Go fuck yourselves FSG

[Jockey]

I hope you don't all take this as an insult. But the thought of everyone here having a say in the running of the club terrifies me! 

 

FSG aren't facing criticism because of their day to day running of the club (not across the board), they are facing it because they wanted to turn us into a Franchise, despite all evidence stating that it won't work. I'd settle for boring, tedious owners who just want to see their asset grow. 

[JohnnyH]

5 hours ago, Anubis said:

And doesn’t it depress you that you’ve been conditioned into thinking winning a top four place is competitive?

It does, but that's a different conversation, and it's always been like that anyway.  When the UEFA Cup was a huge competition in the 1970s and 1980s, you were desperate to be in it and so had to get 2nd or 3rd to do that.  No different to now really. 

 

But the fact is the difference between finishing 4th and 5th now is huge, whether we like it or not. It's competitive.  For the wrong reasons, but still competitive. 

 

With this new Super League it wouldn't have mattered a jot where you finished in the league other than first.  And then in the super league itself, pretty much all teams got out of the league phase to the knockout, so you couldn't get relegated, and the vast majority of your games were effectively friendlies.  It was a monumental change that would have headed football down an avenue of self-destruction.

[Chairman Meow]

1 hour ago, Barrington Womble said:

It wasn't really grovelling was it?

More snivelling. 

[J-V]

10 minutes ago, Chairman Meow said:

More snivelling. 

All the way to the bank...

[Daisy]

Hopefully this disproves the myth about how smart they are. Stupid fucking cunts 

[Scooby Dudek]

26 minutes ago, JohnnyH said:

It does, but that's a different conversation, and it's always been like that anyway.  When the UEFA Cup was a huge competition in the 1970s and 1980s, you were desperate to be in it and so had to get 2nd or 3rd to do that.  No different to now really. 

 

But the fact is the difference between finishing 4th and 5th now is huge, whether we like it or not. It's competitive.  For the wrong reasons, but still competitive. 

 

With this new Super League it wouldn't have mattered a jot where you finished in the league other than first.  And then in the super league itself, pretty much all teams got out of the league phase to the knockout, so you couldn't get relegated, and the vast majority of your games were effectively friendlies.  It was a monumental change that would have headed football down an avenue of self-destruction.

Getting into UEFA was seen as a sign that you were going the right way as seen as a stepping stone to the European cup/league win. Finishing fourth every year is a completely different thing. 

 

The difference between 4th and 5th, is huge purely in terms of finance and attracting players. Most teams finishing 4th don't expect to win the CL but know it is worth a lot more than 5th, where they might have a change of winning the UEFA. We are currently worrying about Arsenal winning the UEFA, not because it shows they are improving but because it potentially takes a CL place from us. 

If each position in the new Super League was worth 25 million or the like then it would be worth finishing 4th rather than 5th.

Everything is purely about money but it is sold differently. People had a go at playing players in a dead rubber Champions League, with the rumour being it was because we would get an extra 250000 for a win. 

 

 

I am not disagreeing with you, despite the above. I just unfortunately think every single thing in relation to football, at elite level, is purely 100% about money. We however all go along with the pretence that it is not. Seeing it pushed in your face is what a lot of people don't like. Hence they can call out this outrageous, open greed, but happily ignore the more subtle greed that we all go along with.  

[Anubis]

1 hour ago, TheHowieLama said:

Zero chance of fan ownership in any of the English teams.

Made a slight amendment for you.

[Jordy Brouwer]

I used to be more positive about the owners than many on here but its all over now. 

 

Yanks for the league win and Yanks for the memories but as of now: Yanks out. 

[Denny Crane]

Andy Burnham and Steve Rotherham pushing this. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[m0e]

3 hours ago, Dave D said:

Barnes was excellent on Talksport this morning.

 

Everyone should listen to it. I thought they were going to cut him off at one point

100%

 

Thank fuck it was Ally McCoist.

 

It looked like he was asked to cut it halfway through when he gave them the thumbs up.

 

[VladimirIlyich]

2 hours ago, JohnnyH said:

It does, but that's a different conversation, and it's always been like that anyway.  When the UEFA Cup was a huge competition in the 1970s and 1980s, you were desperate to be in it and so had to get 2nd or 3rd to do that.  No different to now really. 

 

But the fact is the difference between finishing 4th and 5th now is huge, whether we like it or not. It's competitive.  For the wrong reasons, but still competitive. 

 

With this new Super League it wouldn't have mattered a jot where you finished in the league other than first.  And then in the super league itself, pretty much all teams got out of the league phase to the knockout, so you couldn't get relegated, and the vast majority of your games were effectively friendlies.  It was a monumental change that would have headed football down an avenue of self-destruction.

Its not really that competitive really though because just staying in the PL itself is enough to satisfy all but the so called big clubs. Say West Ham or Burnley finished 6th and just lost a UEFA Cup place,they largely wouldnt be arsed because they'd still get a shedload of cash for a place and more the following season from tv revenue. The CL has destroyed the real joy of being the only club from your country in the premier european competition. Its shit and despite it needing changing its being changed for the worst and not to change that shit at all.

[Barrington Womble]

2 hours ago, 3 Stacks said:

Football is not made to have parity as it's a pyramid. But the authorities should at least pretend they want stuff to be fair. Clearly they don't as stuff like FFP was marginalized. 

The trouble with ffp is it was there because something basic like a salary cap couldn't be enforced under EU competition law. So they wrote something that fitted competition law but saw stupidly complex and difficult to enforce if someone has good legal advice. 

[Lee909]

1 hour ago, Denny Crane said:

Andy Burnham and Steve Rotherham pushing this. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wonder how FIFA react as government interference in football doesn't sit well with them. 

 

Also its a easy point scoring exercise with MPs. Fuck off and actually take on the tories not point score easy wins with football fans. 

 

They will never get it passed as there is no way its legal to suddenly tell owners you have to sell or giving voting rights and a place on the board to someone. 

 

It would have to cover all aspects of ownership. 

[Denny Crane]

There are two 50+1 approaches they are calling for.

 

The immediate one is to do with giving season ticket holders a say and I'm not talking about dropping Firmino. The shareholding one is when they become available see #3. I think what is discussed happens in Germany and Spain maybe elsewhere. So it is far more controversial politically in the UK than culturally within global football. 

 

#2 EMPOWER SUPPORTERS WITH IMMEDIATE 50+1 LAW

Given the threat to our clubs remains real, we need to provide immediate safeguards for supporters to be able to act to protect the best interests of their clubs. We call on the Government to legislate to require all English clubs to secure a 51% majority of their registered season ticket holders on any major decision that fundamentally affects the club’s identity or future (for instance: a change of competition or league; a change of home ground; a change of name, club colours or badge)

 

#3 CREATE A LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK TO PROMOTE GREATER SUPPORTER OWNERSHIP OF CLUBS, MOVING TOWARDS THE GERMAN 50+1 MODEL

 

While we can’t move to a German model overnight, we call on the Government and the game’s authorities to adopt it as the long-term direction and create a legislative framework to support it. Where clubs shares are being sold, either by shareholders or through new share issues, the legislation should require vendors to make shares available on a first refusal basis to recognised, democratically-controlled supporters’ trusts. This rule would apply until trusts own 51% of club shares. The effect would mean that any prospective owner would need the consent of the supporters.

 

The Government should consider other tax and financial incentives to help trusts build up the shareholding.

[Grinch]

8 hours ago, Anubis said:

Apologies for using the word you've  and making it seem like I'm talking about you alone, Johnny. I'm not. A lot of us have. Me included. 

It's also shite that the money involved has destroyed domestic cups with managers having to focus on Europe. 

 

 

[Anubis]

5 hours ago, Jockey said:

I hope you don't all take this as an insult. But the thought of everyone here having a say in the running of the club terrifies me! 
 

 

[Dave D]

4 hours ago, Scooby Dudek said:

Getting into UEFA was seen as a sign that you were going the right way as seen as a stepping stone to the European cup/league win. Finishing fourth every year is a completely different thing. 

 

The difference between 4th and 5th, is huge purely in terms of finance and attracting players. Most teams finishing 4th don't expect to win the CL but know it is worth a lot more than 5th, where they might have a change of winning the UEFA. We are currently worrying about Arsenal winning the UEFA, not because it shows they are improving but because it potentially takes a CL place from us. 

If each position in the new Super League was worth 25 million or the like then it would be worth finishing 4th rather than 5th.

Everything is purely about money but it is sold differently. People had a go at playing players in a dead rubber Champions League, with the rumour being it was because we would get an extra 250000 for a win. 

 

 

I am not disagreeing with you, despite the above. I just unfortunately think every single thing in relation to football, at elite level, is purely 100% about money. We however all go along with the pretence that it is not. Seeing it pushed in your face is what a lot of people don't like. Hence they can call out this outrageous, open greed, but happily ignore the more subtle greed that we all go along with.  

I understand the view that champions league attracts better players but I cant think of many we have signed purely based on that under Klopp- Thiago maybe?

 

Klopp has been quoted as saying anyone whose key priority is champions league when signing for us he wouldnt be interested 

[3 Stacks]

10 minutes ago, Dave D said:

I understand the view that champions league attracts better players but I cant think of many we have signed purely based on that under Klopp- Thiago maybe?

 

Klopp has been quoted as saying anyone whose key priority is champions league when signing for us he wouldnt be interested 

We definitely couldn't have signed van Dijk without Champions League football. Likely Fabinho and Alisson as well. 

[Dave D]

11 minutes ago, 3 Stacks said:

We definitely couldn't have signed van Dijk without Champions League football. Likely Fabinho and Alisson as well. 

Not sure on Van Dijk. He would have bought into the project stepping up from Saints. Maybe the fee was related to Champions League qualification 

[3 Stacks]

13 minutes ago, Dave D said:

Not sure on Van Dijk. He would have bought into the project stepping up from Saints. Maybe the fee was related to Champions League qualification 

There's no "project" if you're not in the Champions League. Liverpool can't sign the level of player of a van Dijk without it. He'd have found another project. 

[Dave D]

3 minutes ago, 3 Stacks said:

There's no "project" if you're not in the Champions League. Liverpool can't sign the level of player of a van Dijk without it. He'd have found another project. 

I could be wrong but Van Dijk was still viewed by some as a gamble at the time. I think we would of got him.

Champions League is clearly important but the way its watered down now I think players are willing to overlook one season if they can see an overall plan (big wage incentives help). In Klopp we have the best manager for selling that overall plan.

 

Without him than we would be in the shite at this present moment

  

[No2]

5 hours ago, Barrington Womble said:

The trouble with ffp is it was there because something basic like a salary cap couldn't be enforced under EU competition law. So they wrote something that fitted competition law but saw stupidly complex and difficult to enforce if someone has good legal advice. 

There are already sports with salary caps, Saracens are playing 2nd division rugby because they ignored it. There are loads of salary caps across tonnes of different industries within the EU. 

[Barrington Womble]

39 minutes ago, No2 said:

There are already sports with salary caps, Saracens are playing 2nd division rugby because they ignored it. There are loads of salary caps across tonnes of different industries within the EU. 

I know and they got some sort of exemption. I don't know how they got that (I don't have any interest in rugby or most sports outside of football and cricket) - perhaps because there was no opposition from within their sport including the players body etc? But for sure it was examined in football and dismissed by the EU. It was some years later when it was implemented in rugby. 

 

Edit.... It looks like it is discussed to some extent here, although I have no real ambition to read it all. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251326306_The_Problem_with_Salary_Caps_Under_European_Union_Law_The_Case_Against_Financial_Fair_Play

[Scooby Dudek]

2 hours ago, Dave D said:

I understand the view that champions league attracts better players but I cant think of many we have signed purely based on that under Klopp- Thiago maybe?

 

Klopp has been quoted as saying anyone whose key priority is champions league when signing for us he wouldnt be interested 

I think the extra finances help fund the better players. One season out a good manager is an attraction, I agree. Just thinking of the budget being reduced with fourth place as opposed to fifth. 

[Scott_M]

Personally, I don’t think £150m is enough. Cheap skates.