2024/25 - Generic NUFC Chat. Cunts ☑️

[Alex 36727]

Sounds like we’re rattling all the right cages but it’s obviously devastating not to be getting patronising pats on the head from the likes of Miller 

[Rayvin 5925]

The guy is more than entitled to have his view tbh but I'm not sure where this idea that we as fans of NUFC give much of a toss about what anyone else thinks about it is coming from. Who gives a fuck if he and/or other neutrals don't like us anymore? I'd wager it was more pity than like anyway. If we're not that pitiable club anymore, good.

[Howmanheyman 36614]

Never heard of the cunt, fuck him. 

[thebrokendoll 10283]

aye.

never heard of the cunt either.

shite article which I didn't pay to read.

looks like a young rolf harris.

 

all in all, nick's probably best avoided.

[Rayvin 5925]

Posted the Dan Burn article but can see it's already been done  Nice that it's not all horrific media nonsense though.

[Monkeys Fist 45160]

11 minutes ago, thebrokendoll said:

looks like a young rolf harris.

 Oof. 

[RobinRobin 12486]

26 minutes ago, Monkeys Fist said:

 Oof. 

Can you see what it is yet? 

[RobinRobin 12486]

[Dr Gloom 23642]

2 hours ago, Andrew said:

 

This is a fairly damning assessment of an article published by a colleague by Caulkin.

 

Might as well have just roasted the bloke for the absolute shite he put in the article. 

 

 

we were likeable when we weren’t any good. They’re not laughing now we’re a threat. Cry me a river 

[Dr Gloom 23642]

2 hours ago, Rayvin said:

The guy is more than entitled to have his view tbh but I'm not sure where this idea that we as fans of NUFC give much of a toss about what anyone else thinks about it is coming from. Who gives a fuck if he and/or other neutrals don't like us anymore? I'd wager it was more pity than like anyway. If we're not that pitiable club anymore, good.

neutrals don’t like winners. Being unpopular with opposition fans shows we’re doing of right 

[ewerk 33226]

2 hours ago, Howmanheyman said:

Never heard of the cunt, fuck him. 

He’s just been granted the freedom of Sunderland.

[NJS 4564]

I think the best thing said on the subject was Shearer after the Arsenal away game when he said he was sick of going there and being patted on the head and thanked for the three points after yet another hiding and if they didn't like the fact that had changed they could do one. 

[ewerk 33226]

3 hours ago, Andrew said:

 

This is a fairly damning assessment of an article published by a colleague by Caulkin.

 

Might as well have just roasted the bloke for the absolute shite he put in the article. 

 

What a crock of shit that article is. 
 

‘We all used to like Newcastle because their owner was a cunt. Now we all hate Newcastle because their owner is a cunt’.

 

Can anyone spot what might be different this time round? Maybe what you really hate is the fact that we’re winning football matches.

 

And where’s this limitless supply of money he speaks of? I sure as shit haven’t seen it. We’ve had decent investment so far but we are still punching well above our weight on the field.

 

He bemoans our shithousing against Chelsea and Arsenal as small time. Well guess what? We beat Chelsea and got a point away to the league leaders.

 

Bitter prick.

[Alex 36727]

6 minutes ago, ewerk said:

What a crock of shit that article is. 
 

‘We all used to like Newcastle because their owner was a cunt. Now we all hate Newcastle because their owner is a cunt’.

 

Can anyone spot what might be different this time round? Maybe what you really hate is the fact that we’re winning football matches.

 

And where’s this limitless supply of money he speaks of? I sure as shit haven’t seen it. We’ve had decent investment so far but we are still punching well above our weight on the field.

 

He bemoans our shithousing against Chelsea and Arsenal as small time. Well guess what? We beat Chelsea and got a point away to the league leaders.

 

Bitter prick.

It was noticeable that when Arsenal did it to us it was a sign of their maturity and beating us at our game etc. I don’t mind Arsenal doing it and it’s absolutely what I’d want us to do in that situation. But the cake and eat it hypocrisy from a lot in the media is ridiculous 

[Polarboy 2317]

 

[v.old 76]

Interesting article; apologies if posted elsewhere.

 

Uefa’s wealth distribution favours established elite while putting Newcastle in their place

Martin Samuels

Saturday May 27 2023, 6.00pm, The Sunday Times

If Newcastle United are knocked out of the Champions League at the group stage next season, they will earn in the region of £21.5 million. If the same fate befalls Manchester City, it is likely to be nearer £58 million. And fair enough, you may say. City won the league, Newcastle are fourth at present.

Yet here’s the thing. Even if those positions were flipped — so City are fourth, Newcastle first — and both went out at the group stage, City would still be close to £20 million ahead. Thank Uefa’s ten-year historical co-efficient pot. Keeps the rich rich, keeps the poor poor. And exposes the myth around financial fair play.

If clubs can only spend what they earn, and then the tournament regulations restrict that capacity, where’s the financial fairness? Yet to keep the elite clubs sweet, and to ward off the threat of a breakaway super league, Uefa has increasingly skewed its revenue streams in favour of the biggest and wealthiest. Then the financial rules tie each club to the size of its revenue stream.
 
And see what they did? Derren Brown would be proud. In recent years, just about every major change made in wealth distribution by Uefa has benefited the establishment. In 2016-17, it was possible for Leicester City to be the Premier League’s highest earners in Europe. They won their domestic competition, they went further in the Champions League than any other English club, so it made sense. That season, Leicester earned €17.1 million (£14.86 million) more from Uefa competition than their nearest rivals, Arsenal. That has changed. Without unimagined success — and also unimagined failure on the part of all their Premier League rivals, which gives one club a greater share of the television pool — it is hard to see how Newcastle can repeat this. It’s why a club of Leicester’s size can win the league one year, the FA Cup a short while later and then be plunged into FFP crisis soon after. The Champions League, and European football generally, is no longer worth the same to new arrivals and the established elite, no matter what the new club has achieved.

The ten-year historical co-efficient pot distributes revenue according to a club’s performance in Europe over the past decade. The total, £522 million, is divided on a sliding scale, with Real Madrid in line for £31.65 million and Manchester City £28.67 million despite that 5-1 aggregate semi-final scoreline.

Madrid are rewarded for being good some years ago, regardless of how they perform now. Yet Newcastle most recently played in Europe in the Europa League in 2012-13. They literally have no historical co-efficient points in the present system. This means they are assigned one-fifth of the English overall co-efficient, quite probably the lowest total in the competition, and worth £989,000. That payment would not change, even had they been league champions. By comparison, Arsenal will receive £21.75 million and Manchester United £24.72 million. Newcastle could switch places with Manchester United this afternoon and it would make no difference to the cut decided on past performance. Historical co-efficients are not interested in what just happened; only what went before.

So far, so protectionist; but then factor FFP into it with clubs only spending what they earn and you see how corrupt the whole idea is, with the wealthy lobbying to place limitations on the earning potential of upstart rivals. And it will get worse.

When the new Champions League format begins in 2024-25, it will include two additional performance-related places. Originally, these were going to be awarded to the clubs with the highest five-year co-efficient that had not already qualified through league position but, rightly, there was uproar. This could have resulted in an established elite club skipping from domestic sixth place, over the fifth placed team, and into Uefa’s marquee competition. No prizes for guessing who was keen on that but, for once, the word fairness was applied in its correct context and Uefa backed down.

Now the two extra places will go to teams from the countries with the best co-efficient ratings from the previous campaign. Next year, that would have been England and Italy. Most years, let’s be frank, it’s going to be England and somebody. Nothing taken for granted, of course — reliable Spain has underperformed in 2022-23 — but it is probable the Premier League will get five over the line with some regularity.

The more English clubs the merrier. Yet this season that would have ruined one of the more compelling narratives towards the end of the season — will Liverpool catch United or Newcastle? — and with ten-year historical co-efficients so important, it helps to maintain the dominance of the cabal. Instead of missing out on the Champions League next season, Liverpool would continue their run of six straight years in the competition, building on their historical ranking as they go, and making it harder for smaller rivals to get their share. This all then bleeds into calculations around FFP.

It is why some observers refuse to be weaned off the idea that clubs like Newcastle — and City before them — should not meekly continue to be feeders for the elite. Last week the former Liverpool midfielder Dietmar Hamann was discussing the midfielders needed to bolster Jürgen Klopp’s team for next season. “I’d like a player like Joelinton, who’s got a physical presence,” he said. But why would Joelinton leave Newcastle, who have edged Liverpool out of the Champions League, unless it was felt there was a limit on what a player could achieve there? Witness the debate around Newcastle’s proposed £25 million-a-year shirt sponsorship deal with Sela, who are majority-owned by the Saudi Public Investment Fund, as are the club.

Sela are the IMG of Saudi Arabia, organising events such as motorsport’s Race of Champions. This deal would fall into the remit of the Premier League’s related-party transactions. Yet no such scrutiny would be applied if Sela went into business with United. The longest-standing commercial partner at Old Trafford is Saudi Telecom.

And this again seeps into the fabric of FFP. It’s fine for United to make money from Saudi Arabia, but if Newcastle do it, there’s suspicion. In the meantime, nobody looks at the elite clubs and Uefa’s ten-year historical co-efficient payments and spies related parties. Yet they might as well be joined at the hip.

 

[NJS 4564]

"United or Newcastle". 

 

He's still a fat tramp. 

[Monkeys Fist 45160]

50 minutes ago, v.old said:

The longest-standing commercial partner at Old Trafford is Saudi Telecom

Miguel Delaney on reading this

[Polarboy 2317]

Clearly the fair thing would be for the co-efficient to only apply to which seed you are for the draw as opposed to the money you receive for progress, but the world we live in is corrupt to the core. The one silver lining is that I'd be confident that we could manage top five most seasons when the extra champions league place comes in season after next. To get to Man City, Chelsea, Liverpool, Man U, and to a lesser extent Spurs and Arsenal given they've missed CL on a fair few occasions over the last ten years, level of revenue is going to be a long slog. We're going to have to be very careful as a club so as to not become a Leicester or Everton when it comes to FFP, and be patient as fans when we're told that we can't spend what we like just because we have the richest owners. We could of course hope that the Saudi owners will employ some dark arts and learn from Man City so as to not get caught. And not necessarily to hide how much we're spending, but rather to put pressure on UEFA so as to make the co-efficient system more fair. Then again given the threat of a break away Super League that might prove impossible.  

Edited May 28, 2023 by Polarboy

[PaddockLad 19015]

I’ll just leave this here 😊

 

 

[Dr Gloom 23642]

22 hours ago, v.old said:

Interesting article; apologies if posted elsewhere.

 

Uefa’s wealth distribution favours established elite while putting Newcastle in their place

Martin Samuels

Saturday May 27 2023, 6.00pm, The Sunday Times

If Newcastle United are knocked out of the Champions League at the group stage next season, they will earn in the region of £21.5 million. If the same fate befalls Manchester City, it is likely to be nearer £58 million. And fair enough, you may say. City won the league, Newcastle are fourth at present.

Yet here’s the thing. Even if those positions were flipped — so City are fourth, Newcastle first — and both went out at the group stage, City would still be close to £20 million ahead. Thank Uefa’s ten-year historical co-efficient pot. Keeps the rich rich, keeps the poor poor. And exposes the myth around financial fair play.

If clubs can only spend what they earn, and then the tournament regulations restrict that capacity, where’s the financial fairness? Yet to keep the elite clubs sweet, and to ward off the threat of a breakaway super league, Uefa has increasingly skewed its revenue streams in favour of the biggest and wealthiest. Then the financial rules tie each club to the size of its revenue stream.
 
And see what they did? Derren Brown would be proud. In recent years, just about every major change made in wealth distribution by Uefa has benefited the establishment. In 2016-17, it was possible for Leicester City to be the Premier League’s highest earners in Europe. They won their domestic competition, they went further in the Champions League than any other English club, so it made sense. That season, Leicester earned €17.1 million (£14.86 million) more from Uefa competition than their nearest rivals, Arsenal. That has changed. Without unimagined success — and also unimagined failure on the part of all their Premier League rivals, which gives one club a greater share of the television pool — it is hard to see how Newcastle can repeat this. It’s why a club of Leicester’s size can win the league one year, the FA Cup a short while later and then be plunged into FFP crisis soon after. The Champions League, and European football generally, is no longer worth the same to new arrivals and the established elite, no matter what the new club has achieved.

The ten-year historical co-efficient pot distributes revenue according to a club’s performance in Europe over the past decade. The total, £522 million, is divided on a sliding scale, with Real Madrid in line for £31.65 million and Manchester City £28.67 million despite that 5-1 aggregate semi-final scoreline.

Madrid are rewarded for being good some years ago, regardless of how they perform now. Yet Newcastle most recently played in Europe in the Europa League in 2012-13. They literally have no historical co-efficient points in the present system. This means they are assigned one-fifth of the English overall co-efficient, quite probably the lowest total in the competition, and worth £989,000. That payment would not change, even had they been league champions. By comparison, Arsenal will receive £21.75 million and Manchester United £24.72 million. Newcastle could switch places with Manchester United this afternoon and it would make no difference to the cut decided on past performance. Historical co-efficients are not interested in what just happened; only what went before.

So far, so protectionist; but then factor FFP into it with clubs only spending what they earn and you see how corrupt the whole idea is, with the wealthy lobbying to place limitations on the earning potential of upstart rivals. And it will get worse.

When the new Champions League format begins in 2024-25, it will include two additional performance-related places. Originally, these were going to be awarded to the clubs with the highest five-year co-efficient that had not already qualified through league position but, rightly, there was uproar. This could have resulted in an established elite club skipping from domestic sixth place, over the fifth placed team, and into Uefa’s marquee competition. No prizes for guessing who was keen on that but, for once, the word fairness was applied in its correct context and Uefa backed down.

Now the two extra places will go to teams from the countries with the best co-efficient ratings from the previous campaign. Next year, that would have been England and Italy. Most years, let’s be frank, it’s going to be England and somebody. Nothing taken for granted, of course — reliable Spain has underperformed in 2022-23 — but it is probable the Premier League will get five over the line with some regularity.

The more English clubs the merrier. Yet this season that would have ruined one of the more compelling narratives towards the end of the season — will Liverpool catch United or Newcastle? — and with ten-year historical co-efficients so important, it helps to maintain the dominance of the cabal. Instead of missing out on the Champions League next season, Liverpool would continue their run of six straight years in the competition, building on their historical ranking as they go, and making it harder for smaller rivals to get their share. This all then bleeds into calculations around FFP.

It is why some observers refuse to be weaned off the idea that clubs like Newcastle — and City before them — should not meekly continue to be feeders for the elite. Last week the former Liverpool midfielder Dietmar Hamann was discussing the midfielders needed to bolster Jürgen Klopp’s team for next season. “I’d like a player like Joelinton, who’s got a physical presence,” he said. But why would Joelinton leave Newcastle, who have edged Liverpool out of the Champions League, unless it was felt there was a limit on what a player could achieve there? Witness the debate around Newcastle’s proposed £25 million-a-year shirt sponsorship deal with Sela, who are majority-owned by the Saudi Public Investment Fund, as are the club.

Sela are the IMG of Saudi Arabia, organising events such as motorsport’s Race of Champions. This deal would fall into the remit of the Premier League’s related-party transactions. Yet no such scrutiny would be applied if Sela went into business with United. The longest-standing commercial partner at Old Trafford is Saudi Telecom.

And this again seeps into the fabric of FFP. It’s fine for United to make money from Saudi Arabia, but if Newcastle do it, there’s suspicion. In the meantime, nobody looks at the elite clubs and Uefa’s ten-year historical co-efficient payments and spies related parties. Yet they might as well be joined at the hip.

 

fat pig

[Polarboy 2317]

 

[Gemmill 49975]

 

 

[The Fish 11323]

"It gets steamy in here" 

[Gemmill 49975]

Him and Matty going at it once the cameras went off.