|
Pompey would have fallen foul of a properly enforced law, the arms-dealing dad and all that.
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 13:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 10:08 |
|
|
FullLeatherJacket posted:Again, the Fit And Proper Persons test isn't a job interview. You don't get a questionnaire as to whether or not you like kittens and whether or not you like to expose yourself in public. You don't have to prove that you have money or that you're not mentally ill. Circle one:
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 13:29
|
|
|
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/p/portsmouth/8522283.stm Love the panicked comments about how this will rule transfer windows pointless and such. Apparently 90% of football fans have only started taking an interest since the windows came in and don't remember a world where football wasn't absolute anarchy because teams could buy players whenever they wanted. Is there even a good argument as for why the windows exist anyway?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 15:32
|
|
|
Bacon of the Sea posted:Is there even a good argument as for why the windows exist anyway? Because um wait hang on I know this
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 15:33
|
|
|
I think the theory is to stop clubs buying players from clubs they're about to face in the cup and the like. I never really bought it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 16:05
|
|
|
It's some vague 'EU rules' thing, I think.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 16:16
|
|
|
What do you do if the club you support simply stops existing. Obviously you don't just begin supporting your local rival.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 16:31
|
|
|
I was always under the impression that it had something to do with when the EU said that they were looking at whether or not the entire contractual system breached employment law. Which would have rendered transfers essentially non-existent, and players could just give notice and switch clubs. How exactly this system combats that, I don't have an earthly idea, but I remember being informed that it does.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 16:31
|
|
|
Daniel posted:What do you do if the club you support simply stops existing. Obviously you don't just begin supporting your local rival. You have to support Coventry City.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 16:35
|
|
|
Daniel posted:What do you do if the club you support simply stops existing. Obviously you don't just begin supporting your local rival. Club together and start a new team? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AFC_Wimbledon
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 16:59
|
|
|
Bacon of the Sea posted:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/p/portsmouth/8522283.stm Manufactured drama to keep people paying above average interest for a few months of the year?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 18:42
|
|
|
Dudley posted:I think the theory is to stop clubs buying players from clubs they're about to face in the cup and the like. Hehe "This just in. Ahead of Real Madrid's second leg CL clash against Lyon, facing a 1-0 deficit, Real Madrid have bought the entire starting XI of Lyon!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 18:44
|
|
|
cheese posted:Hehe wish we'd bought some of reading's players
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 18:57
|
|
|
Lyric Proof Vest posted:edit: the fit and proper test hasn't failed utd as the owners had loads of money and several sports teams, they just didn't spend it on you. Liverpool probably were due to previous with corinthians. Loads of money, several sports teams, and a history of not spending anything on said teams and instead draining the teams' cash into their own bank accounts. Not fit and proper to run a football club.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 19:01
|
|
|
Vando posted:It's some vague 'EU rules' thing, I think. Surely it goes against EU rules? I doubt they're too keen on employees being tied to their job and being unable to take another one if they were to leave. The window is a load of bollocks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 20:47
|
|
|
Indeed, the whole transfer system is on very, very shaky ground really.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 21:39
|
|
|
There's been talk for years that transfers themselves are illegal in that if a person is moving from company A to company B, company B doesn't have to pay a fee. Although, considering how long I've been hearing about this, I'd imagine if there was anything in it, it would have happened by now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 21:43
|
|
|
Mickolution posted:There's been talk for years that transfers themselves are illegal in that if a person is moving from company A to company B, company B doesn't have to pay a fee. Although, considering how long I've been hearing about this, I'd imagine if there was anything in it, it would have happened by now. I don't think that takes into account the fact the players are on contracts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 21:44
|
|
|
willkill4food posted:I don't think that takes into account the fact the players are on contracts. Yeah, I know that and that's how Bosman came about. That's why I say, if there was anything in it, it would have happened back then/by now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 21:46
|
|
|
Mickolution posted:Yeah, I know that and that's how Bosman came about. That's why I say, if there was anything in it, it would have happened back then/by now. There's no interest from either party. Clubs would have players walking out all the time and players get a cut of the huge fees so they aren't going to change their approach either.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 22:01
|
|
|
Jollzwhin posted:There's no interest from either party. Clubs would have players walking out all the time and players get a cut of the huge fees so they aren't going to change their approach either. Fair point, though all it would take was one player who wanted out of his club and to pursue it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 22:04
|
|
|
Jollzwhin posted:There's no interest from either party. Clubs would have players walking out all the time and players get a cut of the huge fees so they aren't going to change their approach either. If clubs didn't have to spend millions to buy players, they would just pop that money into offering higher wages to players to ensure they stayed at their club since there wouldn't be a transfer fee or a binding contract to force them to stay, only money. Players would get richer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2010 22:06
|
|
|
Briatore just quit QPR http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/q/qpr/8525530.stm "How much have I spent so far? And we've won the champion's league how many times? We've at least beat Chelsea, right? ...What? I thought you said we were in the championship?! gently caress this, I'm out." Avram Grant has apparently not been paying attention to the news and is livid that Pompey want to sell players. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/p/portsmouth/8524881.stm But it doesn't matter anyway because Pompey are pretty much poo poo canned  http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/p/portsmouth/8522283.stm Bonus lolquote 606: DEBATE posted:
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2010 11:15
|
|
|
Found this which will be of interest to those more interested in finances. http://www.arsenaltrust.org/accounts.php One of the arsenal supporters trust members breaking down our finances each year, defiantly not as rosy as i'd have liked to have thought but wages at 46% of turnover is quite comforting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 13:12
|
|
|
Cuban Chowder Factory posted:the silver lining for Pompey supporters would be that they can now completely start from scratch with whatever team they want. even if they pick United or something, can you really ridicule them? they just watched their favourite team cease to exist. you'd have to give them a break... I PICK UNITED THE SHIRTS ARE NICE AND THEY WINNERS ! Maybe one day I'll go to Manchester Park with my replica top and see them play  AFC Cardiff City vs AFC Portsmouth perhaps the biggest police operation the Isthmian League has ever seen.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 13:29
|
|
|
Lyric Proof Vest posted:Found this which will be of interest to those more interested in finances. An interesting thing is that Arsenal pay £104m a year to 54 players, which is 50% more than what was paid to the 61 players in the year you last won the FA Cup. The wages have spiralled up, no doubt in keeping with Chelsea and the like. But £104m divided by 54 players is just less than £2m a player a year, which has a mean wage bill of £40,000 a week. Bearing in mind the associated problems with a mean average] of data, that seems incredibly high and smacks in the face of a few Arsenal fans who make out that their wage bill isn't really that big. There must be some really big wage spending going on somewhere to account for this. Would be interesting to compare it to the same figure for Man Utd, Liverpool, Spurs, Villa and Everton, but I've a feeling it will be much closer to the first two than the others. Fat Turkey fucked around with this message at 14:36 on Feb 21, 2010 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 14:31
|
|
|
Fat Turkey posted:An interesting thing is that Arsenal pay £104m a year to 54 players, which is 50% more than what was paid to the 61 players in the year you last won the FA Cup. The wages have spiralled up, no doubt in keeping with Chelsea and the like. But £104m divided by 54 players is just less than £2m a player a year, which has a mean wage bill of £40,000 a week. Bearing in mind the associated problems with a mean average of data, that seems incredibly high and smacks in the face of a few Arsenal fans who make out that their wage bill isn't really that big. The general gist that i have gathered seems to be that our wage structure is much more even. Because of the situation where we have to spend transfer income on new players or contracts we have loads of players on decent wages rather then a few big stars getting masses and it trailing off rapidly as you get closer to the bench. I'm pretty sure our wage bill is the 3rd or 4th largest in the PL but its (according to that link) the lowest as a percentage of income which is very important. I'm bored so i might go root around for some actual figures because it would be nice to see some proper numbers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 14:41
|
|
|
pre:Chelsea Utd Arsenal Pool City Spurs Everton Total 190.5 256.2 225 159.1 82.3 114.7 80 Wages 172 121 104 90.4 82 52.9 44.5 as % 90% 47% 46% 57% 100% 46% 56% Edited for city. Loving Africa Chaps fucked around with this message at 15:08 on Feb 21, 2010 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 15:02
|
|
|
This poo poo would never happen to Wigan.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 16:03
|
|
|
The 46% is very very good commercially for Arsenal and helps secure their long-term future. If football were to crash, ignoring sugar daddies, the clubs that survive are the ones with the lowest %. As a business they are really well set up at the moment. In absolute terms, your 3rd wages in the Premiership secure your status there. No wonder they can regularly be top 4 when they can tempt better players onto the field or bench. Your site shows 30 of your squad, whose wages must dwarf the remaining 24 players, so presumably their average wage must be much higher than £40k. 1st XI may average up to 70k or more. There can't be an expectation for the smaller clubs to keep up on the field with this. But, as you point out, they can afford it and plenty. Fat Turkey fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Feb 21, 2010 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 16:10
|
|
|
Does it list how much they're paying on the stadium, though?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 16:12
|
|
|
FullLeatherJacket posted:Does it list how much they're paying on the stadium, though? yeah, read it. We are in a considerably better position then you, sorry to disappoint 
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 16:15
|
|
|
Lyric Proof Vest posted:yeah, read it. We are in a considerably better position then you, sorry to disappoint Think that might have been a joke aimed at City rather than at Arsenal
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 16:16
|
|
|
Lyric Proof Vest posted:yeah, read it. We are in a considerably better position then you, sorry to disappoint That's not hard. Or relevant. But see, that's why I don't read things. Everything comes back to the same Arsenal propaganda that they're just a couple of years from dominating all of football, and not a team that's slightly better than Aston Villa with it's two best players agitating and possibly looking for a transfer out. It doesn't seem to challenge what was said in here, that Arsenal needed to sell players and property in order to make a significant profit, despite continually raping their own fans for money.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 16:46
|
|
|
Guess I'll post some of the Serie A wage information here. Wages for players at the start of this season for the biggest clubs (in Euros):      There's more of these but I obviously don't want to post them all. If anybody wants one for a certain club I can get it. Reported wages for managers (excluding bonuses): Mourinho - Inter €11m Prandelli - Fiorentina €1.8m Ranieri - Roma €1.6 Leonardo - Milan €1.2m Ferrara - Juventus €1.2m Gasperini - Genoa €1.2m Donadoni - Napoli €1.2m I can't find the debt information but Milan are debt free. Inter had a debt of ~77% of their value in 2009. Roma had a relatively small debt of ~10% of their value but it has been very problematic. If I remember correctly, most Serie A clubs have debts smaller than 10% of their value.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 16:49
|
|
|
FullLeatherJacket posted:two best players agitating and possibly looking for a transfer out. Who's the second?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 16:51
|
|
|
FullLeatherJacket posted:That's not hard. Or relevant. Well if you actually read it you would see that it says we are over-reliant on the club level, boxes and property while a huge amount of the costs are not broken down so we have no idea where all the money is going.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 16:53
|
|
|
Mickolution posted:Who's the second? Arshavin. Well, in the sense that Arshavin hasn't been linked with a move away in the same way as Fabregas, but I can't remember him actually coming out and saying anything positive about Arsenal at all. When the two things he's said this year are "if I knew I'd be paying this much tax, I'd have stayed in Russia", and, "we don't have the class to be better than third, and we won't do so as long as I'm being played up front", it doesn't sound to me like he's going to sign a new deal out of any kind of love for the club.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 17:00
|
|
|
Right, I was struggling because he's not very good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 17:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 10:08 |
|
|
Lyric Proof Vest posted:
Does no-one have figures on Villa, or do they just conveniently forget they are a top 6 side, that like to occupy a top 4 slot prior to xmas to falsely build up their supporters hopes. I mean you list 7 sides and not one of them is loving Villa.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2010 17:33
|
|
