Football 2010-2011

[eFestivals]

No I haven't. See, you can't even f**king read.

Only to a retard who has zero understanding of the role Southgate has taken on, zero understanding of what the 'elite' is referring to, and zero understanding of the game in general.

Know nothing Neil strikes again.

Oh look, I can read. You implied I'd commented on all these things when I've commented on none, but something entirely different.

Retard.

[eFestivals]

You can apply this to every subject related thread where some people are genuinely interested and knowledgable and he is interested and knowledgable in telling them his own opinion.

you're so knowledgable you're avoiding giving me the evidence you say you have and said you'd give me. Funny that.

As ever, you go for the diversion tactics to avoid being found out.

[Benj]

not when you looked last season they weren't, but that was squarely what their spending for that season was aimed at.

(I'm less certain about the effects on Real, but I do know that big spending in the last year or two hasn't brought them the hoped-for success)

Spending is likely to work, but it won't always work.

[worm]

you're so knowledgable you're avoiding giving me the evidence you say you have and said you'd give me.

[eFestivals]

The more that's spent, as a whole, the more the status quo will be harder to breach, another reason Utd will not likely ever have a massive collapse (at least sustained for more than a couple of years), esp if they do have big funds to keep ahead.

Depends what their expectations were, they needed to spend that money to have a chance of keeping in line with Barcelona, which they're all but doing now.

Well, if the Qataris do take over than Utd are obviously in a much better position to maintain their place at the top.

But as things stand at this moment, Utd are about as likely to have a massive collapse as Leeds were - they're OK when things are good on the field, but if that changes they're quite likely to be f**ked.

[eFestivals]

You mean the evidence on the sites I gave you. It's always a retarded experience talking to you.

You said you'd give me links to some specific stuff. So go ahead!

[Benj]

Well, if the Qataris do take over than Utd are obviously in a much better position to maintain their place at the top.

But as things stand at this moment, Utd are about as likely to have a massive collapse as Leeds were - they're OK when things are good on the field, but if that changes they're quite likely to be f**ked.

[eFestivals]

Yet when I mentioned this re- Liverpool, not getting the CL money, you said it would not be an issue to them due to other revenues.

Why would it be different for Utd, who have far higher non CL revenues than LFC??

cos I'd made the mistake of falling for the bullshit of H&G about their own wealth. Tho to be fair to myself about that, there were solid reports of them having money in the bank of their own (rather than them being borrowings).

And to put that into comparison with the Glazers, the reports there are different - they say they're technically bankrupt, that their borrowings are greater than their assets (or, to be more correct, that was the situation at the depths of the recession. Things might well not be so dire now, it's a long time since I looked).

The point is that in the case of losses at the club, money needs to be sourced from somewhere to cover those losses - and as things were a couple of years ago, the Glazers had almost no options for borrowing, which is a part of why they went the bond route.

Utd are miles and miles better placed than Leeds were, for Leeds the CL money was crucial, Utd would be fine for some time before it would hit.

Yep - but once a club falls out of the top placings, everything that's needed to get back there is much harder than the effort needed to stay there in the first place. If we take Liverpool as they are now as an example, their options for getting a replacement for Torres were limited by the fact that they don't have CL footie.

[TheGayTent]

Oh look, I can read. You implied I'd commented on all these things when I've commented on none, but something entirely different.

Retard.

Edited February 11, 2011 by TheGayTent

[eFestivals]

Really - your posts are evidence to the contrary:

Clearly if you accept that Southgate was skillful - which is the only sensible conclusion, he must have been skillful at some if not all of the arts of defending to play in the top flight and international football for a decade - then you are also stating he was a donkey. Which is clearly a retarded viewpoint.

Here you are doubting his credentials to do the role he has accepted by by commenting on his managerial ability (which has fcuk all to do with his new role and is therefore a worthless comparison) and stating a complete mistruth. He has all the coaching badges available, bar the UEFA Pro License. The highest of the high.

What you are effectively saying is that a someone who has a black belt at 2nd Dan, can't implement a new training programme for other karate teachers to follow across the country who are looking to coach 7 or 8 year old children achieve their 10th kyu (white belt), because they aren't a black belt 1st Dan. It's such a daft opinion it doesn't make any logical sense.

Here, due to what I can only assume to be because you're too lazy to read, you're commenting on him not being elite (in your opinion) when the elite in his job title refers to the new structure he is charged with implementing rather than his own ability. So, another daft statement.

Oh look, another complete mistruth. Southgate is a qualified coach. Southgate isn't charged with the responsibility of getting new coaches at UEFA Pro License level, or even the standards close to it - it's the ones way lower down - you know the ones as seen on the diagram I posted.

All of this, demonstates why you get pulled up for your daft opinions.

Donkey? Was he a donkey at times? Yes he was. Did I call him exclusively a donkey as you implied? Nope. One to me.

Did I say he'd be poor at the job? Nope, I said he might be, or he might not be. Two to me.

"elite" means the very best. Was he the very best footballer, or regarded at being at that sort of level? Nope. He was never lauded as being one of the best in the world. Three to me.

The only opinion I expressed was that a job title of 'elite' sounds wrong for him, because he was not a part of the elite. Very good but not the elite. And plenty of others agreed with me on that point.

But the retard only challenges me about it, because he's a retard that is here for points scoring and not to discuss.

Grow the f**k up, and stop proving that West Ham Olympic is only for kids.

[TheGayTent]

Donkey? Was he a donkey at times? Yes he was. Did I call him exclusively a donkey as you implied? Nope. One to me.

Did I say he'd be poor at the job? Nope, I said he might be, or he might not be. Two to me.

"elite" means the very best. Was he the very best footballer, or regarded at being at that sort of level? Nope. He was never lauded as being one of the best in the world. Three to me.

The only opinion I expressed was that a job title of 'elite' sounds wrong for him, because he was not a part of the elite. Very good but not the elite. And plenty of others agreed with me on that point.

But the retard only challenges me about it, because he's a retard that is here for points scoring and not to discuss.

Grow the f**k up, and stop proving that West Ham Olympic is only for kids.

[worm]

Donkey? Was he a donkey at times? Yes he was. Did I call him exclusively a donkey as you implied? Nope. One to me.

Edited February 11, 2011 by worm

[TheGayTent]

Redknapp's failed his appeal - will have to stand trial.

[Benj]

cos I'd made the mistake of falling for the bullshit of H&G about their own wealth. Tho to be fair to myself about that, there were solid reports of them having money in the bank of their own (rather than them being borrowings).

And to put that into comparison with the Glazers, the reports there are different - they say they're technically bankrupt, that their borrowings are greater than their assets (or, to be more correct, that was the situation at the depths of the recession. Things might well not be so dire now, it's a long time since I looked).

The point is that in the case of losses at the club, money needs to be sourced from somewhere to cover those losses - and as things were a couple of years ago, the Glazers had almost no options for borrowing, which is a part of why they went the bond route.

Yep - but once a club falls out of the top placings, everything that's needed to get back there is much harder than the effort needed to stay there in the first place. If we take Liverpool as they are now as an example, their options for getting a replacement for Torres were limited by the fact that they don't have CL footie.

[Tugger2k]

Utd will be fine, if push cones to shove, the club is worth far more than the debt and like with LFC, they'll have no problem finding someone to rake it on and move them forward

To compare the to Leeds is madness

[eFestivals]

I've never come across anyone with as much front as you. I do not understand how you can continuously demonstrate your idiocy and not seem to be embarrassed by it in the slightest.

says the man who took some clear words of mine, and claims I was saying something I didn't.

How can you completely ignore the fact that you have stated on more than one ocassion complete lies? Especially after you have been pulled up on it.

Lies? What "lies"?

All there is here at most is a difference of opinion - IF we're working from what I actually said and not what you've invented for your own moronic purposes.

FFS.

[Tugger2k]

Redknapp's failed his appeal - will have to stand trial.

[eFestivals]

Was saying that he was as skillful as he was a donkey retarded? Yes.

it wasn't the most perfect of statement, but the retarded ones around here are the ones with such a love of the word retard because they can't sensibly address what was actually said.

Were your doubts retarded. Yes.

Oh right, then your doubts about the quality or not of Carroll are similarly retarded - because in both cases nothing has been proven as to each's suitability for the job.

You're a retard by your own opinion.

[TheGayTent]

says the man who took some clear words of mine, and claims I was saying something I didn't.

Lies? What "lies"?

All there is here at most is a difference of opinion - IF we're working from what I actually said and not what you've invented for your own moronic purposes.

FFS.

[eFestivals]

Utd will be fine, if push cones to shove, the club is worth far more than the debt and like with LFC, they'll have no problem finding someone to rake it on and move them forward

ultimately the proof is if someone is willing to pay that - but even then that's only the worth to them.

Real worth, an exchangable worth, is what a number of people would pay - and the 'red knights' withdrawal from considering buying Utd because "it was overpriceed" gets to show it's worth as a proper business proposition as lower than the debts. But they were looking at buying it cos they knew just how bad the Glazers finances were at that moment, and believed they'd be forced to sell up (rather than willingly sell up).

To compare the to Leeds is madness

Nope. Just as was seen with Leeds and Liverpool and Pompey and others, when it starts crumbling it collapses in a moment, because people won't do deals life-saving with the desperate. People said it would never happen with Leeds, it did. People said similar wouldn't happen with Liverpool, it did. Etc, etc.

At this precise moment things look reasonably stable at Utd on the financial front but not so long ago they looked far more fragile, and that could be the case again.

[eFestivals]

The lies I've pulled you up on at least once in the last hour. You either missed it because you can't read, or you chose to ignore it because it demonstrated you're completely and utterly wrong. Not for the first time.

Please give me an instance of one of these "lies".

The nearest it gets to that is my statement that he'd be responsible for dealing with coaches less qualified than himself.

Now, I fully accept that it wasn't the most solid thing I might have said, but for it to be "lies" you'd have to have the evidence that not a single coach that he'd have dealings with in his role had the UEFA Pro badge, and just cos someone is coaching kids doesn't exclude them from having that badge - and the fact is there's plenty of ex-players and the like, some with league managerial experience, who have coached kids teams at some point or other and might well have that badge.

[TheGayTent]

Leeds got a £60m loan by securitising 25 future years worth of ticket revenue.

I'm not sure Man Utd or Liverpool have been that stupid.

Edited February 11, 2011 by TheGayTent

[TheGayTent]

Please give me an instance of one of these "lies".

The nearest it gets to that is my statement that he'd be responsible for dealing with coaches less qualified than himself.

Now, I fully accept that it wasn't the most solid thing I might have said, but for it to be "lies" you'd have to have the evidence that not a single coach that he'd have dealings with in his role had the UEFA Pro badge, and just cos someone is coaching kids doesn't exclude them from having that badge - and the fact is there's plenty of ex-players and the like, some with league managerial experience, who have coached kids teams at some point or other and might well have that badge.

Edited February 11, 2011 by TheGayTent

[eFestivals]

Leeds got a £60m loan by securitising 25 future years worth of ticket revenue.

I'm not sure Man Utd or Liverpool have been that stupid.

I know that Arsenal did something like that for their new stadium, but I'm not sure if anyone else has.

But it's still the case that when things get financially difficult, the possible ways to get out of it start to dry up too - much as happened to the Glazers when they couldn't refinance some of their Utd loans except at a silly rate of interest (which of course then further impacts on their finances). Things can crumble very quickly from what is workable position, particularly for a club hocked up to the eyeballs.

There's a pretty solid view amongst a number of economists that interest rates are likely to go to stupid rates within 5 years. It might not happen of course, but if it did then the likes of Utd could find it hard to survive - their interest payments could (in theory*) shoot up by another £100M a year. That's well beyond what they could easily manage while staying at the top level of football.

(* it's dependent on lots of factors, such as when loans need to be refinanced, whether they're considered a good risk at the time (and so able to get better rates) or a bad risk (bad rates), etc).

[worm]

it wasn't the most perfect of statement

Edited February 11, 2011 by worm