubs by measures like forward funding and allowable debt ratios. These things are pretty simple once you’re clear about their objectives, football at the moment is anything but. I agree with you about one of aims of FFP is to level the playing field - ie ensure that the club with the biggest wallet don't just buy success and kill off the competition. However I suggest you float the idea of a player auction as a poll on here and see what happens. Man City's legal challenge is that the Premier League's rules are illegal in terms of the UKs anti competition laws (which is the legal case won by the backers if the Super League in the European Court). The problem is if you apply free market economics to football the outcome is what you get in other areas of life where the free market is king - the big players use there financial clout to make it impossible for the small players to compete and either drive them out of business or buy them out. If Man City get their way that is exactly what would happen in football - they would pump in more and more money knowing full well it would kill competition and drive thise daft enough to compete out of business. In setting up the independent football authority even the Tories recognised that allowing football to operate in an unfettered free market would decimate the football league structure and deprive communities of a big part if their identity. As you say its one of the things the incoming Labour government needs to get up and running ASAP. Again it’s not my idea it’s something I see working elsewhere. Mumbai Indians finished bottom of the IPL table this year. It wouldn’t even be a stretch of the imagination for them to win it next season, now that’s a proper competition.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jun 11, 2024 20:47:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Jun 12, 2024 6:40:43 GMT
I agree with you about one of aims of FFP is to level the playing field - ie ensure that the club with the biggest wallet don't just buy success and kill off the competition. However I suggest you float the idea of a player auction as a poll on here and see what happens. Man City's legal challenge is that the Premier League's rules are illegal in terms of the UKs anti competition laws (which is the legal case won by the backers if the Super League in the European Court). The problem is if you apply free market economics to football the outcome is what you get in other areas of life where the free market is king - the big players use there financial clout to make it impossible for the small players to compete and either drive them out of business or buy them out. If Man City get their way that is exactly what would happen in football - they would pump in more and more money knowing full well it would kill competition and drive thise daft enough to compete out of business. In setting up the independent football authority even the Tories recognised that allowing football to operate in an unfettered free market would decimate the football league structure and deprive communities of a big part if their identity. As you say its one of the things the incoming Labour government needs to get up and running ASAP. Again it’s not my idea it’s something I see working elsewhere. Mumbai Indians finished bottom of the IPL table this year. It wouldn’t even be a stretch of the imagination for them to win it next season, now that’s a proper competition. It might not be your idea but it is you who is proposing it as a solution to make the football more competitive. As I said try setting up à poll and see what support you get for the idea. I'll go out on a limb and say very little.
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jun 12, 2024 7:02:58 GMT
Again it’s not my idea it’s something I see working elsewhere. Mumbai Indians finished bottom of the IPL table this year. It wouldn’t even be a stretch of the imagination for them to win it next season, now that’s a proper competition. It might not be your idea but it is you who is proposing it as a solution to make the football more competitive. As I said try setting up à poll and see what support you get for the idea. I'll go out on a limb and say very little. What’s the point with most football fans they’re riddled with self interest. My point is if the administrators of the game want to level the playing field there are far better ways than this mess that they’ve implemented of which even its goals are not clear and transparent. I don’t see a great deal of difference between a locked out status quo in terms of whose owner is richest to one of who’s got the biggest worldwide fan base (turn over). So I’d actually welcome a proper levelling out that wouldn’t make getting promoted a bit of a nightmare because I don’t think I’d see much fun or pleasure from it over and above enjoying a promotion season. It’s a matter of trying to think of something that would keep the English leagues (including the prem) status in the food chain to still attract world stars and it’s knock on of our clubs doing well in Europe. That’s why the IPL is a good model, all the biggest stars are there but they’re spread pretty evenly. The standard is very high whilst at the same time the competition is highly unpredictable. Competitions in any sport should be looking at it for ideas they can adapt in their own.
|
|