Jump to content

I’ve enough of football.


24Charlie

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, DCFC Kicks said:

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.

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, DCFC Kicks said:

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?

 

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, TexasRam said:

Everything you say is spot on. If it wasn’t for the routine, mates and the craic I could quite easily give it up. However that said I don’t know what I do in it’s place !!! 

Is the routine even there anymore? How many Saturday 3pm kick offs have we had at home this season?

10 maybe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Is the routine even there anymore? How many Saturday 3pm kick offs have we had at home this season?

10 maybe?

Think they’ll be more next year !!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Gaspode said:

Bigger problem is that if I stop, my wife would very quickly find a huge list of jobs I could do in it's place...

Trust me on this : The list already exists and is she poised ready for the moment you sit down. There is no escape if you are at home

Edited by FindernRam
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 There smacks an air of hypocrisy as there would be no posts like the above if the "fake sheikh" had turned out to be the real deal. There would have been no questioning of how he got his riches or whatever went on in his country.  He would have been welcomed and seen as the savior of the club in much the same way the new owner of Newcastle has been received by the fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

 There smacks an air of hypocrisy as there would be no posts like the above if the "fake sheikh" had turned out to be the real deal. There would have been no questioning of how he got his riches or whatever went on in his country.  He would have been welcomed and seen as the savior of the club in much the same way the new owner of Newcastle has been received by the fans.

Just one little ?‍♂️ with that Athers...He didn't

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Unlucky Alf said:

Just one little ?‍♂️ with that Athers...He didn't

 

1 minute ago, Unlucky Alf said:

Just one little ?‍♂️ with that Athers...He didn't

Sorry Alf your reply just doesn't stand up to my post, it's only because he didn't  that people are questioning the moral/ethical conduct of other owners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

 

Sorry Alf your reply just doesn't stand up to my post, it's only because he didn't  that people are questioning the moral/ethical conduct of other owners.

If, If, if, Your surmising, You'll be telling us all next you're descended from Romany Gypsies

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DCFC Kicks said:

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.

 

Breathe Here We Go GIF by Manchester United

breathe.

Edited by Chris_Martin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

If, If, if, Your surmising, You'll be telling us all next you're descended from Romany Gypsies

How can i be surmising when people are critical and questioning where foreign owners get their money from or what human rights events are happening in their country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

How can i be surmising when people are critical and questioning where foreign owners get their money from or what human rights events are happening in their country.

Your intial post.

"There smacks an air of hypocrisy as there would be no posts like the above if the "fake sheikh" had turned out to be the real deal. There would have been no questioning of how he got his riches or whatever went on in his country.  He would have been welcomed and seen as the savior of the club in much the same way the new owner of Newcastle has been received by the fans"

So you know 10s of 1000s of DCFC fans who wouldn't question where he/their wealth or Country it/they came from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, europia said:

The recent Chelsea v Newcastle fixture optimises the grim state of football.

Could easily have been billed as:   War Criminals v Executioners 

It could have been apart from the fact that there is no evidence of the owners of either club being directly involved in either as far as I am aware?

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...