I remember he's the bloke that fouled Owen for the 2002 WC pen
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Football Thread |OT11| Campaign: Save a donkey in Colombia
- Thread starter Fry
- Start date
- Status
I remember he's the bloke that fouled Owen for the 2002 WC pen
His sole contribution to football was fouling Michael Owen in the box during the 2002 world cup.
We were in admin and needed money. That actually made sense, this...
Gareth Bale
Member
They accepted a lower payment in advance because they were poor as shit.
FUCKING LOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
LOST OUT ON £10M AHAHAHAHA
If its the same board, then they're the biggest morons after Shebby in the sport
edit; oh. But still, Christ.
Vivalaraza
Member
The Atticus
Member
This is plain disrespectful.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
Well you see, he may have left Espanyol 9 points off relegation but as we all know, La Liga is a massively superior league, meaning that he should be able to take S'oton to EUROPA cup places at least.
Vivalaraza
Member
Guillem Ballgue confirms Wesley Sneijder will sign for Liverpool on £180k/week
kingellesar
Member
Damn, that's a shame with regards to season 7
As for Southampton, surely he must have done something for this to happen?
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
It is kinda.
You're wrong mate. I'm not sobbing because United want it. It's fucking hilarious that United are now asking for it. Would United have asked for it whilst spending around £30 on Rooney, Veron and Rio? nope. They know it's the only way they can compete.
For years you out priced everyone else, yup with money you earned but so what?
People act as if £30m+ transfers have only been around since Abromovich and Mansour. Bollocks.
United fans need to realise, if you weren't saddled with debt because of your own owners leeching money out of the club you could still compete with City and Chelsea financially. Then you wouldn't be voting for this, naturally.
Vivalaraza
Member
Not true.
You are missing the point.
United don't want this to push their spending further up.
They want it to push City and Chelsea down. Even if we are debt free the club would still push for this because it would limit Chelsea and City.
BTW United spent about £40m net on transfers this summer and will record a profit at the end of the year - our second biggest spending summer of all time, net.
kingellesar
Member
If this happened now, Levy wouldn't pay them £2m. He'd shiped Bale out to a Belgian club for 20p then buy back for 15p 2 months later.
Seriously though, at the time it was still unlikely for him to ever break through the team, heck no one predicted he'd turn into a left winger and be one of the best in the country!
Still, let's go buy more Southampton players
Nobody can compete with City financially. United, regardless of the debt certainly couldn't.
I've said it before but it's ironic considering that City were only bought in the first place by Mansour because United were on the doorstep and the City Council essentially gave them a brand new stadium for free. What goes around comes around.
I've said it before but it's ironic considering that City were only bought in the first place by Mansour because United were on the doorstep and the City Council essentially gave them a brand new stadium for free. What goes around comes around.
kingellesar
Member
I believe Arsenal and Tottenham are also supporting United on this? We're debt free pretty much, as are Arsenal I believe.
Edit - And Liverpool too, haha they probably want someone to tell them they can't spend money on English players anymore.
Aye. Classless.
Vivalaraza
Member
dc doesn't realise the economics of this situation.
He thinks that if United were debt free they would pay the same wages as City. We would...and then City would just pay another £100k on top.
I am against FFP and think it's an unbalanced regulation but the reasons outlined for it by dc in particular are just wide of the mark.
As I said before, it's Arsenal's letterhead on these plans.
Not United's.
United as the leaders just helps makes a story to contrast them against City.
Yeah, just read Viva's posts. Good job again dc, can always rely on you to post the shittiest things in a thread that talks about masturbation and Bayern
Fucking bananas.
"You wouldn't have asked for this 10-15 years ago"
Of course we wouldn't have, you dippy bastard. It's just imbecilic or disingenuous to act like funnelling limitless funds into a football club is identical to spending money that the club has earned - because it's all money innit.
It's the reaction and perceptual level of a fucking child.
The deal City did with the council was quite incredible really. David Bernstein pulled a master stroke.
But it's not free. The original agreement was a lease until 2099 I believe. Obviously we were going from 34,000 Maine Road to 47,000 CoMS. There was a concern wether we'd get above 34,000 fans at first, so it was agreed if we didn't fill it over 34,000 on a match day we wouldn't pay the rent that week. Incredible really, we got a great deal.
However, of course we filled it so we've paid our way as originally agreed.
But I don't know wether the agreement has changed under the new ownership. There were rumours of us buying the stadium or building a new one on some land we acquired. But now the plan is to build the campus and extend the capacity by adding a third tier to two of the stands.
The problem with FFP for Man City, is that they don't have the enormous fan base that teams like United, Arsenal and Liverpool do. Without the ability to rely on foreign investors they simply wouldn't be able to compete on a financial level with those clubs. Same for Chelsea, though they have spent the last decade growing their brand and might be less affected.
The Atticus
Member
I understand the place you are coming from, but please try and appreciate that it is not the case.
Vivalaraza
Member
City's "brand" has itself grown massively by virtue of the Abu Dhabi group.
They won't be able to spend £100m in a summer anymore but they will most likely foot their wage bill and spend a decent amount each summer and pass the regulations.
City and Chelsea fans are lucky. FFP doesn't hit them, they've just nipped through the closing door. They don't realise it yet but wait for 5 years, once they've tied up their in house deals to falsely inflate their value - they won't be moaning so much then when they're part of the elites.
It's almost like they'd have to make the most of the campus/academy development they're so excited about.
LanceVance
Member
Um you do know united still ran at profit when signing those players don't you? The difference is united could afford it from the money they made and still continue to make as a club from merchandise/sponsorship etc whereas city's all comes from your owner and your marketing/sponsorship doesn't even cover the cost of the players wages because you pay them so much. United want this so that they don't have to pay stupid wages not because they're 'scared'. It's a very childish thing to suggest anyway.
kingellesar
Member
Mental decision, wonder if a few Southampton players will be sold and that's the reason they parted ways? He didn't agree perhaps?
Maybe this is Arsenals big plan? Buy some more Southampton players.
Rio/Vidic then probs.
Yikes. Getting personal?
Luke Shaw was rumoured for a while.
When you're saying stupid things I don't know what else you'd expect.
edit: well not personal, but comments like dippy refer to your posts, not you.
They're going to simply buy Southampton and rename them Arsenal B. Then they don't have to worry about buying all their young players any more.
Vivalaraza
Member
This "scared" talks is just City fans getting brave.
If City had such immense owners with such ambitious and efficient plans - why do they oppose FFP?
Are City scared they can't compete when their wealthy owner is no longer a trump card.
It's the same scenario, clubs are just voting for whatever fits them best. dc talks about 15 years ago.
Well how would City have voted 15 years ago?
:lol yeah I'm surprised he's still here!
I've never complained about FFP. It was always more detrimental to those who sought to imitate Chelsea and maybe City than to those clubs themselves.
And it's good that Chelsea get its financials in order. Getting a profit last season for once was nice.
These discussions are getting really tiresome. Seems to concern the same old stuff and it's not like either side will ever budge from their position and they know it.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked