Jump to content

DCFC Kicks

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,661

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by DCFC Kicks

    Live football thread.

    in Football Forum

    Posted

    1 hour ago, cannable said:

    He’s exactly what you want from an international manager.

    Spain couldn’t beat them either and they have a treble winning manager…

    He's good at everything other than the actual tactics on the pitch. The luckiest England manager of all time in terms of the opposition we've faced the last two tournaments. 

    Spain had a bad tournament (including a COVID outbreak), and Italy still only drew with them. Spain also drew with Poland, Sweden and Switzerland, which shows the level Italy were at.

     

    I’ve enough of football.

    in Derby County Forum

    Posted

    2 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

    Did you used to call all English teams war criminals following our invasion of Iraq?

    That would only make sense if Tony Blair owned a club personally, or if an owner personally instigated or financially benefited from the Iraq War, which I'm not away any did. I'm sure there are many owners of other English clubs who should be criticised for various reasons. 

    Abramovich has proven close ties with Putin. Much of the money that made Chelsea fans happy was allowed to be accumulated because of Putin's actions. Much of that same pot of money goes back to Putin himself to fund his actives

    It has been proven Mohammed bin Salman, who is chairman of the group who own Newcastle, was personally linked with the murder of a journalist and personally ordered the ongoing bombings in Yemen.

    I’ve enough of football.

    in Derby County Forum

    Posted

    3 hours ago, Unlucky Alf said:

    Great Post DCFC Kicks

    I just wanted to highlight and say that Shearer is a sycophant a populist to the armchair fan, He'll say what he belives the viewers want to see/hear, The BBC will give him a platform, Yet we pay out TV lisence for this shyte privilage, I no longer watch MOTD, I don't need pundits telling me in great detail what is clear to see on your TV screen, Saudi Arabia executed 81 people last week, The Manager was crtisized for his being paid by a murderous state, He was very uncomfortable trying to fend off questions, This will continue, You've highlighted those who have super wealth by their murky deeds, And yet there are millions upon millions who aren't bothered one iota as long as their team are winning/surviving

    Agree. It's getting really annoying seeing Tuchel and Howe dodging questions saying things like: "I only know about football issues". If they're quite happy to accept money off these owners then they should be expected to justify it, that goes for the players as well.

    What's more annoying is the pundits/fans appearing to show sympathy towards these managers and players. How difficult it must be for Chelsea now they might have an owner who's only worth £5billion and not £10billion. Ridiculous.

    I’ve enough of football.

    in Derby County Forum

    Posted

    9 hours ago, Leeds Ram said:

    The super league lasted a week and took immense pressure and heat from day 1. That will never happen and money isn't sufficient to make it happen. Some premier league teams may try to play a game at those stadiums, it was discussed many years ago before being nixed as again it seemed desperately unpopular. The difference between the super league, premier league, and playing games away is the maintenance of the league system, geographical location and access for 'legacy supporters'. The premier league ultimately didn't destroy the football pyramid, clubs geographical relationship with fans or the relationship with their national bodies. If it had it wouldn't have succeeded. If the latter 2 are disconnected then a long term plan is not going to function. I did try and make a distinction for football clubs such as in the UK to 'franchises' in the US that may lack the same kind of historical, social, and cultural roots that football clubs have laid down here. 

    Actually, you can just take it back technically... but that's for another day. I think if there ever was such a crisis in English football then the rebalancing of finance would occur to such an extent that it would box in the mega-rich clubs for a significant period of time. 

    I hope you're right, but I just see these things as inevitable. Many fans protested the PL foundation, hated Sunday/mid-week games and said they'd never go, but eventually they did. The same thing will happen with a Super League. The PL didn't destroy the PL entirely but It's broken it many ways and why wouldn't people feel the same as the original creator of this topic feel? I always think of the 1967 Celtic team as the best of what football is meant to be, what's left of that now?

    I don't see the geographical location as an issue with a possible overseas game, clubs already jet off to places like Azerbaijan for a mid-week CL game. I also don't think 'legacy supporters' are significant in any way to these people. I'm sure they could fill out a 100k seat stadium in North America easily, and they already expect fans to travel 2,800 miles to Baku to watch a game so 3,400 to New York isn't much difference. I don't even think they would acknowledge 'legacy fans' even existing. To them you're just as much of a fan whether you're a 4th generation fan who lives 100ft from the stadium, or if you're a glory hunting Man City fan from Los Angeles, as long as you buy their merchandise.

     

    I’ve enough of football.

    in Derby County Forum

    Posted

    11 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

    I think the super league highlighted two critical things. The distinction was made between 'legacy fans,' i.e., true fans from the area and 'future fans,' i.e., people abroad with 0 connection to the club and wanted to market more towards the latter and were even disdainful of the former. So there is a distinction to be made. Second, the idea collapsed like a house of cards because the 'legacy fans' are the fans, and ultimately, no sports team can survive without its fanbase. Even franchised units in America still need a 'home base' to play at; otherwise, they're just wandering badges that are homeless and despised in their cities. Fundamentally, those clubs can't be utterly divorced from their geographical locations; I'd suggest in England it'd be not very smart to attempt such an idea given the histories and identities that are layered upon football clubs. 

    In his infinite wisdom, Simon Jordan claimed that we couldn't stop the super league because of the money involved; the idea lasted about a week before fans seemed willing to burn their clubs down before letting it happen. I think what will eventually happen is like almost all forms of markets that seem to be growing ever more they'll hit a brick wall. They'll be a mass crisis, and most premier league clubs will need to be bailed out. The tv revenue cannot continue to exponentially go up (there are only so many markets in the world), and there are a limited amount of sovereign wealth funds in the world. The result will be a radical change in the standings for a few years and maybe spending limitations implemented if we're lucky. 

    The Super League hasn't worked for now, but it will eventually. If there's money to be made, greedy people will continue to push it until it happens. The same thing happened with the Premier League in 1992, they said the 'legacy fans' wouldn't allow it but eventually it happened.

    You say NFL teams need a 'home base', but sometime they even move cities entirely. The LA Rams moved from California to Missouri in 1995. The NFL now plays one game a season at Wembley. I could honestly see in the next few years, one or two PL or Champions League games being played in the Middle East or North America. For example Liverpool and Man Utds owners doing a deal to play a game at Fenway Park or the Buccaneers stadium. There'd be a lot of money to be made and therefore a lot of people pushing it.

    The TV revenue isn't the problem, it's the owners of Man City, Chelsea, PSG etc. Where the TV revenue is an insignificant amount of their wealth. They buy these clubs because owning a culturally important asset gives them some security. they also use them to Sportswash, or in Abramovich's case literally laundering. The saddest thing is, you can say all this to the fans of these clubs but they still want it. I was watching the FA Cup earlier and Shearer made some ridiculous comment along the lines of: "fans are allowed to support and enjoy their team winning and be critical of their owners at the same time". He's trying to make himself feel better about being happy with Newcastle's owners but it's just a massive contradiction. How can you be unhappy with your owners but then enjoy and celebrate the success their dirty money created?

    Yes, there's only a limited amount of sovereign wealth funds in the world but just one is enough to ruin it for everyone. The problem is once you allow these people to buy clubs, how do you go back? you can't just take it off them.

    I’ve enough of football.

    in Derby County Forum

    Posted

    19 minutes ago, Highgate said:

    I do think the PL cares about whether local communities attend games or not.  But only in a financial sense.  Premier league clubs aren't going to fill stadiums with 50,000 Chinese tourists every week and stadiums full of passionate noisy fans produce a league that is a far more marketable product than half empty stadiums. 

    If Man City, Newcastle etc.. do turn into franchises and play their games in Dubai and Miami in the Sky Billionaire Global Football League....and local people still support them, then we, as fans, only have ourselves to blame.

    I agree they care about wanting to fill the stadiums for money, but my point was they don't care where the crowd is coming from or if the local communities feel represented. A lack of crowd doesn't seem to affect Man City that much and they've already experimented with artificial crowd noise last season.

    Everyone still watched it after the creation of the PL in 1992 killed much of what was good about football and saddest part is, most people will continue to watch it even if all the clubs turn into franchises. Every time I see Newcastle now it makes me sad. How can such a historically working class city allow and encourage something so culturally important to them just be taken and exploited? and for what? their team to win more? pathetic. 

    I’ve enough of football.

    in Derby County Forum

    Posted

    9 minutes ago, Highgate said:

    One thing is for sure...club football can't keep going like it is or eventually there will be some sort of grassroots revolution.  

    A grassroots revolution would have no impact what so ever. Do you really think the PL cares at all about clubs local communities and whether they attend games or not? They care more about the Chinese audience because that's where the money is.

    Just look at American sports like the NFL because that's the way English football is heading. Where clubs severe all ties to their local city and become franchises, sometimes even relocating entirely. 

    Within 5 years we'll probably see Man City play a PL game in Abu Dhabi or Man Utd play one in Florida, if the Super League hasn't been resurrected by then. Why would anyone from Manchester feel any connection to these clubs in any way?

    Abramovich is offski

    in Football Forum

    Posted

    56 minutes ago, TigerTedd said:

    What’s sad is that the way football is going (actually very much due to abramovic) only the mega rich can afford to buy a football club. And there are very few mega rich people who didn’t get there doing something dodgy.

    it’s a pretty obvious pattern. We’re getting more and more dubious people owning football clubs putting more and more dodgy money into the game, raising the the prices for everyone else and ensuring your average, everyday local millionaire couldn’t hope to own a football club. 

    The saddest thing is they way fans seem to embrace it. 

    vs Newcastle, Chelsea fans chanting Abramovich, Newcastle fans chanting back waving Saudi flags. 

    I honestly don't even know what the point of football even is anymore.

    Abramovich is offski

    in Football Forum

    Posted

    It was incredibly depressing hearing Chelsea fans chant Abramovich's name the other day. Integrity and morals are non-existent in football today. As long as your team is winning and your owner has a lot of money he's a hero and nothing else matters. Where the money comes from doesn't matter. 

    The morally correct thing would be for all Chelsea fans to refuse to support their team in any way until they have a new owner (they won't). All broadcasters, Sky, BBC etc. should refuse to show any Chelsea games (they haven't), and Sky continue to make money off showing their games, and no one is criticising them for doing this. All Chelsea players should refuse to play or get their dirty money wages (obviously they won't).

    Yet Sky, Chelsea fans/players continue with the empty gestures, like holding up a Ukrainian flag before games, then everyone feels better about themselves and just continue on.

×
×
  • Create New...