the day football died

[Nigels Tackle]

I'll try again....

http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40800757

[Original Dub]

The day your link died.

[Foreverinbluedreams]

I can't remember if I cried
When I read about that Qatari bribe
Something touched me deep inside
The day that football died

[sheblue]

was football reincarnated? because it died in 1992.

[edge275]

We should've been in for Neymar.

[sheblue]

We should've been in for Neymar.

Less of that talk now.

[Foreverinbluedreams]

We should've been in for Neymar.

Less of that talk now.

[city72]

So a pogba+ a lukaku = a Neymar. Bargain

[john@staustell]

Pound for pound probably more of a bargain than Roque Santa Cruz from Blackburn to City

[nottsblue]

Pound for pound probably more of a bargain than Roque Santa Cruz from Blackburn to City

Putting the £17m on trap 1 at Nottingham Dogs on Friday night would've been a better use than RSC

[nottsblue]

We should've been in for Neymar.

Robinho mark II i feel.

[edge275]

Some hypocrits in regards to this Neymar transfer. Football has NEVER been fair.

There is corruption, dodgy pay outs, tax avoidance, clubs being owned by incredibly rich owners, unfair locations as to where each club resides and a crazy amount of money involved across the board.

There's no issue when we spend £50 million on Kyle Walker by our ludicrously rich owner, but it's a travesty when £200 million is spent on Neymar by another ludicrously rich owner?

Are we ok when football is 'a bit unfair' ie when we have a transfer budget bigger than anybody's?


We have to accept that football is corrupt and unfair, and embrace it. You can't have morals when it suits.

[iwasthere2012]

Some hypocrits in regards to this Neymar transfer. Football has NEVER been fair.

There is corruption, dodgy pay outs, tax avoidance, clubs being owned by incredibly rich owners, unfair locations as to where each club resides and a crazy amount of money involved across the board.

There's no issue when we spend £50 million on Kyle Walker by our ludicrously rich owner, but it's a travesty when £200 million is spent on Neymar by another ludicrously rich owner?

Are we ok when football is 'a bit unfair' ie when we have a transfer budget bigger than anybody's?


We have to accept that football is corrupt and unfair, and embrace it. You can't have morals when it suits.

You've caught me on a bad day edge, but what a load of bollox.
Why accept football is corrupt? Why embrace it? Why not just have morals, full stop?

If PSG want to spend 200 million on Neymar, let them. I'm with you on that.
But I'm also of the opinion that if City did it I'd be very upset, because I agree with NB. He's not worth it.

[edge275]

Some hypocrits in regards to this Neymar transfer. Football has NEVER been fair.

There is corruption, dodgy pay outs, tax avoidance, clubs being owned by incredibly rich owners, unfair locations as to where each club resides and a crazy amount of money involved across the board.

There's no issue when we spend £50 million on Kyle Walker by our ludicrously rich owner, but it's a travesty when £200 million is spent on Neymar by another ludicrously rich owner?

Are we ok when football is 'a bit unfair' ie when we have a transfer budget bigger than anybody's?


We have to accept that football is corrupt and unfair, and embrace it. You can't have morals when it suits.

You've caught me on a bad day edge, but what a load of bollox.
Why accept football is corrupt? Why embrace it? Why not just have morals, full stop?

If PSG want to spend 200 million on Neymar, let them. I'm with you on that.
But I'm also of the opinion that if City did it I'd be very upset, because I agree with NB. He's not worth it.

For clarity, I'm not saying we accept football is corrupt in the sense of actual cheating/match fixing, referee scandals etc. Nobody should accept that. But in regards to an uneven playing field that has existed since time immemorial (club income, club 'luck', owners, transfer budgets, club locations).

Upon reflection, 'corruption' was probably a poor choice of wording as it could be interpreted the other way.

[nottsblue]

One thing to potentially come out of this transfer is the way the transfers are actually done. Barcelona are reportedly demanding the full payment of the buyout clause to be paid in full in one instalment. This is not the way transfers are currently done. Most transfers have the fee paid over a number of years. I suspect this is a last ditch effort by Barca to try and scupper the deal in the hope PSG either haven't got that amount of cash or whether they think this is what will make PSG fall foul of FFP regulations.

If it does turn out that they have to pay the full fee up front I hope every club that is forced to sell to Barca, and let's be honest, that's how a lot of their transfer business is conducted, that all those clubs demand their full fees up front. Hopefully this will bite them in the ass in the future.

[iwasthere2012]

Some hypocrits in regards to this Neymar transfer. Football has NEVER been fair.

There is corruption, dodgy pay outs, tax avoidance, clubs being owned by incredibly rich owners, unfair locations as to where each club resides and a crazy amount of money involved across the board.

There's no issue when we spend £50 million on Kyle Walker by our ludicrously rich owner, but it's a travesty when £200 million is spent on Neymar by another ludicrously rich owner?

Are we ok when football is 'a bit unfair' ie when we have a transfer budget bigger than anybody's?


We have to accept that football is corrupt and unfair, and embrace it. You can't have morals when it suits.

You've caught me on a bad day edge, but what a load of bollox.
Why accept football is corrupt? Why embrace it? Why not just have morals, full stop?

If PSG want to spend 200 million on Neymar, let them. I'm with you on that.
But I'm also of the opinion that if City did it I'd be very upset, because I agree with NB. He's not worth it.

For clarity, I'm not saying we accept football is corrupt in the sense of actual cheating/match fixing, referee scandals etc. Nobody should accept that. But in regards to an uneven playing field that has existed since time immemorial (club income, club 'luck', owners, transfer budgets, club locations).

Upon reflection, 'corruption' was probably a poor choice of wording as it could be interpreted the other way.

Someone said it earlier edge. The game died years ago ...... as a sport!
It certainly has got progressively worse since Sky money came into it but it's now in danger of eating itself.
You are absolutely correct, there is no level playing field. We all know it (or is it in our heads?) and we are operating within those parameters.
But it's an industry. A business. and like other big business, those with the money like to have the bases covered and know the result in advance.
They like a sure thing.

As a game, I don't think there is finer than soccer/football. But what we play or see our kids play at an amateur level is getting further and further removed from what is presented to us on tv.

I'm finding it harder and harder to care, but still want to see City buck the system and screw up the cartel from the outside. It's probably the only thing keeping me motivated at the moment.

[mr_nool]

Some hypocrits in regards to this Neymar transfer. Football has NEVER been fair.

There is corruption, dodgy pay outs, tax avoidance, clubs being owned by incredibly rich owners, unfair locations as to where each club resides and a crazy amount of money involved across the board.

There's no issue when we spend £50 million on Kyle Walker by our ludicrously rich owner, but it's a travesty when £200 million is spent on Neymar by another ludicrously rich owner?

Are we ok when football is 'a bit unfair' ie when we have a transfer budget bigger than anybody's?


We have to accept that football is corrupt and unfair, and embrace it. You can't have morals when it suits.

You've caught me on a bad day edge, but what a load of bollox.
Why accept football is corrupt? Why embrace it? Why not just have morals, full stop?

If PSG want to spend 200 million on Neymar, let them. I'm with you on that.
But I'm also of the opinion that if City did it I'd be very upset, because I agree with NB. He's not worth it.

For clarity, I'm not saying we accept football is corrupt in the sense of actual cheating/match fixing, referee scandals etc. Nobody should accept that. But in regards to an uneven playing field that has existed since time immemorial (club income, club 'luck', owners, transfer budgets, club locations).

Upon reflection, 'corruption' was probably a poor choice of wording as it could be interpreted the other way.

Someone said it earlier edge. The game died years ago ...... as a sport!
It certainly has got progressively worse since Sky money came into it but it's now in danger of eating itself.
You are absolutely correct, there is no level playing field. We all know it (or is it in our heads?) and we are operating within those parameters.
But it's an industry. A business. and like other big business, those with the money like to have the bases covered and know the result in advance.
They like a sure thing.

As a game, I don't think there is finer than soccer/football. But what we play or see our kids play at an amateur level is getting further and further removed from what is presented to us on tv.

I'm finding it harder and harder to care, but still want to see City buck the system and screw up the cartel from the outside. It's probably the only thing keeping me motivated at the moment.

Well said mate. I'm only a break-away super league away from giving up on professional football and just watch Sunday League.

[edge275]

Some hypocrits in regards to this Neymar transfer. Football has NEVER been fair.

There is corruption, dodgy pay outs, tax avoidance, clubs being owned by incredibly rich owners, unfair locations as to where each club resides and a crazy amount of money involved across the board.

There's no issue when we spend £50 million on Kyle Walker by our ludicrously rich owner, but it's a travesty when £200 million is spent on Neymar by another ludicrously rich owner?

Are we ok when football is 'a bit unfair' ie when we have a transfer budget bigger than anybody's?


We have to accept that football is corrupt and unfair, and embrace it. You can't have morals when it suits.

You've caught me on a bad day edge, but what a load of bollox.
Why accept football is corrupt? Why embrace it? Why not just have morals, full stop?

If PSG want to spend 200 million on Neymar, let them. I'm with you on that.
But I'm also of the opinion that if City did it I'd be very upset, because I agree with NB. He's not worth it.

For clarity, I'm not saying we accept football is corrupt in the sense of actual cheating/match fixing, referee scandals etc. Nobody should accept that. But in regards to an uneven playing field that has existed since time immemorial (club income, club 'luck', owners, transfer budgets, club locations).

Upon reflection, 'corruption' was probably a poor choice of wording as it could be interpreted the other way.

Someone said it earlier edge. The game died years ago ...... as a sport!
It certainly has got progressively worse since Sky money came into it but it's now in danger of eating itself.
You are absolutely correct, there is no level playing field. We all know it (or is it in our heads?) and we are operating within those parameters.
But it's an industry. A business. and like other big business, those with the money like to have the bases covered and know the result in advance.
They like a sure thing.

As a game, I don't think there is finer than soccer/football. But what we play or see our kids play at an amateur level is getting further and further removed from what is presented to us on tv.

I'm finding it harder and harder to care, but still want to see City buck the system and screw up the cartel from the outside. It's probably the only thing keeping me motivated at the moment.

I can't disagree with any of that really. Like you said, we are operating within the parameters of a completely unfair playing field. We should thank our lucky stars that we have been blessed in that regard having the owners we do have, and since we know this is the case, play as 'dirty' as possible as that's what other clubs would do if they could.

People balking at the fee for Neymar. It's understandable but although this is an eye opening transfer, it's always been this unfair and ridiculous. If other clubs had similar owners they'd be doing exactly the same.

Considering it's always been this brutal, we need to be as brutal as we can be too. If that means bidding a humongous fee for someone and/or tapping someone up, then so be it. Sod the morals and honour. It's a dirty game and we need to be as dirty as possible ourselves.

[john@staustell]

The hypocrisy of Barcelona and the Spanish FA is beyond belief.

Amusing.

Wonder what chain it will set off?

[JamieMCFC]

One thing to potentially come out of this transfer is the way the transfers are actually done. Barcelona are reportedly demanding the full payment of the buyout clause to be paid in full in one instalment. This is not the way transfers are currently done. Most transfers have the fee paid over a number of years. I suspect this is a last ditch effort by Barca to try and scupper the deal in the hope PSG either haven't got that amount of cash or whether they think this is what will make PSG fall foul of FFP regulations.

If it does turn out that they have to pay the full fee up front I hope every club that is forced to sell to Barca, and let's be honest, that's how a lot of their transfer business is conducted, that all those clubs demand their full fees up front. Hopefully this will bite them in the ass in the future.

Transfers and buyouts are two different things.

After signing a new deal with Barca last year, Neymar’s initial buyout clause was 200 million euros, but grew to 222 from July 1st and would have risen to 250 million once had he entered a third year of the deal.

How can they be activated?

The biggest difference between Spanish buyout clauses and release clauses more common in other big leagues around the world is the manner in which they must be triggered.

Rather than the buying club merely paying the selling club the amount set by the contract, the player himself must buy himself out.

This is done by depositing the amount of the buyout clause with La Liga to release the player from his contract. La Liga then pass the money onto the selling club.

Normally this will require the buying club to pay the player the sum of the buyout clause up front.

Are there tax implications?

A huge change in how these transfers are taxed has resulted in a big increase in the number of deals being done by meeting buyout clauses.

Until 2016 the money advanced by the buying club to the player was subject to income tax, which could add up to 48 percent onto the price of the fee. It is now tax free.