Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Saying Dave Whelan is a old school chairman who takes the clubs debt from his own money, the right thing to do according to Alan Sugar and this programme. Does that put MA into the same category?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Saying Dave Whelan is a old school chairman who takes the clubs debt from his own money, the right thing to do according to Alan Sugar and this programme. Does that put MA into the same category?

 

Yes.  BUT, whilst Whelan does it for the love of the club Ashley does it to protect his investment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the end, I wasn't sure how well Sugar really understood the problem. He portrayed himself as a life-long Spurs supporter who got involved as the owner out of some community spirit, but I can recall at the time him saying that he saw Spurs as a useful addition to his business portfolio in the media / entertainment business. I'm not sure that he really identifies with the bond that supporters have with their club and which gives the game its particular character.

 

A club is not just a business, it's also a community institution. That produces pressure on owners to take risks with their spending, but it's also the reason why there's so much pressure and desire to keep clubs going even when they go under financially. Sugar's idea that fans could do with learning a lesson by seeing a 'disaster' was a bit naive.

 

Basically, the game can't be regulated entirely on a business / market model, where an enterprise that's financially unviable simply disappears. It needs to be regulated from outside, by the authorities that govern the game. That process has only just started, with the financial fair-play rules, but hopefully it's the start of a continuing trend.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder with the financial fair play rules whether we'll see examples of teams openly flouting the rules.

 

For example, Man City saying "you can keep your Europa League / Champions League, we'll keep spending until we win the league then we'll look at sorting ourselves out".  As has been mentioned before though, it's massively open to rule-bending, e.g. what's to stop one of Abramovic's mates from buying a corporate box or sponsoring the academy for something daft like £5-10m a season.  Time will tell, although I fully support the logic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the end, I wasn't sure how well Sugar really understood the problem. He portrayed himself as a life-long Spurs supporter who got involved as the owner out of some community spirit, but I can recall at the time him saying that he saw Spurs as a useful addition to his business portfolio in the media / entertainment business. I'm not sure that he really identifies with the bond that supporters have with their club and which gives the game its particular character.

 

A club is not just a business, it's also a community institution. That produces pressure on owners to take risks with their spending, but it's also the reason why there's so much pressure and desire to keep clubs going even when they go under financially. Sugar's idea that fans could do with learning a lesson by seeing a 'disaster' was a bit naive.

 

Basically, the game can't be regulated entirely on a business / market model, where an enterprise that's financially unviable simply disappears. It needs to be regulated from outside, by the authorities that govern the game. That process has only just started, with the financial fair-play rules, but hopefully it's the start of a continuing trend.

 

Agree with everything you've said there :thup:

 

Can't really comment on Sugar and his relationship with football - I was only 3/4 when he bought Spurs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder with the financial fair play rules whether we'll see examples of teams openly flouting the rules.

 

For example, Man City saying "you can keep your Europa League / Champions League, we'll keep spending until we win the league then we'll look at sorting ourselves out".  As has been mentioned before though, it's massively open to rule-bending, e.g. what's to stop one of Abramovic's mates from buying a corporate box or sponsoring the academy for something daft like £5-10m a season.  Time will tell, although I fully support the logic.

I just wonder when push comes to shove whether uefa will have the balls to say to real madrid, barcelona, inter, ac milan, man u etc no you can't go into the champions league this year because your finances are in breach of our rules, personally I doubt it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Guest ObiChrisKenobi

http://www.lioncitycup.com/

 

Monday 20th June

Open iCalendar file to add this fixture to your calendar

Juventus v Newcastle Lion City Cup British Eurosport 2 (13:45-15:45)

 

What the hell is this?!

 

Our U15s play the Juventus U15s. Totally caught off guard by this!

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.lioncitycup.com/

 

Monday 20th June

Open iCalendar file to add this fixture to your calendar

Juventus v Newcastle Lion City Cup British Eurosport 2 (13:45-15:45)

 

What the hell is this?!

 

Our U15s play the Juventus U15s. Totally caught off guard by this!

 

Class, i i think Flamengo will be the team to beat. Not that i know that much about them like, but they are Brazillian.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 3 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...