http://fourfourtwo.com/news/restofeu...8/default.aspx
****** should learn it wont happen.
http://fourfourtwo.com/news/restofeu...8/default.aspx
****** should learn it wont happen.
That isn't the story you've linked but interesting anyway
He's taking the piss saying that they'll give them 200m a year and that will count as revenue so they can spend that in the transfer window and keep up their spending.
Why would you ever need to spend that much, it's rediculous. I honestly can't see how he can be making money if he's going to give them that every year.
Platini, what a **** ******* **** of a ***.
Umm... OK then.Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingJesus
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by Geraint
It wont be £200,000,000 it'll be however much we need for our targets.Quote:
Originally Posted by CHA!NGANG
And TheWolf, you've never heard of FourFourTwo? Deary me.
I say do it, why not? Firstly it'll lower the price of footballers for around the place, it will encourage teams to make good use of the English (youth talent) and it'll also cut the whole money crap which has got quite ridiculous lately. I mean Chelsea when they first did it was pretty bad, but it seems every season it happens.
I expect Portsmouth to do it next season, they wont do it yet. It's just pants the current system, its full of exploitation. Giving people a limit would be alot like Formula 1, and hell thats not exactly died in popularity. I think, give it a chance, and it'd be more exciting than the current games... I mean, it'd be pretty unpredictable imo.
I can't see any teams whining about it either, well 3/4 of prem league teams i couldnt see kicking up much of a fuss.
So european giants are fine to do it but clubs in England for example don't have any chance of becoming a worldwide great club because the same opportunity isn't available as is for Real Madrid for example?
What a ****.
Being UEFA, it'll enforce it for the other leagues too just to be fair on us. I mean they do have that power I'm sure. Many other league authorities will follow after that when they see that it works. >.>
Real Madrid are different. The president the runs it has some connection with the Spanish Royal Family, and they get there money from the Madrid banks. Madrid have also always been a big spending team, and have proven success, however, teams like Man City and Chelsea didn't spend much before they got taken over, and weren't that successful either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tristan
I think they should put a limit. Teams used to get money from winning things, trophies. Now when teams have the money from owners, I think that the value of these trophies will go down and down because the financial backing from them will be less significant to the big spending teams. Look at Barca, they hardly spend any money, alot of there players are homegrown and they are very successful. Arsenal spend nothing really and are successful. I think that is how it should be done, not buy pumping tones into teams that don't deserve it, and can just buy there way into success, not earn it.
Rich teams will disagree and Poor teams will agree
I think limitless financial backing from owners is ok, and shouldn't be capped, therefore if i supported a team not lucky enough to have billions at their disposal i would think the exact opposite.
On the contrary, I support Sunderland. A team in quite abit of money at the moment and I would love this to happen. We had Leadbitter, a good player coming through the ranks and a local lad, but we sold him because we went and bought Cana and Cattermole. But we only had to that, because everyone is doing it. We can't get left behind, so we have to do what other clubs do. It's a massive shame.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexOC
It's funny how now a team is trying to break into the top four and into Europe he's running scared. It'll never happen, they'll always be ways around the system. Funny how he didn't mention anything about Real Madrid speninding £80,000,000 and around £50,000,000 each on two players where as once we've spend around £125,000,000 on a load of top quality players he gets upset. pmsl, soon the the mong dies the better for football.
Oh I just thought I'd state the obvious, I didn't think I'd have to do this but nobody has picked up on it. If this came into place it would mean no Champions League football if you have debt. Hey, we can have record sponsorships and a bloke buying millions of shirts however I'll ask the Arsenal, Everton (why are you even bothered pmsl), United, Liverpool, Chelsea... I'll stop now, fans would they be able to enter? Of course not. Bring it on then! City, Spurs, Fulham and Notts in the Champions League!
If it does just get the Arabs to buy a million shirts off us, and then we will gain £40m of our own money.
Simples.
Couldn't agree with your more TBH, it's fine for ******* ****** Spanish teams such as Madrid spending all that money, but when it comes to English clubs, oh no! they can't do that!, ******* foreign ****.Quote:
Originally Posted by lBlue
Lol... Arabs got shezese to burn!
You know, i wouldn't mind a rich Turk coming and buy United.. Why didn't current of City buy United!!! Haha.
But ye seriously the game is just about one thing now... $$$$$$$$$$$
as is everythinQuote:
Originally Posted by BoomItsClowgon
Haha.. But it's so unfair now... City and[COLOR="Red"] *Removed*[/COLOR] are just going to go wild in the transfer market... Clubs won't be able to buy good players as City will just buy anyone they want for a stupid price...
That arrgorant french man Michel Platini needs a French bread stuck up his ass. He absolutely hates us English Clubs.. Madrid went wild spending £230ish Million on like less then 10 players and he's moaning at us?
Seriously how long is he Uefa Chief? The sooner he's out the better
Edited by Catzsy [Forum Super Moderator]: Please be careful not to make remarks that could offend others. Thanks.
Madrid have spent £230M on x5 players?Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomItsClowgon
City have spent £130M ish on x8 players? is it?
Yet he moans at the English clubs as always.
Because of that mounting debt you have, told you. It's unmanageable.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomItsClowgon
I'm going to take the same stance our fans and the club took towards Celtic when they changed "You're owned by the taliban". How club got Celtic fined for racial chants.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomItsClowgon
Calling them "Ackmed" because they're Muslim is wrong, it's stereotypical of the Muslim background. You could of easily of said "Sheikhs" which is what they are however you have to put a racial stance towards it because it's the rival club.
Good job you don't go to games because you'd be banned from going for a few years if a steward catches you singing it.
Ye exactly... Looked like an idiot when he was at the Champs lg draw.. the ****Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWolf
I would of said the same thing even if it wasn't against a rival Club what difference does it make?.. and i disgree with where you said "racial"Quote:
Originally Posted by lBlue
You could say.. saying the word "Sheikhs" is a racial term.
If the word "Ackmed" was a racial term for the Arabs (because they are called Arabs) then surely comedians and such wouldn't be allowed to say the word on the TV... even though they are joking?
And good job i don't go to games? Haha whatever..
Nice racial comments there...Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomItsClowgon
by the way, it's spelt "Achmed".
wth comedians joke, exactly. Please don't say you said it as a joke, if you are you're even more idiotic than even I thought.
You said it with malicious intent.
Then you're racist. :eusa_naugQuote:
Originally Posted by BoomItsClowgon
How is "Sheikhs" a racial term when they are Sheikhs? If I were you then I would read upon what a Sheikh is. They are not called "Ackmed", they are Sheikhs. Here's a bit of light reading you can do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheikh
You're dragging this into a PC brigrade debate which I'll happily employ because sooner or later I'll lose you.
TV comedians don't use a name as a racial term. You however said something along the lines of "Now City and the Ackmeds are around". The plural you used is significant. It indicated that you labeled all the Sheikhs "Ackmed" hence the racial slur.
If you were in the away end near a steward singing "You're owned by the Taliban/Ackmeds" you would be warned for racial slur. If you continued you would be facing an on the spot fine, a ban from COMS and maybe even further action from the police.
-rep for being racist.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomItsClowgon
Anyway, I agree it's unfair targetting English clubs, and not Spanish ones, but the Spanish have always spent big, the English haven't and suddenly are which is probably why but he should target both really. I admire AC Milan, they have about £100 Mill to spend from transfers (Kaka + Shevchenko), not spending a penny, even though they should really as there squad is lacking a bit.
oh wait.. it goes in, it comes out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tristan
Not interested.
Haha.. Ever watched the Omid Djalili show? He said the exact same thing. He was talking about the City Owner and he used the word "Ackmed" 3 times.. He hasn't go in trouble for saying this.. So why difference does it make if i say it? Ye..Quote:
Originally Posted by lBlue
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tristan
up top is why.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomItsClowgon
by the way, it's spelt "Achmed".
It's just -rep you know. :PQuote:
Originally Posted by CHA!NGANG
And i'm NOT a racist and i feel that i haven't said anything that can be deemed as being racist.
Anyway, no more arguing please. There was no need to start an argument, just people looking for a bit of attention for themselves.. "as usual"
I didn't say you were a racist, I said that comment was racist and don't pretend like it wasn't everyone saw it was and it clearly is. I'm not going to say anything else on it, but it was racist in my eyes and no-one is seeking attention, they are pointing out you made a comment which was out of order.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomItsClowgon
Edited by Catzsy [Forum Super Moderator]: I have edited the original post and I do not think it was meant maliciously so if everyone could get back to the main topic, that would be great. Only editing this post as it the last. Thanks
.
Thanks Catzsy for removing it. :)
Doing a fantastic job moderating the sports section! http://www.losslessbootlegs101.org/i..._thumbs_up.gif
... except for the racist comment.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomItsClowgon
kk whatever.