Jump to content

seanthecanary

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    520

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by seanthecanary

  1. Posted

    4 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

    I bet they get away with it. Next EPL meeting, they will still be throwing their weight about.

    Probably yeah. What I don’t get is that the 12 clubs involved already have the deck stacked in their favour financially and it’s still not enough. The 3 Spanish clubs in particular. Barca and the two Madrid clubs get 70% of all La Liga tv revenue and it’s still not enough. I would sooner leave a fox in charge of a chicken coup than let Perez control our clubs finances.

  2. Posted

    I will now be interested if any punishment is dished out to these clubs. I heard pundits on Sky saying last night that it wouldn’t be fair to punish fans, players and staff for the owners discretion. I understand it to some degree but Wigan’s fans, players and staff got punished with a points deduction that ultimately relegated  them last season because of an owners failings.

  3. Posted · Edited by seanthecanary

    Seems we’re scapegoating McClean. A bit harsh because other than Hanley none of players got anywhere near their best. So many heavy touches , under/over cooked or misplaced passes and lack of composure was on display last night from everyone. We just didn’t play well at all and never got our game going. There were flashes of it but no consistency over 90 minutes and 0-1 flattered us. It’s hard to know how to judge the performance because Watford were in far greater need of the points than we were and they may have been a hangover from clinching promotion. I can see why some are worried. We are going to face this level of opposition and better every game next season. The two games against Watford and the defeat to Swansea have been poor. We need to be better in these games. Not that we have to blow them away but they are must not lose fixtures and over the past 2 seasons we’ve lost too many of them. Let’s not get carried away though, it’s been a brilliant season and we should enjoy promotion and fingers crossed another title before we start to worry about the PL

  4. Posted · Edited by seanthecanary

    15 minutes ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

    Honestly, they were probably expecting the FIFA/UEFA backlash and probably a bit of fan backlash. I honestly don't think they were expecting governments to weigh in so strongly, I think they totally underestimated the affront to our merit-based sporting history that they'd caused.

    I also don’t think they expected the reaction from broadcast partners to be so severe and negative either. I guess they expected the likes of Sky, BT and Amazon to be fighting over and begging for the rights. Instead Amazon condemned the plan and Sky Sports have been quite prepared to let their reporters and pundits really lay into the idea since Sunday. They’ve been lining up people from the football world and fans to shoot down the whole thing for 3 days. If even Sky thinks it’s too much, you know you’ve gone too far.

  5. Posted · Edited by seanthecanary

    26 minutes ago, king canary said:

    Well that was fast. I'm really intrigued to understand what on earth sort of reaction these clubs expected?

    That’s what I’ve been wondering the last two days.What did these clubs think would happen when they announced this?

    Overall it’s a damming indictment on football as a whole, especially at the top. You’ve got clubs like Barca, Real and Juve who manage their finances like Nick Leeson is their accountant. They almost cannot afford for this Super League to fail because they can’t reign in spending and are in financial holes. Then you’ve got the businessmen owners who have shown their true colours that it’s all about profits for them. It’s not just the 12 clubs greed on display though, it’s FIFA, UEFA and the Premier League who were all worried about how this effects their finances. Bamford also made a really good point when interviewed last night. Ask UEFA to do something meaningful about racism, you get the right noises but nothing really happens. You take their revenue away and suddenly they’re all action. He’s right as well. 10 game ban for racially abusing a player on pitch. Lifetime ban for playing in the Super League when players don’t have a choice because they’re contracted to a club. Not many football clubs or bodies are coming out of this looking good.

  10. Posted

    6 minutes ago, HazzaJet said:

    This was something I was wondering as well. Surely if the current funders of competitions in England get on the side of the government, fans, UEFA etc and refuse to pay the clubs in the ESL any TV rights there won't be any financial loss to the other teams? It would just be the clubs in the ESL suffering from loss of fans, players, and competitions to compete in (if the threats UEFA are making do take place)

    It really depends on whether Sky and BT would want to renegotiate their deals with the PL and CL without the rebel clubs. I guess it would depend on viewing figures and subscription numbers. It seems that Sky especially have been blindsided by this though and the fact they are allowing their presenters, reporters and pundits let rip over it suggests they’ve had no contact about TV deals etc. 

  11. Posted

    27 minutes ago, Son Ova Gunn said:

    The Super league chairman Perez is saying on TV that they cannot get banned from the champions league as the law protects them, it’s impossible and that matches may be shortened from 90 minutes to attract younger audiences. What a safe pair of hands in which to place the beautiful game! 

    It’s also pathetic to see the President of one the richest, most powerful clubs in the world pleading poverty. I don’t see that anyone has any sympathy for them. There are crack addicts that manage their finances better than Real.

    • Like 2
    • Haha 1

  13. Posted

    3 minutes ago, Haus said:

    Teams will move, like the American Sports model.  

     

    Beijing Arsenal or New York Red Devils or something 

    I think the radio silence from all the English owners shows how little they care about the fans that have turned up week in, week out for year upon year. It’s been nearly 48 hours since they dropped a bomb and have felt no need or desire to justify or explain it to their own supporters. Man Utd and Liverpool also quite quite happy to throw their managers and players under the bus while the owners hide across the Atlantic 

  14. Posted

    Just now, nutty nigel said:

     But then I've never believed many people invest in clubs for the local community.

    It’s certainly a thing of the past in the Premier League. Fans of these 6 clubs can no longer delude themselves that their club is still part their community. It’s not. Just like Amazon’s delivery depot isn’t part of Norwich’s community. These clubs are businesses with investors that expect returns on their investment.

  15. Posted · Edited by seanthecanary

    6 minutes ago, ncfcstar said:

    That won't happen because all of the TV deals etc are linked to the Premier League, unless they can somehow roll over these deals to a new league which doesn't feature the 'top 6' teams then that will never happen. 

    And that really is the rub of it, if the PL kick out these teams Sky, BT, Amazon will come roaring back asking for rebates on their broadcast deals - and that is another reason why these six teams (or their owners) are really the worst of the worst.  The PL know they can't live with them now, but they certainly can't live without them either, so many clubs across the PL and EFL are now financially exposed if these teams stay or leave (arguably even more exposed if they leave).

    I guess what it comes down to is that I would probably find the Premier League as a competition a lot more interesting without those 6 teams. I am no doubt in the minority there though.

  16. Posted · Edited by seanthecanary

    1 hour ago, Jim Smith said:

    14 EPL clubs plus the EPL would be able to afford equally good lawyers. Thay may have found lawyers who have advised them they have an arguable case but there will not be a lawyer out there who will have advised them that they cannot be chucked out of the premier league. at best they will have been advised that there are legal arguments but that its also extremely unlikely for commercial reasons. 

    I wouldn’t have thought they need to kick them out of the PL. If in the early 90s division one clubs could decide to break away from the football league to start the PL and now these clubs breaking away to form a Super League then the 14 remaining Premier League clubs can surely just form a new league?

  17. Posted

    3 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

    The biggest problem with this is that it seems to flow from an obsession/presumption that income needs to continue to grow or cannot stagnate/level out, presuably to continue to fund the obscene player wages. the real answer to ther problems these clubs "claim" are behind this is a reset and some common sense on player wages so they don't feel this continual pressure to make more, more and more money.

     

    I think that’s part of the problem but not the main reason the owners of say Man Utd want this. They bought the club as a business concern to make profit from. In that sense, even if the sport reduced transfer fees and wages, it still wouldn’t be enough money for them. They will still want more. They only want success on the pitch because it means financial success. Removing the need to have a successful team to make money is a big thing for them.

    • Like 1

  18. Posted · Edited by seanthecanary

    5 minutes ago, king canary said:

    Unfortunately one thing modern football fans don't do very well is 'stick together' its all far too partisan- see the reaction to £20's plenty at times.

    You mean like earlier in the season when the majority of fans outright refused to pay for and ultimately reversed the decision about PPV Premier League matches? I don’t see this as partisan issue either. Even the supporters of the clubs involved don’t want it. There seems to be an almost universal agreement amongst fans that this is not wanted. This is about football as a whole not which club you support

  19. Posted

    3 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

    I heard Gary Neville claiming they were just custodians of the club and spouting history. Yet I doubt that was made plain to them in any agreement when they bought it. You can't sell someone your car and then dictate what they do with it.

    Quite. Being “custodians” didn’t stop Wimbledon’s owners moving the club to Milton Keynes and changing the name.

  20. Posted · Edited by seanthecanary

    10 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

    Well they could but do these owners really care where they play. Many don't live in this country. Some probably don't even understand the game. It beggars belief how people seemed to think they really cared about this country, their City or it's "legacy fans". I guess if folk are sooo keen to call other people's money their own they'll believe anything.

    That’s a point I made. I don’t think the Glazers or FSG would lose any sleep moving the clubs base out of Manchester and Liverpool respectively if the money would still roll in. When businessmen buy your club to make profit, you stop being a supporter and become a customer. 

  21. Posted

    6 minutes ago, SteveN8458 said:

    Yes I see and understand all of this.

    But the SL is advertised as having 20 teams forming 2 mini leagues of 10, but having a 'super core' of 15 founder members.

    What happens in say 10 years where the money that the '20' are getting is not enough? do they kick out the 5 non super core members and have a single league of 15?

    Then what, there is not enough money to go round the 15 'super core' members, so a new 'super elite' group set up an new league...... and so it goes round again.

     

    And while these super super elite clubs are getting their 'fair share' every other club goes out of business. So where do the new Beckhams et al come from??

    Part of me just thinks let them do what they want and see where it gets them. The majority of fans domestically support clubs outside of those involved. I’m still going to remain more interested in Norwich than any of the clubs in this Super League. I say let them take their ball and go play elsewhere and let the hundreds of European Clubs not involved get on with competitive leagues and cups. I’m quite convinced more people would watch genuine competitions over this sham and that’s where the money will migrate to.

    • Like 1

  22. Posted · Edited by seanthecanary

    19 minutes ago, SteveN8458 said:

    Does anyone see the similarity here to when the Pl got off the ground?

    The PL in it's infancy was a money machine for the clubs involved to the point where prior to the ESL we all considered the money involved had ruined the game where the BIG clubs had all the money and the rest were playing some form of 'catch-up'

    Here we are today saying the same thing about the new ESL, so assuming this does fly, where to next?

    The difference between this and the PL is that it’s a closed shop with guaranteed involvement for clubs, some of which have by no means earned it. A lot of footballs greatest moments in this country have come from teams defying odds.  Forest consecutively getting promoted, winning the top league and then the European cup 2 times on the trott. Leicester miraculously avoiding relegation then winning the Premier League the following season. This Super League doesn’t allow for any of that. There is nothing any club can do to reach the pinnacle of the sport anymore if this comes to fruition. Clubs like ours can never be at the top table, ever. Premier League status, as difficult as it is to achieve and maintain is still a realistic dream for a lot of clubs. Super League status is not something any clubs outside of this elite group can ever aim for.

    On top of that, what’s to stop say the Glazers or FSG deciding they want to have 2 seasons where they just bank the money involved and not invest in players, accepting they’ll finish bottom? There is nothing to stop them doing it because their involvement the next season is guaranteed. You’re heading towards a situation here where clubs are rewarded regardless of success. At least in the PL they have to make the effort to qualify for the CL to get the revenue.

    • Like 1

  23. Posted

    4 minutes ago, Fiery Zac said:

    The money involved in this ‘franchise league’ is staggering, mind bendingly staggering. Billions for each club, just as a start up for the first few years. Enough for Levy to pay the stadium off immediately for example. Enough for every player of these teams to be on at least 400-500k a week. Absolute crazy amounts of money.

    And that is why it will happen. It’s too much money. It’s horrible, capitalism at its most evil, anti-football and anti-competition, but it’s just too much money for it not to happen.

    Where is the money coming from though? I won’t pay watch it and I doubt I’m the only one. This is universally hated by football fans. If you can’t get TV revenue from people watching there is large chunk of money gone. If the viewing figures are not high, why are companies going to to spend big on sponsorship and advertising?

     

    9 minutes ago, Fiery Zac said:The SL would love for FIFA/UEFA to ban players from playing in Euros and World Cups. Competitions they have no interest in other than a distraction from their product that could damage their assets. However I don’t think it will come to that as how can a court possibly uphold a decision to ban a human from representing their own country in a national sport. Won’t happen.

    If FIFA can ban players from playing for their clubs due to missing internationals for no good reason, then they can do the reverse.

  24. Posted

    5 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

    I don't think so. These clubs are in terrible (mainly) self-inflicted financial trouble and need the 300 million euros just for signing up. The backlash (Oliver Holt says two of the English clubs are already having cold feet) could turn it into a negotiating ploy but I am with Bethnal on this. This is not meant as a mere strategem to do with the Champions League.

    I originally thought that it was bargaining leverage but I think it’s clear now that it was not the overriding motivator. That said, I don’t think any of those involved thought the backlash would be quite as severe as it has been. It’s universally hated across the board. It’s going to take so much to get this off the ground now. There is no fan support inside Europe and while I understand this is not the only market, the majority of TV money comes from Europe and sponsors looking to sell their products in Europe. Without a strong fan base in Europe, it’s hard to see where the big bucks are coming from. I mean what is the average disposable income in African/Asian countries? With the Government now threatening sanctions it’s entirely possible that the owners of clubs in England could potentially have to move the clubs outside of England. As I said previously, Real and Barca’s perpetual involvement is not guaranteed either because the fans can just vote out the incumbent presidents and elect one that removes them from it. With Bayern and PSGs absence, it then starts to look a less than super, super league.

    • Like 1

  25. Posted

    Just now, BroadstairsR said:

    I can't see it flying. The weight of the world seems against it and everything from the football authorities banning players from international representation, amongst other sanctions, to our government not issuing the stadia with the necessary licence, amongst other sanctions, have been mooted. 

    Neville (Gary?) spoke well on behalf of the fans on Sky yesterday, with eloquence and emotion, whilst Tottenham fans are taking the piddle at the concept:

    "Despite no relegation in the rules Spurs would manage it surely?"

    That’s part of the joke of it for me. Spurs, unless they rectify it Sunday have not won a trophy in 12 seasons and have a spotty record at best in qualifying for the CL. Arsenal haven’t qualified for the CL in what seems like an eternity. Is Spurs/Arsenal vs At Madrid really a box office fixture globally? If they want a place at the top table, they should have to earn it as has always been the way:

×
×
  • Create New...