CleeToonFan 1 Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 So we're in a position where we want the Scousers to win the cup final to keep 7th spot a possibility for Europe. Thought the FA wont let Cardiff take it anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 So we're in a position where we want the Scousers to win the cup final to keep 7th spot a possibility for Europe. Thought the FA wont let Cardiff take it anyway? Why's that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio 0 Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share Posted January 27, 2012 (edited) Thought the FA wont let Cardiff take it anyway? Why's that? For being Welsh. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/c/cardiff_city/7294461.stm Edited January 27, 2012 by Baggio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio 0 Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share Posted January 27, 2012 Although apparently they can now. http://edition.cnn.com/2008/SPORT/football/04/24/england.cardiff/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Thought the FA wont let Cardiff take it anyway? Why's that? For being Welsh. http://news.bbc.co.u...ity/7294461.stm Aye, but the FA backed down and said they'd be in if they won, didn't they? Have they changed their mind again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio 0 Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share Posted January 27, 2012 Yes they backed down, I've posted a link to it on the previous page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Well done you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio 0 Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share Posted January 27, 2012 Well done you. Thank you alex, it's nice to know my efforts are appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 The link doesn't work for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9404 Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 The link doesn't work for me. You need to suffix it with .cymru Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 (edited) yes it is. The point is that your scaremongering is nothing more than that, and whatever "changes" football has gone through, those changes affected EVERY club, but WE had directors who competed against their rivals more than the vast majority of other clubs, in fact all other clubs bar 4 and that is subject to debate considering the starting point when put against manU, Liverpool and Arsenal. Don't let the footballing facts get in the way of your spreadsheets though. I'm not using spreadsheets, am speaking from experience. The only thing scarey about this exchange is that you think i'm scaremongering. I'm the positive soothsayer, trying to reassure people that their may be some method to the apparent madness, you're the merchant of doom, not me. The way we competed in the 90s was fantastic but there were exceptional environmental factors also driving the club forward. Thats why you cant compare the club's performance across time within the same framework. experience tells you that what I say in the clip from the book, above, is the truth ie the reality. Experience should tell you that football business is not the same as the High Street business, where coming 5th top company in 15 years is outstanding success and would not get you booed by knowledgeable shareholders. You are making the comparions, me - while I recognise football is of course still a business, the rules, expectations, demands are totally unique. Experience should tell you this. The simple fact is whatever conditions existed in the 1990's existed for all clubs, and the Halls and Shepherd competed with their rivals more than anybody else in their own particular eras because they knew the size of the club, the potential of the club and the desire to compete at those levels. There is no mystery about this, that is literally all they did. Edited January 28, 2012 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaythesouthernmag 0 Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 They did, the credit ran out, Ashley bought the club and that's where we are now. Simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9404 Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 yes it is. The point is that your scaremongering is nothing more than that, and whatever "changes" football has gone through, those changes affected EVERY club, but WE had directors who competed against their rivals more than the vast majority of other clubs, in fact all other clubs bar 4 and that is subject to debate considering the starting point when put against manU, Liverpool and Arsenal. Don't let the footballing facts get in the way of your spreadsheets though. I'm not using spreadsheets, am speaking from experience. The only thing scarey about this exchange is that you think i'm scaremongering. I'm the positive soothsayer, trying to reassure people that their may be some method to the apparent madness, you're the merchant of doom, not me. The way we competed in the 90s was fantastic but there were exceptional environmental factors also driving the club forward. Thats why you cant compare the club's performance across time within the same framework. experience tells you that what I say in the clip from the book, above, is the truth ie the reality. Experience should tell you that football business is not the same as the High Street business, where coming 5th top company in 15 years is outstanding success and would not get you booed by knowledgeable shareholders. You are making the comparions, me - while I recognise football is of course still a business, the rules, expectations, demands are totally unique. Experience should tell you this. The simple fact is whatever conditions existed in the 1990's existed for all clubs, and the Halls and Shepherd competed with their rivals more than anybody else in their own particular eras because they knew the size of the club, the potential of the club and the desire to compete at those levels. There is no mystery about this, that is literally all they did. You keep quoting that part of the book, and it is pathetic and utter nonsense, as has been pointed out as many times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 I'm not using spreadsheets, am speaking from experience. The only thing scarey about this exchange is that you think i'm scaremongering. I'm the positive soothsayer, trying to reassure people that their may be some method to the apparent madness, you're the merchant of doom, not me. The way we competed in the 90s was fantastic but there were exceptional environmental factors also driving the club forward. Thats why you cant compare the club's performance across time within the same framework. experience tells you that what I say in the clip from the book, above, is the truth ie the reality. Experience should tell you that football business is not the same as the High Street business, where coming 5th top company in 15 years is outstanding success and would not get you booed by knowledgeable shareholders. You are making the comparions, me - while I recognise football is of course still a business, the rules, expectations, demands are totally unique. Experience should tell you this. The simple fact is whatever conditions existed in the 1990's existed for all clubs, and the Halls and Shepherd competed with their rivals more than anybody else in their own particular eras because they knew the size of the club, the potential of the club and the desire to compete at those levels. There is no mystery about this, that is literally all they did. You keep quoting that part of the book, and it is pathetic and utter nonsense, as has been pointed out as many times. you keep insisting that your man Mikey baby is making progress for the club, which is an absolute pile of bollocks. He has taken it back 20 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 They did, the credit ran out, Ashley bought the club and that's where we are now. Simple and soopa Mike has restored the glorious promotion from the 2nd division years that the evil Halls and Shepherd did away with forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 44879 Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 Turns out ignore isn't working on Tapatalk. He's had the weekend off, let the insanity commence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JawD 99 Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 LM, genuine question, do you think the global recession and current economic climate has an impact on football? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaythesouthernmag 0 Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 LM, genuine question, do you think the global recession and current economic climate has an impact on football? You only need to look outside the mega rich clubs to see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 44879 Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 What he's been saying for the past four years >>>>>>>> global recession, is my prediction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 LM, genuine question, do you think the global recession and current economic climate has an impact on football? has it impacted us more than the likes of Stoke, Bolton, Blackburn etc ie forced us to lower our ambitions to such levels ? Last I looked, we were still at least twice the club that these are, wouldn't you agree ? Was it the reason Spurs told Chelsea to fuck off when they asked about Modric ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9404 Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 (edited) LM, genuine question, do you think the global recession and current economic climate has an impact on football? has it impacted us more than the likes of Stoke, Bolton, Blackburn etc ie forced us to lower our ambitions to such levels ? Last I looked, we were still at least twice the club that these are, wouldn't you agree ? Was it the reason Spurs told Chelsea to fuck off when they asked about Modric ? With at least thrice the debt (to the banks) at the time BTW we've spent £20Mill more than each the first two, over the last 5 years, thick end of £50 Mill more than Blackburn. Edited January 30, 2012 by Toonpack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaythesouthernmag 0 Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 Spurs have got into the position due to years of building, which involved selling players and not spending it all(Pocketing the cash LM). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JawD 99 Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 LM, genuine question, do you think the global recession and current economic climate has an impact on football? has it impacted us more than the likes of Stoke, Bolton, Blackburn etc ie forced us to lower our ambitions to such levels ? Last I looked, we were still at least twice the club that these are, wouldn't you agree ? Was it the reason Spurs told Chelsea to fuck off when they asked about Modric ? Id agree we are yes. I can imagine (I dont know factually) that it is harder to sell corporate hospitality, season tickets, advertising and so on and so the clubs income from operational activity has been dented. Not just us of course, any club. You have to take the likes of Man City out of the equation as they dont operate "normally". I will be interesting to see what happens when the fair play rules come into force and how quickly clubs will make a mockery of them by finding loop holes. Re Spurs, good on them for remaining strong. But there would have been a point in which they would have broke. Look at Man Utd selling Ronaldo etc. But is 11/12 Spurs have recovered near £20M in transfers. Selling £27M and spending £7M. The year before the net figure was a £17M spend and before that a £5M spend. They do seem to sell a lot but spend it in just as good measure. Without looking at figures, Bolton are near relegated so whatever their policy, isnt working. Blackburn? Same. I dont think our ambitions are the same as these two, do you? Yet, their spend in last couple of years looking at the net figure is likely greater. Yet we are in 6th? So Im not sure which you think is better. To me, as Ive said before. For all I dislike the stuff off the field, on the field, where it matters the policy is currently working. Spend less than Bolton and be in sixth or spend more and who knows? Im well aware our wheels could come off and the house of cards come crashing down if we sold Colo and Ba tomorrow for example. But Im not going to worry about what ifs. Only if things do happen and so far this window, we've bought a £9M (ish) forward and are looking for a defender. Currently more than any other team in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 Spurs have got into the position due to years of building, which involved selling players and not spending it all(Pocketing the cash LM). you'll never learn Link to comment 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