European Super League | All six PL teams withdraw from ESL

[Biblio 158]

are not seriously comparing Rangers in the 1990s to Salford now are you? Rangers generated much more money and had far greater support than the opposition. This was not the case with Salford who bought their success without any of these factors applying. There is really no moral case for it at all. And I would not want Rangers to go down the big spending route again. 

Neville said nothing when he and his team (plus Liverpool, Chelsea) etc hoovered up all the money. He said nothing when about CL money being used to prop up the same teams every year. How has he only just noticed that football is not some corinthian ideal? I think there are two things motivating him - one is his attachment to the corrupting outfit that is Sky TV (who would almost certainly not have been in the running for broadcast rights) and the other is his desire to be seen as being on the side of the angels. Check out an excellent article in The Times today (paywalled)which really outlines the hypocrisy on display.

[craig 5,199]

All 6 EPL teams have now withdrawn from the Super League - lasted a while.

 

On the plus side.... apparently there are clauses that anyone withdrawing needs to pay £100 million to extract themselves from said Super League

[Bill 13,717]

7 minutes ago, craig said:

All 6 EPL teams have now withdrawn from the Super League - lasted a while.

 

On the plus side.... apparently there are clauses that anyone withdrawing needs to pay £100 million to extract themselves from said Super League

That's nice but mutiny should still be punished. I think a 20 point deduction at the start of next season and banned from UEFA competition for a year should send the right message.

[craig 5,199]

21 minutes ago, Biblio said:

are not seriously comparing Rangers in the 1990s to Salford now are you? Rangers generated much more money and had far greater support than the opposition. This was not the case with Salford who bought their success without any of these factors applying. There is really no moral case for it at all. And I would not want Rangers to go down the big spending route again. 

Neville said nothing when he and his team (plus Liverpool, Chelsea) etc hoovered up all the money. He said nothing when about CL money being used to prop up the same teams every year. How has he only just noticed that football is not some corinthian ideal? I think there are two things motivating him - one is his attachment to the corrupting outfit that is Sky TV (who would almost certainly not have been in the running for broadcast rights) and the other is his desire to be seen as being on the side of the angels. Check out an excellent article in The Times today (paywalled)which really outlines the hypocrisy on display.

Haha.  Salford generated far more money than the competition too - they just did so by way of investment instead of ticket sales to fans.  Nothing wrong with that, not against the rules.  Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is unfair.  When Souness came to Rangers, which was when 9IAR actually started, Rangers invested - yes, invested, far more money than every other club in the league - in EXACTLY the same way that Salford did - it was outside investment that took us from also-rans to title winners - and I remember only too well that at the inception of that overhaul Rangers games were being attended by less than 10,000 fans - so hardly a "far greater support".  So I think that the comparison is wholly appropriate.  And if you believe that there is no moral case for it then there is no moral case for Rangers either, right ?  Or are you also forgetting that David Murray was spending WAY MORE than Rangers could afford on its own i.e. sustainably from its own revenue streams ?  

 

Are you also forgetting that David Murray underwrote TWO share issues in order to bring the levels of debt down at Rangers - one of which was for £50 million ?  Or are you also forgetting that Dave King also invested £20 million into the club for similar reasons when Murray was the custodian ?  ALL of these are EXACTLY the same way as Salford got the better players - they outspent from investment and not generic income.

 

It is OK though, it is OK for you to be wrong

 

Neville does know all that - he isnt stupid, he is part owner in a club in the lower echelons of league football and knows full well the disparity between the top and the rest - as much as I like Klopp, it was laughable last night when he says Neville should be "in a hot seat somewhere" - Neville is as much of a hot seat as Klopp - he is part owner of a club that employs 600 people and has had to try to keep them afloat through a pandemic.

 

On what grounds do you think Sky wouldnt be in the running for the broadcast rights ?  You have inside information on that or are you guessing ?  Who would have had them instead ??

[craig 5,199]

2 minutes ago, Bill said:

That's nice but mutiny should still be punished. I think a 20 point deduction at the start of next season and banned from UEFA competition for a year should send the right message.

Absolutely.  Aston Villa released a statement saying that they are considering punishment for the 6, and rightly so.  I would ban them for a year too - I would give them such a draconian punishment that it hurts the owners significantly to the extent they would have second thoughts next time, and there WILL be a next time, they consider something like this.

[craig 5,199]

14 minutes ago, craig said:

All 6 EPL teams have now withdrawn from the Super League - lasted a while.

 

On the plus side.... apparently there are clauses that anyone withdrawing needs to pay £100 million to extract themselves from said Super League

Perez clearly has the right idea..... invite a dozen clubs into a super league, have the other 11 pull out because of thebacklash.... take the £1.1 billion and pay off the debts of Madrid - lol

[Thinker 887]

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11668/12282080/man-utd-liverpool-arsenal-and-tottenham-join-chelsea-and-manchester-city-in-leaving-european-super-league

 

And that's the end of that.

[ranger_syntax 4,422]

7 hours ago, Biblio said:

are not seriously comparing Rangers in the 1990s to Salford now are you? Rangers generated much more money and had far greater support than the opposition. This was not the case with Salford who bought their success without any of these factors applying. There is really no moral case for it at all. And I would not want Rangers to go down the big spending route again. 

Neville said nothing when he and his team (plus Liverpool, Chelsea) etc hoovered up all the money. He said nothing when about CL money being used to prop up the same teams every year. How has he only just noticed that football is not some corinthian ideal? I think there are two things motivating him - one is his attachment to the corrupting outfit that is Sky TV (who would almost certainly not have been in the running for broadcast rights) and the other is his desire to be seen as being on the side of the angels. Check out an excellent article in The Times today (paywalled)which really outlines the hypocrisy on display.

A just transaction is entirely ethical.

 

If you want to change the reward structure of football then just say so.

 

No need to twist words.

[Rousseau 10,823]

Ha! Collapsed like a house of cards. 

 

There should be severe punishment, yet I doubt it. 

[compo 7,216]

Relegation for the six of them