Friday's Moronic Uwaffa B*ll*x

[mcfc1632]

You know what...it really would be 'Typical City' if when we finally become billionaires Platini and his fucking crew manage to push this through...it makes me livid just thinking about it

SOCS (WITH SOME HELP FROM ME) HAS BEEN TRYING TO GET THE BOARD TO TAKE THIS THREAT SERIOUSLY FOR SOME TIME NOW

ARE YOU HIS PERSONAL SPOKESMAN?

Good one - in fact I have more often been on a different position to Socrates on a number of issues - I only comment on him in a positive sense on this topic - because I do admire someone who (when being totally right but facing a majority of people that shout him down whilst whilst they themselves have clearly not been arsed to read into the topic properly - therefore are not really qualified to comment) has the fortitude to carry on seeking to get through to people - well it deserves some respect

Not if he is talking BS and making up lies to back up his BS.

Well I have not gone into all the posts so not sure which ones you refer to

It is more that I get the sense that he is trying to get the board to recognise that this is a very serious threat to the success of our club. Perhaps even the biggest threat - because, given the resources we have available (especially when others are in the poor house) without constraints / regulations we can simply buy success without doubt - but if we are not able to bring those resources to bear because of regulations etc - well it becomes harder.

I think the renewed threat of a breakaway league has become very relevant as well - I looked on a scum fans site last night and there are an increasing number of threads about the how the Platini regulations will trigger this and when this is likely to happen / who would be in the league / what would be the relegation policy etc

They have these threads in response to their financial crisis - they see it as a possible saviour (yes they are starting to realise that they are right in the shit) by increasing television revenues etc - they are smelling the coffee - so should we

[Rag_hater]

Well I have not gone into all the posts so not sure which ones you refer to

It is more that I get the sense that he is trying to get the board to recognise that this is a very serious threat to the success of our club. Perhaps even the biggest threat - because, given the resources we have available (especially when others are in the poor house) without constraints / regulations we can simply buy success without doubt - but if we are not able to bring those resources to bear because of regulations etc - well it becomes harder.

I think the renewed threat of a breakaway league has become very relevant as well - I looked on a scum fans site last night and there are an increasing number of threads about the how the Platini regulations will trigger this and when this is likely to happen / who would be in the league / what would be the relegation policy etc

They have these threads in response to their financial crisis - they see it as a possible saviour (yes they are starting to realise that they are right in the shit) by increasing television revenues etc - they are smelling the coffee - so should we[/quote]

UEFA might make it more difficult for the Sheikh to spend his legally earned money but that is all they will be able to do.
The claim that some of the ways people have suggested for jumping through the hoops is fraudulent is not true either.Where is the fraud lets say for example in me giving(a gift is not illegal)my son a million pounds and letting him buy city kits.Nothing is the answer.May seem a bit strange but not against the law.
Also UEFA have said they expect a legal challenge to their proposals and have to go to court when one of the main voices to frighten people about these proposals said there wasn't a court in Europe that would hear it.And if it is expected to be dragged through the courts it delays any action and we have only really heard UEFA side of the story so an accurate judgement cannot be made.
Also I think you overestimate the power of the "big" clubs with the media companies.I think if they go of and form a super league their market will diminish and end up losing revenue.

[Ted Hughes]

Gary Cook's obviously shitting himself about the UEFA proposals.

[Socrates]

You know what...it really would be 'Typical City' if when we finally become billionaires Platini and his fucking crew manage to push this through...it makes me livid just thinking about it

SOCS (WITH SOME HELP FROM ME) HAS BEEN TRYING TO GET THE BOARD TO TAKE THIS THREAT SERIOUSLY FOR SOME TIME NOW

ARE YOU HIS PERSONAL SPOKESMAN?

Good one - in fact I have more often been on a different position to Socrates on a number of issues - I only comment on him in a positive sense on this topic - because I do admire someone who (when being totally right but facing a majority of people that shout him down whilst whilst they themselves have clearly not been arsed to read into the topic properly - therefore are not really qualified to comment) has the fortitude to carry on seeking to get through to people - well it deserves some respect

Not if he is talking BS and making up lies to back up his BS.

Really? Do you know something? I've met retarded tortoises with better comprehension skills than you. Go join Blue Moan they are only twice as intelligent than you on there so you'd only look half as stupid.

[9secondlegend]

You know what...it really would be 'Typical City' if when we finally become billionaires Platini and his fucking crew manage to push this through...it makes me livid just thinking about it

IT is a joke it just adds a new meaning to unfair really as it means the top 4 will be the top 4 forever as they have such a big following they are the only ones who could sustain the wages needed for the top players. This will backfire anyways as nobody would watch champions league with a load of minor clubs as all the big clubs are overspending and its the champions league that is actually needed to keep them afloat. The pool are fucking screwed if they fall out of top 4. It's all a big Ironic pool of shit.

Chelsea had fuck all support in the 90s mate. And before that when they were in Div 2 it was 3 men and a dog, last man out lock up. I firmly believe City have a bigger ground base than Chelsea, and by next season the last 2 years' publicity will start to pay off in extra fans, over and above lifelong 'returners' - cups or not. I know Chelski cant match the evil red duo in appeal but it's going the right way.

This is where our old mate Cook comes in. All these deals he's signing in the middle east, in America etc, the arab language website. This is when we find out if he's doing his job increasing the revenue/fanbase, not poking about in football matters.

Watch this space............................

just going back to the start of thread.
in the 80s early 90s we were a far bigger club than chelsea but the difference was chelsea invested heavily in the future. we were always thinking short term and spent millions on various players which got us nowhere. even before the russians came to chelsea they were far far ahead of us in signing players,managers and in general how the club was run.

[john68]

RH,
You seem to have a block on this issue but by dismissing Socrates's posts as bullshit, you are also dismissing the staements coming form Real madris and UeFA.
You also dimiss the power of the cartel clubs. I restate, UeFA only have such power as it allowed them by the clubs. The clubs, by playing football and employing the players, that acually OWN THE PRODUCT. I gave you plenty of evidence of how this has worked previously with the Football League (the premier League), The RFU (The Guinness Premiership), The RFL (SuperLeague and the new franchised Super league), UeFA (the Champions League). The ICB (the Indian 20/20 League).

The media in all its forms (TV, radio, Newspapers, magazines, advertisers, sponsors etc) ALL earn their money directly from the clubs and they will follow those clubs wherever they go. The 2nd tier of clubs who may remain behind will not create the TV audiences.
Consider a choice between watching Real Madrid v Sayern Munich or Athletico madrid v Anderlecht. Which do you think will provide the greater audience, interest and generate the most money?

You may be right about future developments being diluted down and/or our ownwers finding a way to balance out turnover and expenditure...but as yet, that has not happened and we can only make our judgments on the present reality.

[mcfc1632]

RH - I do not want this issue to become some divide between fans - it is all about opinions after all - and most of us that are concerned about this being a MAJOR threat would also be delighted to be proven wrong and you right

Re your (and a number of other posters) assertion that the Sheik will find a way around the regulations - it is not fraud etc etc - there seems to be some block in people's minds that things need to be LEGAL (in a formal laws of the land way) - people that keep hanging onto this line of debate seem to just be unwilling to accept that a) it is in no way against formal European regulations and more importantly b) that they are setting it up to be 'judgement' - so that their 'panel' can 'take a view' on whether income being counted is directly related from core business and not some 'gift' - this places the burden of proof on the clubs

a) - £xxxxxm from gate receipts - 49,000 X ticket price - check
b) - £xxxm from shirt sponsorship - check

and so on

c) - £xxxxm from ex-gratis payment from Sheik - not allowed
d) - £xxxxm from spurious looking deposit which can not be set against direct football revenue - not allowed
e) - £xxxxm from 'unbalanced / excessive' sponsorship - 'judged to be indirect Sheik money' - not allowed

leads to a position of what they view as our net revenue - a percentage of which we can spend on transfers

the proposals are really biased towards the scum (as an example) - because the only netting appears to be obscene in terms of fairness - because if the process was 'fair' the scums figures would be turnover minus debt payments = net revenue - a percentage of which can be used for players etc

But of course UeFA are at pains to point out that debt is OK so long as a club can service it (no matter its size) - THAT IS BECAUSE YOU DO NOT GET BALANCE / FAIRNESS IN A WORLD WHERE ACTIONS ARE TAKEN FOR THE VESTED INTERESTS OF CERTAIN KEY GROUPS

[Rag_hater]

RH,
You seem to have a block on this issue but by dismissing Socrates's posts as bullshit, you are also dismissing the staements coming form Real madris and UeFA.
You also dimiss the power of the cartel clubs. I restate, UeFA only have such power as it allowed them by the clubs. The clubs, by playing football and employing the players, that acually OWN THE PRODUCT. I gave you plenty of evidence of how this has worked previously with the Football League (the premier League), The RFU (The Guinness Premiership), The RFL (SuperLeague and the new franchised Super league), UeFA (the Champions League). The ICB (the Indian 20/20 League).

The media in all its forms (TV, radio, Newspapers, magazines, advertisers, sponsors etc) ALL earn their money directly from the clubs and they will follow those clubs wherever they go. The 2nd tier of clubs who may remain behind will not create the TV audiences.
Consider a choice between watching Real Madrid v Sayern Munich or Athletico madrid v Anderlecht. Which do you think will provide the greater audience, interest and generate the most money?

You may be right about future developments being diluted down and/or our ownwers finding a way to balance out turnover and expenditure...but as yet, that has not happened and we can only make our judgments on the present reality.

You maybe right that at the moment a match between Bayern and Real is probably be the one to generate a bigger audience but I think that would be only the case in a limited part of Europe and if it is not sanctioned by UEFA its audience will diminsh.Also this new league will have to be approved by FIFA for the players in it to qualify to play for their countries and if FIFA do not approve it where does that leave any players who decide to play for the big teams.I dont think the media companies will pay for any tournaments that do not have the approval of UEFA which a super league would not and their revenues would diminish.I think anything that is not backed by UEFA is limiting itself to the fans of those clubs
Also the example you give of clubs setting up such things as the RFL etc were done to generate money and not to circumnavigate any rules introduced by the governing powers.They were done so that players could become professional and the standard would increase.

RH - I do not want this issue to become some divide between fans - it is all about opinions after all - and most of us that are concerned about this being a MAJOR threat would also be delighted to be proven wrong and you right

Re your (and a number of other posters) assertion that the Sheik will find a way around the regulations - it is not fraud etc etc - there seems to be some block in people's minds that things need to be LEGAL (in a formal laws of the land way) - people that keep hanging onto this line of debate seem to just be unwilling to accept that a) it is in no way against formal European regulations and more importantly b) that they are setting it up to be 'judgement' - so that their 'panel' can 'take a view' on whether income being counted is directly related from core business and not some 'gift' - this places the burden of proof on the clubs

a) - £xxxxxm from gate receipts - 49,000 X ticket price - check
b) - £xxxm from shirt sponsorship - check

and so on

c) - £xxxxm from ex-gratis payment from Sheik - not allowed
d) - £xxxxm from spurious looking deposit which can not be set against direct football revenue - not allowed
e) - £xxxxm from 'unbalanced / excessive' sponsorship - 'judged to be indirect Sheik money' - not allowed

leads to a position of what they view as our net revenue - a percentage of which we can spend on transfers

the proposals are really biased towards the scum (as an example) - because the only netting appears to be obscene in terms of fairness - because if the process was 'fair' the scums figures would be turnover minus debt payments = net revenue - a percentage of which can be used for players etc

But of course UeFA are at pains to point out that debt is OK so long as a club can service it (no matter its size) - THAT IS BECAUSE YOU DO NOT GET BALANCE / FAIRNESS IN A WORLD WHERE ACTIONS ARE TAKEN FOR THE VESTED INTERESTS OF CERTAIN KEY GROUPS

I'd disagree.
UEFA may introduce rules that they think will bring about a bit of stability to the system but they HAVE to obey the laws of the land.
I know it has nothing to do with it but I would like you to consider the fact that all the football associations had to accept the courts ruling when it came to Bosman because the court was able to make the associations obey the law of the land.
And also there never will be a law that stops people spending legitimate money legally.If they try and implement this rule they will be walking into a minefield of letigation.







Really? Do you know something? I've met retarded tortoises with better comprehension skills than you. Go join Blue Moan they are only twice as intelligent than you on there so you'd only look half as stupid.[/quote]





Maybe you should change your name to Dr. Doolittle as you can talk to animals

[john68]

RH,
As patient as I try to be, you really do take the biscuit when you have a mental block mate. Despite statements made by the governing bodies, despite the evidence of history, despite announcements made by UeFA officials and despite the City club stating publicly that they have changed their buying policy, you still believe that, based on no evidence at all, this cannot happen.
I give up Mate...I'm sorry.
You are correct on one thing...UeFA cannot interfere with the business of any club. How any club chooses to spend or even hoe much to spend is the decision of the club. UeFA have never made any statement about stopping that. They have just said that if the income/expenditure does NOT meet the criteria, we can't qualify for the CL. That is a whole different argument.

I have come to the conclusion that you are on a wind up.

[Feed The Goat]

It's late at night and I'm just finishing my shift so prob not the best time to read this thread. However I did and I am confused as fuck about it. We are not in any debt and I get that we are spending out of our means at the present time. It's the whole you can still qualify if you are in debt but can pay the interest. Can't we just put all the money we've spent as a loan and paybthe interest out of our income?

I know I might sound thick but I am just trying to understand the whole thing oh and gillie will vouch for me bein a bit slow

[Socrates]

It's late at night and I'm just finishing my shift so prob not the best time to read this thread. However I did and I am confused as fuck about it. We are not in any debt and I get that we are spending out of our means at the present time. It's the whole you can still qualify if you are in debt but can pay the interest. Can't we just put all the money we've spent as a loan and paybthe interest out of our income?

I know I might sound thick but I am just trying to understand the whole thing oh and gillie will vouch for me bein a bit slow

Only if we borrowed it commercially, in which case the interest would be added to our expenditure and make the gap between our income and expenditure even worse.

[Rag_hater]

RH,
As patient as I try to be, you really do take the biscuit when you have a mental block mate. Despite statements made by the governing bodies, despite the evidence of history, despite announcements made by UeFA officials and despite the City club stating publicly that they have changed their buying policy, you still believe that, based on no evidence at all, this cannot happen.
I give up Mate...I'm sorry.
You are correct on one thing...UeFA cannot interfere with the business of any club. How any club chooses to spend or even hoe much to spend is the decision of the club. UeFA have never made any statement about stopping that. They have just said that if the income/expenditure does NOT meet the criteria, we can't qualify for the CL. That is a whole different argument.

I have come to the conclusion that you are on a wind up.

Seems to me you dont wish to comprehend the law in these matters.
The can make as many statments as they want.
What they can actually make binding is a different thing.

[Tokyo Blue]

the couple of times I've seen him for Hammers this season (he hasn't even been regular but can't remember if he was injured) he was playing on the wing but I'm not going to argue with you over this as I haven't really followed him closely enough. Because he hasn't made any great impression on me.

I watched him in one of the games over the Christmas period, maybe WHU v Arsenal in the cup, and I was quite impressed with him. It was only the one game, like, but he did well, I thought. He was definitely playing in the centre.

Just goes to show, dunnit?

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

the couple of times I've seen him for Hammers this season (he hasn't even been regular but can't remember if he was injured) he was playing on the wing but I'm not going to argue with you over this as I haven't really followed him closely enough. Because he hasn't made any great impression on me.

I watched him in one of the games over the Christmas period, maybe WHU v Arsenal in the cup, and I was quite impressed with him. It was only the one game, like, but he did well, I thought. He was definitely playing in the centre.

Just goes to show, dunnit?

Yeah mate. Like I said, I haven't followed him with any particular interest.

Point is though that I'd like to think I would've noticed 15m pound player.

[Colin the King]

the couple of times I've seen him for Hammers this season (he hasn't even been regular but can't remember if he was injured) he was playing on the wing but I'm not going to argue with you over this as I haven't really followed him closely enough. Because he hasn't made any great impression on me.

I watched him in one of the games over the Christmas period, maybe WHU v Arsenal in the cup, and I was quite impressed with him. It was only the one game, like, but he did well, I thought. He was definitely playing in the centre.

Just goes to show, dunnit?

Yeah mate. Like I said, I haven't followed him with any particular interest.

Point is though that I'd like to think I would've noticed 15m pound player.

I've seen Behrami a lot over the last few years. My next door neighbour where I used to live was a big Lazio fan, so we'd watch them on a Sunday night and he featured quite regularly. Then there was the Euro 2008 and the move to West Ham. He strikes me as one of those players whose versatility is his own undoing, if that makes sense. He's a decent right back, a decent central midfielder, a decent winger but hasn't really mastered the art of any one position.

I'd definitely have him at City for £5 or £6million as a utility player, very handy to have around when injuries and suspensions hit the squad. He's incredibly hard working, intelligent, uses the ball well and is a good crosser- but definitely not worth £15million, even in the current climate.

Reminds me a bit of Zabs actually.