Guest neesy111 Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I will never forgive and forget Mike Riley (the worst referee ever) that Sir Bobby was sacked. It was after the Aston Villa game that he was sacked. The worst refereeing ever on that game saw their goalkeeper getting away with handballing outside the area and other very tragical decisions. Though it wasn't that one match that got him sacked, but if the referee had any sense in his mind in that game, we would've won it and Bobby would've got more time. Who knows what would've happened. http://www.theguardian.com/football/2004/aug/30/match.sport3 "Thomas Sorensen then produced the handball that even he admitted altered the game. "Ball to hand," said Sorensen unconvincingly. The dismal referee Mike Riley showed a yellow card. The Premiership should show Riley a red one. " Also drew 2-2 at the Riverside through an equalising handballed goal by Hasselbaink during the final minutes of the game didn't we? Yeap. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Walter Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 2003-2014 http://transferleague.co.uk/league-tables/transfer-league-table-2003-to-date.html Last 5 seasons http://transferleague.co.uk/league-tables/transfer-league-table-last-five-seasons.html Comparisons http://transferleague.co.uk/premiership-football-club-comparisons/premier-league-comparisons.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Our average nett spend per season has gone down 16 million since Ashley took over. Dat ambition.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJ7 Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I loved Bobby, but things had started to turn sour a year before he was sacked. He should have been given a role upstairs that summer and there should have been a proper transition to a good up and coming manager. As a club we were an attractive proposition. Liverpool handled their managerial appointment right that summer. We fucked it up, sacked Bobby at a ridiculous time and appointed the worst possible replacement. We still suffer from that decision now IMO. It was a huge turning point in our fortunes and Shepherd was to blame. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I loved Bobby, but things had started to turn sour a year before he was sacked. He should have been given a role upstairs that summer and there should have been a proper transition to a good up and coming manager. As a club we were an attractive proposition. Liverpool handled their managerial appointment right that summer. We fucked it up, sacked Bobby at a ridiculous time and appointed the worst possible replacement. We still suffer from that decision now IMO. It was a huge turning point in our fortunes and Shepherd was to blame. the turning point was the summer before tbh the lack of investment seriously fucked over everything Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawK Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Anyone not annoyed yet know about the stealth-interest that Mike Ashley is charging the club for his 'interest free loan?' taken in the form of SD stadium hoardings and branding? Direct quotes from the latest fans meet that seemed to have gotten overlooked. Yet more lies and intentional misleading of fans. Paraphrashing - "We don't pay Mike Ashley interest on the loan, but we do take out SD advertising in the ground in lieu of said interest". CBA to find the direct quote now, but honestly I'm about done with this 'club'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Anyone not annoyed yet know about the stealth-interest that Mike Ashley is charging the club for his 'interest free loan?' taken in the form of SD stadium hoardings and branding? Direct quotes from the latest fans meet that seemed to have gotten overlooked. Yet more lies and intentional misleading of fans. Paraphrashing - "We don't pay Mike Ashley interest on the loan, but we do take out SD advertising in the ground in lieu of said interest". CBA to find the direct quote now, but honestly I'm about done with this 'club'. It wouldn't surprise me if the reason we don't attract much bigger sponsorship revenue is because it would interfere with pushing Sports Direct into everyone's face 24/7. There's a conflict of interests there without a doubt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Thats always been the case, even if it hasnt been explicitly said out loud its an obvious trade off thats been discussed for a few years on here. fwiw the lost revenue is more or less equal to the interest that would be charged on the loan so apart from the tacky advertising boards the club isnt really losing out in this particular case Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallace Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Thats always been the case, even if it hasnt been explicitly said out loud its an obvious trade off thats been discussed for a few years on here. fwiw the lost revenue is more or less equal to the interest that would be charged on the loan so apart from the tacky advertising boards the club isnt really losing out in this particular case Although surely if it was a normally structured loan, it would be reducing over time and this one isn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 True, but only if it has a repayment schedule attached to it - no reason why it couldn't just attract interest but never be paid down Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomson Mouse Posted April 18, 2014 Share Posted April 18, 2014 Depends if they can service the debt. If they can, they're fine. Been away for a bit and with the risk of dragging this shite up again, pretty much bingo from Ian. It was very doubtful whether the club could meet the repayments in the next 12 months. Comparing it to Liverpool is laughable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomson Mouse Posted April 18, 2014 Share Posted April 18, 2014 Hugely increased TV revenue since Ashley took over, in no way attributable to him directly, simply glosses over how grossly he's mismanaging us financially. Our debt has doubled inside 7 years, non-TV related revenue income has almost halved at a time where nearly every other Premiership club has seen significant growth, and ultimately we're posting profits because we are a selling club who don't reinvest even the money generated in the playing or coaching side of the football club. I cannot believe people are falling for this insane notion that we were heading for financial ruin until Mike saved the day. The Hall/Shepherd ownership pisses all over this one on any level, including financial, even if it was going stale towards the end. Agree with everything apart 'Mike saved the day' and the club was going down a very poor financial path. Genuinely would like to see how the debt has doubled though. No bullshit or anything. It was around £61m in 2007. It's now £129m. I'm not certain but i thought most of this additional was due to Ashley absorbing the overdraft. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanji Posted April 18, 2014 Share Posted April 18, 2014 I believe Mike paid off all the short term debt with close maturities and then has injected cash in the form of a non interest loan owed to him (which is essentially equity) but given the separate entity that is the club, I assume it was done that way so he'd also protect his cash injection as a loan and future buyers would pay X for the club and X to pay off the debt (to MA) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomson Mouse Posted April 18, 2014 Share Posted April 18, 2014 I believe Mike paid off all the short term debt with close maturities and then has injected cash in the form of a non interest loan owed to him (which is essentially equity) but given the separate entity that is the club, I assume it was done that way so he'd also protect his cash injection as a loan and future buyers would pay X for the club and X to pay off the debt (to MA) So what i said then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawK Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Except it hasn't been a non-interest loan at all and we must be many millions into the red now in lost revenue because of it. What is the saving that Sports Direct makes on advertising around the stadium? The club suggested that while it is always proactively looking to attract new commercial partners and to sell that advertising space' date=' in the current climate it could not command a sum for that space anywhere close to the £129M invested into the club interest free by the owner.[/quote'] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Reputedly, Villa are likely to be subject to a take-over bid by Americans if they escape relegation this season - a figure of 200m has been mentioned. It would be interesting to find out if Ashley was approached before Villa became the target.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Crooks Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Maybe they are a second city club though which outside if London or Manchester has a pull I'd guess, although people probably know more about NUFC. Lerner is also American as you of course know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Reputedly, Villa are likely to be subject to a take-over bid by Americans if they escape relegation this season - a figure of 200m has been mentioned. It would be interesting to find out if Ashley was approached before Villa became the target.... Not a chance. No way he'd say no to that type of money for us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Why does nobody want us? Surely we would be more profitable than someone like Villa (no offence Brummie), we could get 10,000 a week more through the gates for a start. If we had more ambitious owners and a manager to reflect them I think 'The Entertainers' hype would come back, we would be on tv more and we would pack the ground out every week. Would love owners willing to back the manager, doesn't have to be silly money like Chelsea/City etc.. just what you would expect a club our size to spend. Chuck Keegan into the mix and we would be so far away from our current selves I would probably wake up every morning having to wash the spunk off my bed sheets. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Reputedly, Villa are likely to be subject to a take-over bid by Americans if they escape relegation this season - a figure of 200m has been mentioned. It would be interesting to find out if Ashley was approached before Villa became the target.... Not a chance. No way he'd say no to that type of money for us. Was it not 260m he wanted for us? That was my understanding too. There is no way a savvy investor/entrepreneur would buy Villa over NUFC given a choice, the number of ST holders - and potential new fans - would see to that ...second city doesn't even come into it, or the owners of Liverpool would have tried for Villa too. Unless someone comes up with north of 250m, Ashley won't sell. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Why does nobody want us? Surely we would be more profitable than someone like Villa (no offence Brummie), we could get 10,000 a week more through the gates for a start. Keep up dude, gate size is utterly irrelevant in modern football, it's not where the money is. /ianw etc Makes you wonder why Ashley didn't pay peanuts for a Leicester or Boro to advertise his shit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanji Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 If there is a rumored takeover, I assume it's false. These type of things are so wrapped up in non-disclosures and possibly done though investment bankers, etc... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 If I was Ashley I'd be thinking about how to gimmick the roof of the West Stand so on sunny matchdays it'll spell "Sports Direct" in shadows on the pitch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sempuki Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Is the fat controller there today? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Is the fat controller there today? Don't think so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts