Yohan Cabaye

[Tiresias]

Honestly think we should try a Juventus style 4-3-1-2 with Sissoko and Anita either side of Cabaye in Pirlo role, with ben arfa remy and cisse up top. We lack the wide players for trying to play down the flanks too much and that plays the strengths of all our players, but it's a bit experimental in the premier league right now.

[Tiotes Witch Doctor]

Anita has shown in the last two games that he deserves to continue getting his chance as a consistent starter, hes got so much more to his game than Tiote and benefits us so much more in almost every area.

[Nobody]

Remy    Cisse    HBA

 

Anita  Cabaye  Sissoko

 

 

Please.

Swap Anita and Cabaye and you're spot on.

 

All 3 would be swapping around ideally (under an actual manager) but Cabaye has a bit more 'tackle' than the other two which is why he would start central for me.

 

Anita slightly deeper (in front of the back four) with Cabs and Sissoko just in front could work well

 

 

Aye

                    Anita

  Sissoko                    Cabaye

 

 

Cabaye played that role for Lille, feeding Gervinho who was cutting in from a similar position I'd want Remy in.

[Guest]

Him not going with the France squad might be a good thing. Hopefully a week and a half with no matches, just training up here, will help him get over it and help him accept he's here for at least 4 months.

[Deuce]

Honestly think we should try a Juventus style 4-3-1-2 with Sissoko and Anita either side of Cabaye in Pirlo role, with ben arfa remy and cisse up top. We lack the wide players for trying to play down the flanks too much and that plays the strengths of all our players, but it's a bit experimental in the premier league right now.

 

Anita isn't cut out for that kind of role, imo. Juve has two of Vidal/Pogba/Marchisio running all over the field, crashing the box, and tracking back to defend. Sissoko might be capable of that role, but neither Anita nor Tiote could pull it off.

[J7]

Would quite happily see Sissoko and Anita try and build a midfield partnership together without Cabaye tbh.

[Mole_Toonfan]

Tiote should be nowhere near the team as far as i'm concerned.

 

Cabaye-Anita-Sissoko midfield 3 or Anita/Cabaye-Sissoko in a 4-4-2.

 

On Cabaye i'm glad the club actually showed some balls for once, even if it will never hide what a joke of a window its been.

[Ronaldo]

Tiote in the starting Xl, man. For what? So we can piss more points away.

[mouldy_uk]

I've given up on Tiote tbh, he went full retard a long time a go.

 

[Belfast Mags]

I've given up on Tiote tbh, he went full retard a long time a go.

 

that's the first genuine post from Oakie I've seen

[alexf]

I'm sort of glad he stayed as i'd rather have Yohan instead of McCarthy for £13m (not that we would have paid that or even got him but still)

Still shows how fucking stupid it was for him not to play, whether that was the club or him refusing, either way we might have got 3 points against West Ham if he had played.

 

He needs some big performances to make it up to a few fans I feel and because we fucking need him to have a big season now.

[wyn davies]

Now knows no-one wants him, he will be well miffed with a lot of bridges to rebuild, as for the club they are now aware no-one is prepared to pay what they want,the gambles didn't pay off.

[madras]

David Gold has spoken recently of the need to increase revenue to allow for more money to be spent on wages. This is due to Financial Fair Play. You can only spend a certain percentage of your clubs turnover on wages. Perhaps this has something to do with our one in, one out policy at the moment. Although, you'd imagine our revenue would be good enough to allow for further movement.

 

If Cabaye stays, I hope he gets his head down and plays well. This whole thing isn't finished though, not unless the club go against the grain and show some ambition.

 

He's talking s****, you can spend any percentage of your income on wages as far as Europe are concerned.  We could make an approximate £32 million loss over the next 3 years and still be OK.  The Premiership are looking at capping wages over £52million

he's not talking shit, don't think it's an excuse for our window but, well, here goes.......

 

http://www.cartilagefreecaptain.com/2013/4/11/4212852/financial-fair-play-english-premier-league-UEFA-Scudamore

 

For many years, financial regulations were basically non-existent in European football. Thus, the sport became a sort of utopia for any ambitious owner to attempt to lead their chosen club to the top of European football, the UEFA Champions League. Many clubs have attempted to attain this goal by buying a team full of talent. Others sought to capitalize on already successful teams by building huge and luxurious stadiums. By 2009, according to a study done by the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA), half of Europe's 655 football clubs ran at a deficit the previous year and the combined debt of these clubs was £1 billion. Today, that figure is over €8 billion.

 

As a result UEFA, led by Preside Michel Platini, created the Financial Fair Play Rules (FFP). The problem with these rules is that they would only apply to football clubs participating in UEFA sponsored competitions (the Champions League and Europa League). Meaning that in most countries the rules would apply to somewhere between 6 and 4 teams. Thus, for financial reform to take root in football, UEFA needed the domestic leagues to buy into their rules.

 

In ealy 2012, the Football League, which comprises the second through fourth divisions of English football, announced its own set of Financial Fair Play rules aimed to reduce the levels of losses being incurred and establish a league of financially self-sustaining professional football clubs. The rules established by the Football League include a break-even approach (similar to that in the UEFA rules) for the Championship and a salary cost management protocol for the lower divisions. The latter method limits spending on wages to a portion of each club's turnover. The Football League cannot, however, just ban clubs from league play. So, instead of the ban on participation that UEFA uses as a sanction, the Football League will impose transfer embargos, preventing clubs from signing new players, until they are in compliance with Financial Fair Play.

 

Today, the big blow arrived. The Premier League shareholders passed a set of financial regulations for its clubs.These rules, like those set forth by UEFA, also encourage teams to work towards break-even. Beginning with the 2013/14 season, Premier League clubs cannot make a loss in excess of £105 million total across a three season period. Additionally, clubs will be restricted in terms of the amounts of Premier League Central Funds that can be used to increase player wages. This portion of the rules essentially amounts to a soft-salary cap. If the club exceeds the cap then additional wages cost will have to be funded by increased commercial revenues that the club itself made during the season.

 

That's the plan on the most basic level, but let's take a look at the specifics of each method of financial reform and then some of the challenges that the Premier League faces.

 

In relation to the break-even aspect of the rules, clubs can make a £15m loss over a three year rolling accounting period. This means that a £5m per season loss can be covered by owner loans. Clubs can make a cumulative £35m loss over a three year rolling accounting period (the first being 2013/14, 2014/15 and 2015/16) I.e. a total loss of £105m if:

 

    owners guarantee the funding;

    show financial forecasting projections to the PL (which is already required); and

    £90m of the loss is injected into the club by way of equity (shares).

 

Regarding the salary control restrictions, only a £4m increase in the wage bill for PL clubs will be allowed. If a PL club spends more than an additional £4m on wages from the previous season, the additional wage cost can only be funded by increased commercial revenues that the club has made during that season. The below table sets out the defined amounts:

Season The extra amount of PL Central Fund revenue that can be used to fund player wage costs (cumulative) If the wage bill is below the following figure, then the club are exempt from the restrictions

2013/14 £4m £52m

2014/15 £8m £56m

2015/16 £12m £60m

 

For reference, in 2011-12 (the last season that wage data was available for) only seven Premier League clubs wage feel below £53 million, thereby making them exempt from the restrictions. This portion of the rule is, obviously, in place largely to benefit newly promoted clubs, who will have to expand their wage bill to compete in the Premier League.

 

There are a number of questions that still need to be answered. Chief among them are, how the rules will apply to the aforementioned newly promoted sides, what sanctions will be imposed upon clubs that don't comply with the rules (though PL chief executive Richard Scudamore has suggested points deductions will be the likely punishment), and how the PL will require a club to guarantee the losses that were made.

 

The obvious goal here is to check the ever expanding wage budgets of the Sky Six, though probably more precisely Chelsea and Manchester City. A £4 million increase basically amounts to 1 player on a £77,000 per week contract. Thus if City, Chelsea, or United plan on making big splashy signings like Falcao, they would have to offload other wages to avoid running afoul of these rules.

 

The problem, however, is that these rules are a soft cap and teams are allowed to compensate for wage increases with commercial revenue. The clubs with the biggest wage budgets already have the most commercial revenue. For reference, Tottenham Hotspur made £41 million in commercial revenue. While, that pales in comparison to Manchester United's commercial revenue, it's certainly enough to cover a few extra millions in wage costs.

 

While it will be easy for big clubs to get around wage restrictions, the break-even provisions may have considerably more bite. UEFA's FFP rules are fraught with loopholes that clubs like Chelsea and Manchester City can exploit. For example, UEFA will grant exceptions to clubs showing a positive trend toward compliance, exempting some contracts from being included, and adjusting some relevant incomes. For example, Manchester City lost £197 million in 2011, the following year, they lost only £97 million. That would probably qualify as a positive trend in the eyes of UEFA, despite the jarring amount of money being lost.

 

We wont't know what, if anything, the Premier League will be doing to ameliorate the problems with UEFA's rules until the regulations are published. However, people in favor of financial reform should take solace in the fact that Scudamore and heads of other English clubs have been some of the most outspoken critics of the laxity of UEFA's rules.

 

Author's Note: Portions of this article were excerpted from my working paper on the legality and anti-competitive nature of UEFA's Financial Fair Play Rules.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[merlin]

I still wanna see Tiote in DM with Cabaye and Sissoko in the centre.

 

With the correct management Tiote can still be a cracking player.  How hard is it to instruct him to win the ball and move it on, and give him a bollocking if he tries to dribble it past 4 players and run it out of our own half.

 

I agree about Tiote - he was a revelation when he first arrived, a player we have needed for years but I reckon Pardew's management has ruined him.

 

IF we got a better manager both he AND Anita could play a role in away games.

If he went to a better-managed club I am sure he would do well again.

[BrettNUFC]

I still wanna see Tiote in DM with Cabaye and Sissoko in the centre.

 

With the correct management Tiote can still be a cracking player.  How hard is it to instruct him to win the ball and move it on, and give him a bollocking if he tries to dribble it past 4 players and run it out of our own half.

 

I agree about Tiote - he was a revelation when he first arrived, a player we have needed for years but I reckon Pardew's management has ruined him.

 

IF we got a better manager both he AND Anita could play a role in away games.

If he went to a better-managed club I am sure he would do well again.

 

Pardew getting the blame for Tiote being s*** now, ffs! He couldn't even get in Mclaren's Twente side, it's not beyond the realms of doubt that he is actually limited as a footballer and he just adapted very quickly and well to our league but now has been totally found out for the s*** he actually is, not everything has to go back to Pardew.

[The College Dropout]

Honestly think we should try a Juventus style 4-3-1-2 with Sissoko and Anita either side of Cabaye in Pirlo role, with ben arfa remy and cisse up top. We lack the wide players for trying to play down the flanks too much and that plays the strengths of all our players, but it's a bit experimental in the premier league right now.

Would liek to see us give it a go

[madras]

Honestly think we should try a Juventus style 4-3-1-2 with Sissoko and Anita either side of Cabaye in Pirlo role, with ben arfa remy and cisse up top. We lack the wide players for trying to play down the flanks too much and that plays the strengths of all our players, but it's a bit experimental in the premier league right now.

basically the 4-4-3 many advocate. cisse predominantly through the middle with ben arfa and cisse having the freedom to move round him and drift.

[Dan Gleebals]

Keep him on the bench for 3 games. See how he likes it.

[Wilson]

Keep him on the bench for 3 games. See how he likes it.

 

You're assuming Pardew has any balls.

[Guest icemanblue]

Or, now that we know he's staying (at least until January), we can play him. This should give us a better chance of winning games, which is quite important.

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

Keep him on the bench for 3 games. See how he likes it.

 

That would be cutting off your nose to spite your face.

[Jack Flash]

Or, now that we know he's staying (at least until January), we can play him. This should give us a better chance of winning games, which is quite important.

 

It didn't last year.

[Guest icemanblue]

Or, now that we know he's staying (at least until January), we can play him. This should give us a better chance of winning games, which is quite important.

 

It didn't last year.

 

Ah well. Best not bother then. Just sack him off.

[Jack Flash]

Or, now that we know he's staying (at least until January), we can play him. This should give us a better chance of winning games, which is quite important.

 

It didn't last year.

 

Ah well. Best not bother then. Just sack him off.

 

Yep.

[Dinho lad]

must be crying like a little girl now.