Rich Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 By the way................................ Don't wanna spark a insane conversation here but.... Do you think Freddie would put any effort in getting compensation money had luque been injured while playing for spain? Dear me... if Luque had cost us £17m and was considered by many in the game to be the best/one of the best goalscorers in the world then I think, just maybe, he might have. Owen is our posterboy these days, man, he cost us a fortune to sign and he costs us a fortune in wages. How can we not deserve compensation? How can you even make that comparison? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stormrider Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 By the way................................ Don't wanna spark a insane conversation here but.... Do you think Freddie would put any effort in getting compensation money had luque been injured while playing for spain? Dear me... if Luque had cost us £17m and was considered by many in the game to be the best/one of the best goalscorers in the world then I think, just maybe, he might have. Owen is our posterboy these days, man, he cost us a fortune to sign and he costs us a fortune in wages. How can we not deserve compensation? How can you even make that comparison? on the ground of money/games played only.. Luque cost us £10m, and has barely played either! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 By the way................................ Don't wanna spark a insane conversation here but.... Do you think Freddie would put any effort in getting compensation money had luque been injured while playing for spain? Dear me... if Luque had cost us £17m and was considered by many in the game to be the best/one of the best goalscorers in the world then I think, just maybe, he might have. Owen is our posterboy these days, man, he cost us a fortune to sign and he costs us a fortune in wages. How can we not deserve compensation? How can you even make that comparison? Exactly, Owen would have made a huge difference if he was fit this season. Luque clearly hasn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 if you took away drogbas goals where would they be? Mid table, because theyd really be playing with 10 men every game. Mid table, because sheva & kalou hardly scores And theyd have gone an entire season with two strikers because theyre penniless and have no buying power. Isn't that kind of the point though? They would have had to gone out and spent a lot of money to bring in someone who would add as much to the team hence the demand for compensation? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stormrider Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 By the way................................ Don't wanna spark a insane conversation here but.... Do you think Freddie would put any effort in getting compensation money had luque been injured while playing for spain? Dear me... if Luque had cost us £17m and was considered by many in the game to be the best/one of the best goalscorers in the world then I think, just maybe, he might have. Owen is our posterboy these days, man, he cost us a fortune to sign and he costs us a fortune in wages. How can we not deserve compensation? How can you even make that comparison? Exactly, Owen would have made a huge difference if he was fit this season. Luque clearly hasn't. the reason doesnt matter, they both are not playing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 By the way................................ Don't wanna spark a insane conversation here but.... Do you think Freddie would put any effort in getting compensation money had luque been injured while playing for spain? Dear me... if Luque had cost us £17m and was considered by many in the game to be the best/one of the best goalscorers in the world then I think, just maybe, he might have. Owen is our posterboy these days, man, he cost us a fortune to sign and he costs us a fortune in wages. How can we not deserve compensation? How can you even make that comparison? Exactly, Owen would have made a huge difference if he was fit this season. Luque clearly hasn't. the reason doesnt matter, they both are not playing. Well it does doesn't it? If your mate borrowed your new Jaguar and crashed it you wouldn't turn round and say "no worries I have an old Nova in the garage I never use and still wont" Your reasoning makes little sense, because we wont play a striker who has been a big let down we should just ignore the fact that our most clinical striker has been injured for a season... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 I'm sorry but this has to be said. Freddie Shepherd has absolutely no right to demand more money from the FA after getting £6M from soho square, he's just bullying the FA and is trying to get a couple of extra pounds to stuff his fat pocket. Injuries happen, and a well managed football club will never crumble due to injuries alone. So, before you open your pie hole about how this injury has damaged the team and beg for compensation money, go learn how to manage a football club so that when you lose you lose key member or two, you'd still be able to have a team (and a manager) that can stand on its feet. Utter pish Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rafa Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 2. chelsea would still be title contenders with or without drogba. you think? He's been a man on a mission for them this season, he's been just superb, a one man wrecking crew. With the long time it took Shevchenko to even become slightly productive, and with Kalou being no great shakes, they would have struggled so much without Drogba. It's not like when they had Robben and Duff on top form, and Gudjonnsen (however it's spelt ), and Crespo - to fill the gaps. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knightrider Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 The FA and FIFA make fortunes on the back of clubs and their stars, we should demand more from them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knightrider Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 2. chelsea would still be title contenders with or without drogba. you think? He's been a man on a mission for them this season, he's been just superb, a one man wrecking crew. With the long time it took Shevchenko to even become slightly productive, and with Kalou being no great shakes, they would have struggled so much without Drogba. It's not like when they had Robben and Duff on top form, and Gudjonnsen (however it's spelt ), and Crespo - to fill the gaps. Chelsea without Drogba = Liverpool So no they wouldn't be where they are, I agree. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rafa Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 Chelsea without Drogba = Liverpool So no they wouldn't be where they are, I agree. Far too generous a theory. Liverpool need a bit more than 'just' a big scorer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 Because if Chelsea lost Drogba for the whole season they wouldnt have suffered a hell of a lot!!? 1. not even mourinho would whine so much about it, the way freddie whined over owen. 2. chelsea would still be title contenders with or without drogba. what are you talking about? When terry was out for a period of weeks all you heard was "well, we're missing our best player" from mourinho. At least roeder didn;t start bitching about injuries until a few months of shit luck. Not shit luck. Shit management and shit transfer activity. I'd say it's shit luck when a sub standard manager isn't abl to call on the one player who might be able to paper over his deficiences to win him games he doesn't deserve to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 We havent receive £6m from the FIFA/FA. We've received £1m + 50% of Owen's wages paid up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stozo Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 We havent receive £6m from the FIFA/FA. We've received £1m + 50% of Owen's wages paid up. Your both wrong. The national press were reporting the other week that it was more than FIFA's £1 million "final offer" but less than Fred's demand of £6 million. As for Stormrider he is off his head. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 The main point for me is that the release of players for international football is governed by a set of regulations and certain insurance provisions are in place. You can't try and change it retrospectively when it just so happens that a valueable player suffers a long-term injury. The same rules should apply to all. This extra 150T seems strange. You wonder whether Freddie's just using it as an excuse to prevent him playing for England. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
juniatmoko Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 The main point for me is that the release of players for international football is governed by a set of regulations and certain insurance provisions are in place. You can't try and change it retrospectively when it just so happens that a valueable player suffers a long-term injury. The same rules should apply to all. This extra 150T seems strange. You wonder whether Freddie's just using it as an excuse to prevent him playing for England. yes you right... but no insurance is on 100% replacing the loss. in any kind of way NUFC still suffer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 The main point for me is that the release of players for international football is governed by a set of regulations and certain insurance provisions are in place. You can't try and change it retrospectively when it just so happens that a valueable player suffers a long-term injury. The same rules should apply to all. This extra 150T seems strange. You wonder whether Freddie's just using it as an excuse to prevent him playing for England. yes you right... but no insurance is on 100% replacing the loss. in any kind of way NUFC still suffer. Well every club with international players suffers from time to time. Just because in this case, we're suffering more than others doesn't mean the rules should change retrospectively to suit us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcjmc Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 The main point for me is that the release of players for international football is governed by a set of regulations and certain insurance provisions are in place. You can't try and change it retrospectively when it just so happens that a valueable player suffers a long-term injury. The same rules should apply to all. This extra 150T seems strange. You wonder whether Freddie's just using it as an excuse to prevent him playing for England. yes you right... but no insurance is on 100% replacing the loss. in any kind of way NUFC still suffer. Well every club with international players suffers from time to time. Just because in this case, we're suffering more than others doesn't mean the rules should change retrospectively to suit us. no but we aren't wanting a one off rule just for us the reason we are getting any support at all is because that most teams see the international scene as a chance to raise players profile but one big risk. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
juniatmoko Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 The main point for me is that the release of players for international football is governed by a set of regulations and certain insurance provisions are in place. You can't try and change it retrospectively when it just so happens that a valueable player suffers a long-term injury. The same rules should apply to all. This extra 150T seems strange. You wonder whether Freddie's just using it as an excuse to prevent him playing for England. yes you right... but no insurance is on 100% replacing the loss. in any kind of way NUFC still suffer. Well every club with international players suffers from time to time. Just because in this case, we're suffering more than others doesn't mean the rules should change retrospectively to suit us. so it's fair? ahhh come on... FA got profit also from international players... got profit also from NUFC each season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 We havent receive £6m from the FIFA/FA. We've received £1m + 50% of Owen's wages paid up. Correct. I don't know where people were banding this £6m from. Maybe they asre confusing it with the total compensation package fifa have for ALL players. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 The main point for me is that the release of players for international football is governed by a set of regulations and certain insurance provisions are in place. You can't try and change it retrospectively when it just so happens that a valueable player suffers a long-term injury. The same rules should apply to all. This extra 150T seems strange. You wonder whether Freddie's just using it as an excuse to prevent him playing for England. yes you right... but no insurance is on 100% replacing the loss. in any kind of way NUFC still suffer. Well every club with international players suffers from time to time. Just because in this case, we're suffering more than others doesn't mean the rules should change retrospectively to suit us. so it's fair? ahhh come on... FA got profit also from international players... got profit also from NUFC each season. If it's not fair, then lobby for a change in the rules. But you can't change the rules in retrospect. No club likes to release their players for international duty, because of the risk of injury. There needs to be rules governing this area, or else international football will die, or at best become an irrelevant sideshow. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 If we can ask the FA for compensation because our player got injured whilst playing for England, then couldnt the FA ask us for compensation if a key England international player got injured for a club? The "we pay their wages" arguement is irrelevant to an extent because the FA could argue that they contribute to a player's income because on increased sponsorship deals and media coverage/reputation due to the players' England performances. And surely they get bonuses when playing for England. And what happens if as a result of this, the FA start paying a basic wage to England internationals based on a fee per callup? Theyd have even more right to ask for compensation if a player gets injured for a club. It could get a bit silly. Shepherd knew he was injury prone (unless hes an absolute idiot, but then he did think Souness would be the man to bring us trophies ), and knew he was an England international, when we signed him, so why should he complain when Owen gets injured playing for England? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bramble OG Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 So lets get this right, people are annoyed that Shepherd is trying to get the club 5-6m? true or not seems madness people are annoyed at this, I dislike Shepherd as much of anyone but id be happy to get the club 6m. I couldnt give a shite if we deserve it or not Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 If we can ask the FA for compensation because our player got injured whilst playing for England, then couldnt the FA ask us for compensation if a key England international player got injured for a club? The "we pay their wages" arguement is irrelevant to an extent because the FA could argue that they contribute to a player's income because on increased sponsorship deals and media coverage/reputation due to the players' England performances. And surely they get bonuses when playing for England. And what happens if as a result of this, the FA start paying a basic wage to England internationals based on a fee per callup? Theyd have even more right to ask for compensation if a player gets injured for a club. It could get a bit silly. Shepherd knew he was injury prone (unless hes an absolute idiot, but then he did think Souness would be the man to bring us trophies ), and knew he was an England international, when we signed him, so why should he complain when Owen gets injured playing for England? You've been listening to Talksport, haven't you son? I heard this in the car, it's almost word for word what one of the Talksport wankers was on about. Like you, they spout mainly shite. A player is EMPLOYED by a club, they are RELEASED to represent their country. The suggestion that a player injured while playing for their club could result in a compensation claim by the FA is total bollocks, so I'm not surprised you're putting this forward. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 If we can ask the FA for compensation because our player got injured whilst playing for England, then couldnt the FA ask us for compensation if a key England international player got injured for a club? The "we pay their wages" arguement is irrelevant to an extent because the FA could argue that they contribute to a player's income because on increased sponsorship deals and media coverage/reputation due to the players' England performances. And surely they get bonuses when playing for England. And what happens if as a result of this, the FA start paying a basic wage to England internationals based on a fee per callup? Theyd have even more right to ask for compensation if a player gets injured for a club. It could get a bit silly. Shepherd knew he was injury prone (unless hes an absolute idiot, but then he did think Souness would be the man to bring us trophies ), and knew he was an England international, when we signed him, so why should he complain when Owen gets injured playing for England? You've been listening to Talksport, haven't you son? I heard this in the car, it's almost word for word what one of the Talksport wankers was on about. Like you, they spout mainly s****. A player is EMPLOYED by a club, they are RELEASED to represent their country. The suggestion that a player injured while playing for their club could result in a compensation claim by the FA is total bollocks, so I'm not surprised you're putting this forward. No, I dont listen to TalkSport, "father". Anyway, if youre right, then fair enough. If you could read properly, I was asking a question, not making a statement. Although reading is a hard skill for the mentally challenged, so you are forgiven my child. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now