Football 19/20

[thetime]

3 minutes ago, WS_Jack_III said:

 

 

 

Blimey you are a bit bitter.

It is not like Newastle have never had money, or spent money to try and win the league they just failed. 

[WS_Jack_III]

4 minutes ago, thetime said:

Blimey you are a bit bitter.

It is not like Newastle have never had money, or spent money to try and win the league they just failed. 

of course i'm bitter, we're not being allowed to compete.

Point being, why's it bad and sportswashing when it's Newcastle United but not the British GP?

 

Also, who gives a f*ck if they had money before and it failed, we're not being allowed the chance again because the top 6 don't want their monopoly being upset.

Edited August 2, 2020 by WS_Jack_III

[thetime]

38 minutes ago, WS_Jack_III said:

 

 

Also, who gives a f*ck if they had money before and it failed, we're not being allowed the chance again because the top 6 don't want their monopoly being upset.

Its Newcastle they would finish 7th anyway. 👍

[eastynh]

57 minutes ago, WS_Jack_III said:

of course i'm bitter, we're not being allowed to compete.

Point being, why's it bad and sportswashing when it's Newcastle United but not the British GP?

 

Also, who gives a f*ck if they had money before and it failed, we're not being allowed the chance again because the top 6 don't want their monopoly being upset.

The top 6???

[kaosmark2]

26 minutes ago, thetime said:

Its Newcastle they would finish 7th anyway. 👍

There's Spurs to contest on the failure front

[WS_Jack_III]

29 minutes ago, thetime said:

Its Newcastle they would finish 7th anyway. 👍

Nice one, it's better than fighting relegation every year

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, Hugh Jass said:

Every team outside of the elite (and for some reason Everton) has a limited shelf life in the Premier League. Pretty much all of them have been promoted or relegated within the last five years.

Teams fight to get up, fight to stay there for a couple of years then complacency and stagnation starts to set in. There are about 20 or so teams hovering between the PL and Champ who are broadly interchangeable in terms of size of resources. They all just take their turn.

Facilitated by the unfair parachute payments that allow them to do it.

[Hugh Jass]

13 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Facilitated by the unfair parachute payments that allow them to do it.

Yup. You just need that first promotion to get on the gravy train.

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, WS_Jack_III said:

of course i'm bitter, we're not being allowed to compete.

Point being, why's it bad and sportswashing when it's Newcastle United but not the British GP?

 

Also, who gives a f*ck if they had money before and it failed, we're not being allowed the chance again because the top 6 don't want their monopoly being upset.

Out of interest did you feel as strongly against Newcastle receiving parachute payments when they were relegated giving them a competitive advantage over most other teams in the league.

[WS_Jack_III]

5 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Out of interest did you feel as strongly against Newcastle receiving parachute payments when they were relegated giving them a competitive advantage over most other teams in the league.

Well considering our owner doesn't really buy players it was most likely a non factor.

 

Also that's not exactly a valid thing to bring in, the sale of a club is being blocked because top teams don't want competition and a media partner which is state owned have a political angle on it. 

 

We have an owner who doesn't want the club and someone who is willing to purchase it, the sale should have been approved months ago. Genuinely believe if it had been Man u or Liverpool this thing would have been done a long time ago.

Edited August 2, 2020 by WS_Jack_III

[Hugh Jass]

6 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Out of interest did you feel as strongly against Newcastle receiving parachute payments when they were relegated giving them a competitive advantage over most other teams in the league.

My team has benefited more than most from parachute payments, and I think they’re unfair.

IMO there should be a first year payment to help with the huge financial drop from PL to Champ but then that should be it. 12 months should be ample time for teams to cut their cloth and get themselves in order.

[pink_triangle]

6 minutes ago, WS_Jack_III said:

Well considering our owner doesn't really buy players it was most likely a non factor.

The parachute payments don't only allow you to buy players, they give money for wages and prevent relegated clubs losing players/managers/coaching staff that they would without them. From memory I don't remember any widespread protests from Newcastle fans about getting payments that most of the teams werent getting.

The premiership was set up to be uncompetitive and protect those teams in it from top to middle to bottom. Throughout it's existence teams (Newcastle included) have consistently voted for measures to protect themselves. Within the league there are clearly groups with more power that look to  further protect themselves, however there definitely is an element of hypocrisy when teams/fans support measures to give themselves a competitive advantage over teams below, but are incensed when the clubs above them do the same.

[WS_Jack_III]

Basically, all i'm hearing from you all is take it on the chin and support your club through thick and thin. What's the point of the league then? They've made it that you can only win by having huge sums of money and now my club could be getting that and the league have said "nah" so basically there is never a chance of them competing. So I have to find enjoyment out of my club being in relegation fights every season because our current owner couldn't give a toss.

I'll remind you that PIF, PCP & the Reubens haven't failed the O&D test here, this is the Premier League saying they won't decide either way. If you don't think that's f*cked up then I don't know what's wrong with you.

[pink_triangle]

4 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

My team has benefited more than most from parachute payments, and I think they’re unfair.

IMO there should be a first year payment to help with the huge financial drop from PL to Champ but then that should be it. 12 months should be ample time for teams to cut their cloth and get themselves in order.

If these payments were used to give the relegated clubs an average (or slightly above) wage and transfer budget compared to others in the league, with a view to competing on fairly even terms, I would agree. However most sensible clubs are not using them to steady the ship, but give themselves a huge competitive advantage over everyone and bounce straight back. No reason clubs can't mitigate for relegation without parachute payments through relegation clauses in contracts.

[WS_Jack_III]

2 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

The parachute payments don't only allow you to buy players, they give money for wages and prevent relegated clubs losing players/managers/coaching staff that they would without them. From memory I don't remember any widespread protests from Newcastle fans about getting payments that most of the teams werent getting.

I seem to remember lots of talk on NUFC twitter about how you only get a certain amount though if you gain promotion straight away. Is this true? 

Financial help should only be available if a team is going to go broke IMO. 

The problem here is you guys are twisting the argument around. The O&D test is supposed to be confidential and yet somehow we've had leaks to the media and other teams meddling in it. The PL are breaking their own rules. I can't see how you're all just passing this off as "Oh well, Newcastle have benefitted from parachute payments" 

[pink_triangle]

4 minutes ago, WS_Jack_III said:

Basically, all i'm hearing from you all is take it on the chin and support your club through thick and thin. What's the point of the league then? They've made it that you can only win by having huge sums of money and now my club could be getting that and the league have said "nah" so basically there is never a chance of them competing. So I have to find enjoyment out of my club being in relegation fights every season because our current owner couldn't give a toss.

I'll remind you that PIF, PCP & the Reubens haven't failed the O&D test here, this is the Premier League saying they won't decide either way. If you don't think that's f*cked up then I don't know what's wrong with you.

At the same time Newcastle have supported measures that protect their position in relation to the teams below, making it harder for them to progress and overtake them. Why is this less fucked up? As I have always said salary caps would be my ideal system. Let's have true competition and no need for foreign money.

[pink_triangle]

1 minute ago, WS_Jack_III said:

I seem to remember lots of talk on NUFC twitter about how you only get a certain amount though if you gain promotion straight away. Is this true? 

Financial help should only be available if a team is going to go broke IMO. 

The problem here is you guys are twisting the argument around. The O&D test is supposed to be confidential and yet somehow we've had leaks to the media and other teams meddling in it. The PL are breaking their own rules. I can't see how you're all just passing this off as "Oh well, Newcastle have benefitted from parachute payments" 

My point is the whole system is fucked as clubs try and fix the system to look after themselves. This happens from top to middle to bottom. People always scream about the need for competition, that generally means allowing them to compete with those above, while doing little/nothing to deal with competition issues from below.

[TheGayTent]

3 hours ago, zahidf said:

West ham was originally going to go for Howe in Dec but went for moyles instead.
 

Is that a fact or just something you once read on Twitter? 

3 hours ago, zahidf said:

Wonder if they'll go for Howe now there isn't a monetary compensation to Bournemouth due 

There would be to Moyes. 

[eastynh]

19 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Is that a fact or just something you once read on Twitter? 

There would be to Moyes. 

From the outside looking in, Moyes seems to have done ok since he returned. For all sound bytes that get spoken about Howe, I have not actually seen anything to suggest that he is a better manager than Moyes.

[pink_triangle]

4 minutes ago, eastynh said:

From the outside looking in, Moyes seems to have done ok since he returned. For all sound bytes that get spoken about Howe, I have not actually seen anything to suggest that he is a better manager than Moyes.

I agree about However. I think a lot of people have been taken in that Bournemouth are some kind of plucky underdogs.

[zahidf]

54 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Is that a fact or just something you once read on Twitter? 

There would be to Moyes. 

The athletic article

https://theathletic.co.uk/1938983/2020/07/26/eddie-howe-bournemouth-relegation-premier-league/

Moyes has 1 year left on his contract at West ham. Lot less than what they'd have to pay to Bournemouth if howe was still theirre

Fwiw its worth, Howe was on the shortlist for Spurs, arsenal and even Liverpool pre klopp. He definitely overachieved at Bournemouth (5 years in the premiere league!). He'd be an upgrade for West ham than Moyes IMO

 

Edited August 2, 2020 by zahidf

[lost]

I think a managers style can buy them alot of extra credit. Howe is praised traditionally for a passing game whilst Moyes was always a build from the back type manager.

Moyes advantage at Everton was always his scouting system. The Baines, Jagielka , Lescott and Coleman defence he built and then players like Cahill, Arteta and Pienaar. Its an advantage that doesn't really work at the top clubs competing for the top players plus its been devalued in the mid tier since the tv money took a step up and a newly promoted prem team can out spend say a Lazio or Valencia

Edited August 2, 2020 by lost

[pink_triangle]

Posted in wrong forum

Edited August 2, 2020 by pink_triangle

[TheGayTent]

1 hour ago, eastynh said:

From the outside looking in, Moyes seems to have done ok since he returned. For all sound bytes that get spoken about Howe, I have not actually seen anything to suggest that he is a better manager than Moyes.

He’s done ok. Nothing spectacular nothing too bad. He’s done as was expected and as you’d expect. 

[TheGayTent]

34 minutes ago, zahidf said:

The athletic article

https://theathletic.co.uk/1938983/2020/07/26/eddie-howe-bournemouth-relegation-premier-league/

So no basis in fact then. 

34 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Moyes has 1 year left on his contract at West ham. Lot less than what they'd have to pay to Bournemouth if howe was still theirre

Fwiw its worth, Howe was on the shortlist for Spurs, arsenal and even Liverpool pre klopp.
 

 

34 minutes ago, zahidf said:

He definitely overachieved at Bournemouth (5 years in the premiere league!).

Poppycock. 
He’s spent heavily financed by dodgy Russian money. Their wage bill is around mid table yet they’ve been relegated. Tactically he’s proven time and again he can’t adapt to plug their defensive frailties. In the 5 years they’ve been in the top flight they were consistently one of the worst in terms of goals conceded. 

Unquestionably Dyche has done a far better job over the same period of time than Howe. 

34 minutes ago, zahidf said:

He'd be an upgrade for West ham than Moyes IMO

 

He plays prettier football that is true. 

Ideally I’d have neither Moyes or Howe in charge at West Ham - though the manager position is largely irrelevant until such time as there’s a change in ownership.