Summer transfer window: Official ins/outs and transfer rumours

[rbr 1,266]

Sorry I got that wrong .

 

 

Premier League's relegated clubs to receive £60m boost

Comments (393)

 

Clubs relegated from football's top flight will receive in excess of £60m over a four-year period from next season.

 

The Premier League has agreed new parachute payment arrangements, although it is yet to confirm the exact figure.

 

Clubs relegated to the Championship currently receive £48m over four years.

Premier League's helping hand

 

Since 2010, clubs relegated from the Premier League have received £15m then £17m for the first two seasons, then £8m for the two seasons after that.

 

Reading, Queens Park Rangers and Wigan are currently in the bottom three and facing relegation.

 

Parachute payments were introduced to help relegated clubs absorb the huge losses in revenue that accompany dropping out of English football's lucrative top division.

 

The new deal will remain in place for the next three years and replaces a deal agreed in 2010. Then, the Football League voted to accept parachute payments from the Premier League over four years instead of two - although the payments increased from £32m to £48m.

 

The revised payments meant that instead of clubs relegated from the Premier League receiving £16m a year for two years, they received the money over four years - £15m for the first season, £17m for the second and then a further two payments of £8m per season.

 

Last month, chairmen of the 24 Championship clubs met to discuss the latest proposal, but the outcome of the meeting was inconclusive.

 

Earlier this season, current Rochdale boss Keith Hill criticised parachute payments when he was manager of Championship side Barnsley, stating that they were "rewarding failure".

 

"I've never been rewarded for doing anything wrong or being relegated," he told BBC Radio Sheffield.

 

"Clubs that get relegated get rewarded financially, how does that make sense?"

 

Sheffield Hallam University sports finance specialist Rob Wilson says he can understand why parachute payments could be viewed with scepticism by some Championship and lower league clubs.

 

He told BBC Sport: "The bigger increase in parachute payment should, by rights, help the transition for any club that gets relegated to the Championship.

 

"What it will also do is make it a little bit more difficult for other clubs in the Championship to compete.

 

"It is almost like, in many ways, they [the Premier League] are protecting the integrity of the three clubs that are relegated to the Championship, giving them a lot more money to survive in the league below which might then increase the same three clubs's chances of getting promotion at the first attempt.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Surprised some miss Alexander as I thought he was the main protagonist of any long ball tactics we played.

 

i have seen ally screaming at him for not punting it.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Financially its a shame that Cardiff could blow us out the water. However if Cowie wants to continue his career for trophies and play for the biggest club in his country then he may opt for the move to ibrox.

 

why would anyone choose the easdales rangers for that.

[calscot 0]

Did it? With the money we spent on our team I woulda expected much much more than what was served up.

 

Sometimes just winning isn't enough

 

I fail to see how having a goal of winning every game leads to the alternate aim of "playing entertaining football" (whatever that is). I think the problem is that many people don't really know what they want. The most "entertaining" games are generally equally matched sides, playing end to end and often ends in a satisfying draw. For all the fans at the match to be entertained, both sides have to play well and that is a bit of a paradox, as both sets of fans want the other side to play badly are are not pleased when they play well. When their goal is constantly exposed in an entertaining way, the fans get annoyed at their defence.

 

I've asked constantly for people to point out the Scottish teams that play incredibly entertaining football that they would like us to play like, but get no answer even though there are 42 senior clubs to choose from. For us to be terrible, there must be about 31 more entertaining teams to put us in the lower quartile. But the reality is that we don't actually have the level of skill that people are really looking for. Scots watch the English Premiership as well as top leagues from around Europe and the World Cup finals and then watch our lower quality game and moan about it.

 

It seems what people really want is for Rangers to take the piss out of lesser teams and play lots of tricks and go for style over substance while the opposition give us space and time to do so while acting like clowns for the comedy aspect. A bit like the Harlem Globe Trotters.

 

We could divert training from "skills for not losing games / winning at all costs" to keepy uppies, ball juggling and tricks etc and flatter to deceive. But without the collusion of the other sides who have no interest in indulging Rangers fans who treat it as a cup final and tactics mainly to keep us from playing and exploiting our superior skills it's probably not going to work.

 

But that's the thing about sports like football, they aren't theatre, they are about scoring more goals than the other lot, and you're not paying for theatre, you're paying to witness the occasion. You might think there is a point where to keep the crowds coming you need to think about being entertaining but where that falls down is all you need is a cynical side who come along, forget the "entertainment" and do the win at all costs thing - like say George Graham's Arsenal, and start winning everything. Or you get that from every opposition team you meet.

 

I would say that the main trouble with Rangers is the latter is what we are experiencing, but we don't have the standard of players, like say Gascoigne, that can just take the piss. We have mid level SPL players which is a level many Rangers fans in the past have seen as pretty poor and not Rangers standard. The same level of player that didn't exactly create enthralling matches in the SPL when playing each other.

 

We have the added pressure at Rangers in that we can't afford to finish second or even be run close as first while we rise up the leagues. Aiming for playing "nice" football instead of doing what needs to be done is an incredible risk to the survival of club as a potential force in Scottish football.

[calscot 0]

i have seen ally screaming at him for not punting it.

 

There is certainly a time where it is the best option, but I didn't notice Bell punting it so much - Ally must be going apoplectic at him...

[Super Cooper 0]

There is certainly a time where it is the best option, but I didn't notice Bell punting it so much - Ally must be going apoplectic at him...

 

Actually there was a match last season where Bell was rolling the ball to full backs and Ally was going aff his nut at him to punt it long to Daly. I seen and heard every word from the front row of the EE. He must have screamed at him half a dozen times to stop passing it short.

 

And no, we were not chasing a game, it was the first 10 mins or so.

[Rangersitis 0]

i have seen ally screaming at him for not punting it.

 

Exactly. There is no way that a player would keep his place if he wasn't listening to the instructions of his manager. McGregor used to hoof it as well.

[Super Cooper 0]

Someone who doesn't even watch our games arguing against those who do. Hilarious stuff.

[calscot 0]

Someone who doesn't even watch our games arguing against those who do. Hilarious stuff.

 

I usually ignore you but sometimes think I should check up on what insults you are currently throwing around. Why do you feel the need to constantly lie just for a reaction? This is the definition of trolling.

 

Let's get this straight, I actually like watching Rangers games but don't have the opportunity to see many due to location and Setanta going bust, but do I see about 1/4 of them on telly or stream along with highlights and read match reports, which is as much if not more than a great number of Rangers fans throughout the club's illustrious history. Contrast this with yourself who I believe said you DON'T ENJOY watching Rangers and have cancelled your season ticket entirely because of this. You also slag off Rangers more than any Tim I know and often it's hard to tell who you support.

 

Since when do Rangers fans look down on someone for not attending games when they live 400 miles away, or for not paying over £700 a year to an overpriced Sky and phone package to watch about 25 games on the telly?

 

But you don't even seem to have the nous to understand (and I presume have no interest in) that what I have written above doesn't require me to watch a single Rangers game ever. It's a philosophical footballing point that is relevant to any team and even transcends the game. If you want to debate my points with well thought out counter philosophies that make some kind of sense then I am happy engage with that, but please stop bringing down the standard of a good forum by merely throwing insulting lies around to try and make yourself feel like some kind of internet hard-man.

[jhunter 0]

I usually ignore you but sometimes think I should check up on what insults you are currently throwing around. Why do you feel the need to constantly lie just for a reaction? This is the definition of trolling.

 

Let's get this straight, I actually like watching Rangers games but don't have the opportunity to see many due to location and Setanta going bust, but do I see about 1/4 of them on telly or stream along with highlights and read match reports, which is as much if not more than a great number of Rangers fans throughout the club's illustrious history. Contrast this with yourself who I believe said you DON'T ENJOY watching Rangers and have cancelled your season ticket entirely because of this. You also slag off Rangers more than any Tim I know and often it's hard to tell who you support.

 

Since when do Rangers fans look down on someone for not attending games when they live 400 miles away, or for not paying over £700 a year to an overpriced Sky and phone package to watch about 25 games on the telly?

 

But you don't even seem to have the nous to understand (and I presume have no interest in) that what I have written above doesn't require me to watch a single Rangers game ever. It's a philosophical footballing point that is relevant to any team and even transcends the game. If you want to debate my points with well thought out counter philosophies that make some kind of sense then I am happy engage with that, but please stop bringing down the standard of a good forum by merely throwing insulting lies around to try and make yourself feel like some kind of internet hard-man.

 

well that is a problem right there - those that have watched virtually every game of mccoist's tenure and more can testify the football is awful.

 

One look at the garbage he's signed to play CF says it all and others are actually saying in this thread - hoof ,hoof , hoof is the "strategy".

 

Averaging less than 3 goals a game against part timers is actually rank - not something to be trumpeted.