Exiled in Texas

But... But ... Short paid off the debts as a matter of honor for screwing up the club No. Sorry. He paid off the debts as it was the only way to get anyone to show any interest in taking over that shambolic festering and financial sink-hole turd of a football club. But keep thinking that he did it because it was the "noble and decent thing"

I love the RTG mindset that "paid off all the debts" means that Short has paid off all future bills Total fantasy land

Mackematic 101 states that their attendances are factored against the "Our Fans" Coefficient of Sh!teness, which means that their attendance of 19,237 is actually the equivalent of 39,897 because the standard of play is so poor, that the fans in attendance are worth more than fans of teams who play better football. So it's actually more impressive to have 19,237 fans watching a Sh!te team, than 39,897 watching a good team. Except, of course, if the higher attendance is actually in Sunderland's favor , in which case your team sucks, is pub-league, small club, basically sh!te and Sunderland is the far superior club.

Which ironically is also stating that West Ham are bigger than SAFC.... which I am sure they will dispute (3 league titles in 1900s, Bank of England Club, 6IAR, 9-1 FTM etc)

And yet no one asks WHY Short was so desperate to dump SAFC that he was willing to pay of the bank debt and write of his own debt. Nope, they still think he did it as an honorable act, and not because it was the only way to make the club appealing to a buyer. Paying off the SBC loan will have given SAFC relief from the £600k month interest payment but they were still allegedly making £2M month loss so that’s still a huge negative hole in the the revenue stream that needs to be patched monthly

BbbbBut, concessions marra... Kids tickets... the north sea. All the SC holders who died this year. It's all Magedia lies

The fact that no one has asked WHY Short is "giving away" the club, and no one has asked What condition the club is in that "giving it away" is preferable than keeping it... just boggle my mind. RTG is so distracted by the Shiny-Object of No-Debt, that they are missing the big issue of a huge negative cash flow that right in front of their face. How they can believe that Short paid of the debts as the honorable thing, and not for some financial benefit to himself, is amazing.

Thought that was Jeff Goldblum ... before he turned into a fly

A comment from the Guardian article ... "All clubs should be made to live within their means whatever that is and a maximum wage should be brought back in which is something like four times what the average wage is for that area. " With the response... "Not sure Sunderland would get many footballers willing to play for four times current Jobseekers Allowance" :mackems:

Reading the RTG thread about that makes me think that they held a party and no body showed up. Because despite what they think....no one cares that much about them From To and finally Mackems had a relegation but no-one showed up

So whats their problem .... as they slip down to League 1 without a wimper ... they still have 6 in a Row as they get beat by pub league teams in a shit division ... they still have 6 in a Row as their fellow fans desert them in droves and they watch crisp packets in an empty stadium ... they still have 6 in a Row as they face financial ruin and cannot buy a player (or shift the ones they have) ... they still have 6 in a Row 6 in a Row .... F*** me Marra, this is glorious, what a time to be alive !! :mackems:

From RTG... Sunderland lose but Gibson gets 3 points ;D

Their fans deserted their team in droves, and at a time when the club really needed them. But RTG excuses and justifies this behavior based on the notion that the team has been playing poorly for a few years so it acceptable to jack it in until they start playing better. It’s a perfect example of fair-weather bandwagon fans (which they say they despise)... except their standards for getting on/off the bandwagon are much lower. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Imagine being so thick that you can't remember that the last first team derby game was a draw, therefore the kids and lasses wins are irrelevant. Irrelevant!! Until Newcastle win, all games are victories to Sunlun U16 games count if Sunderland win, but are excluded if Newcastle win. Makematics 101

The NBC team in the US (Robbie Mustoe and Robbie Earle) had great praise for that move.

During the goal celebrations today while the players were celebrating together, the TV coverage showed Shelvey in conversation with Rafa on the touchline. It happened three times so it has to be a planned activity. To me that shows a great focus on the game from Shelvey in not letting the celebration distract him from what needs to happen next. Its always important not to let your guard down after scoring and letting the other team back into the game, so I loved seeing then focus on what they needed to do settle down again and "bank" the goal and then push on for the next one.

So glad that we didn't panic and sign Joe Hart. Love how cool and calm this guy is. Even chuckled at him giggling when he fluffed the throw up field and had to get bailed out by Lejeune

That's what I would do..... being the vindictive bastard that I am when it comes to Pard-ewe

Chelsea fans at Old Trafford singing "Just like London, your city is Blue"

True or not.... He will always be Sepp "Bellend" Blatter

And yet they lap it up. Completely blind to the fact the the tongue up their arse still has blue pop and cheesy chips on it

Such denial on RTG And that's just page 1

TBH the replay on that "corner" decision showed only the faintest of touches by Jones. So it's not improbable that the AR didn't see that touch, and then he has a choice - go with what he knows...the through ball was played by Newcastle (or guess that if Gayle let the ball run out then he must have a reason).

The relegation pay cuts all depend on how it's worded in the contracts. My guess is that when a Premier League club negotiates a contract to sign a player, the contract says "We'll pay you XXXX when the club is in the Premier League, but it reduces to XX in the event of relegation to the Championship". No mention of the possibility of playing in League 1. I cannot see any player signing for a Premier League club willing to to even consider agreeing to contractually defined wages to play in League 1. They would be moving on to the next option of club immediately. So I doubt very much that there is a blanket reduction of XX% for each relegation. The only way to get rid of these Contract in league 1 is if the player requests to be sold rather than stay with the club as they drop down into league 1.