• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

'Big Story'

Forums Unread posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Woland, could you articulate what you want to happen, that is realistic? I don't understand how you can object to this and like the status quo. If you don't like the status quo and see this as another continuation of it, what's the alternative?


[quote author=Ryan link=topic=47157.msg1411248#msg1411248 date=1318412096][quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=47157.msg1411231#msg1411231 date=1318410060]

Without teams to play of a similar standard, or capable of competing at some level, football becomes dull & uninteresting, worse, predictable.

[/quote]

Which is exactly what it's like right now anyway.
[/quote]

This is exactly the point. People are getting hysterical. OMG, if this goes through there will be an entrenched group of clubs that dominate football. That is the case now. The only exception is that there are two clubs in the league now that are dominating, and entrenched, who don't actually deserve it based on success. Football is already ruined by money. Ruined.


Our popularity is based on YEARS of sustained success. That gives us a leg up, and it should, but it won't last forever, and it's actually an advantage blunted by the fact that our overseas broadcasting rights don't reflect our draw, at all.


If you don't like this proposition because of what it says about football, and I can see a million reasons to agree with you on that, then you don't like modern football, and that's valid. But the way I see it, we have a number of structural disadvantages as a club, and one of the only advantages in terms of revenue is our international recognition and support. We are trying to play that hand as strongly as possible because if we don't we will likely just fade into obscurity.


The idea that this is some original initiative spearheaded by John Henry because he's some fat cat asshole is unproductively naive. Like most successful people, I accept that he is very competitive, enjoys the game, and loves to win. But he doesn't play football does he? And he isn't the only one who has grumbled about this. Other clubs will have an interest in this ultimately.
 
i'm all for a competitive league, and ideally for more equal revenues, but (not sure if anyone's mentioned this yet as can't be arsed reading the whole thread) maybe the best solution would be to let clubs maximise their revenues with individual TV deals and introduce other, US-style, non-financial means of levelling the playing field. i wouldn't have anything against us, man utd et al growing richer and richer, as long as things remained competitive ON the field. i guess that would mean measures like some kind of draft, and the MLB thing Rosco mentioned whereby young players have to stay with their original club for a certain amount of time, and possibly limits on wages and transfer spending.

it'd mean a major rethink, but in theory you could achieve both a 'fairer' revenue split as well as greater equality on the pitch than we currently have from our largely laissez faire model - the best of both worlds? the problem would be that many clubs would still see absolute reductions in revenue, if not sporting competitiveness, so that'd need to be compensated for before any kind of agreement might be reached.
 
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=47157.msg1411367#msg1411367 date=1318440735]
Woland, could you articulate what you want to happen, that is realistic? I don't understand how you can object to this and like the status quo. If you don't like the status quo and see this as another continuation of it, what's the alternative?

[/quote]


Good question.

I hate the the way that the game has evolved from escapist fun and mini wars between cities into this global statistics model. It reads to me like the story of some raped grandad.

I can’t believe I’ve put up with the way it’s changed, I’m diametrically opposed to the way it is now, so radically different to when I got into supporting Liverpool.

It’s symbolic of the whole beige Murdocharisation of everything. Sky, Fox, not content with picking our world leaders, they've dicked with my sport, too – and now football seems a simple matter or either being an odious billionaire’s vanity project or whoring yourself out to become one, or some ridiculous investment opportunity. Both the Mancs and us are a result of buy outs by American investors who don’t give a toss for football but saw a growth opportunity. They don't give a fuck. A single fuck about football. Chelsea are owned by some Russian crook. It’s like the cold war but the reds own the blues and the blues own the reds. Ownership and what’s happening off the pitch seems to matter a whole lot more than the game itself.

I try to think when, if ever, I considered who owned Liverpool when I was fanatical about them as a kid – but I come up short. Not just because I was a kid but because that part of the game wasn't a significant part of the debate. Now fans worry as much about the bank balances of their clubs as their league position, and as far as I'm concerned this newer dimension of the game is a reflection of everything that is shit about the world.

Ownership of things doesn’t interest me. Custodianship was the way I’d seen it before, someone honourably looking after an institution until they could offer no more, at which point they handed it on to another safe pair of hands, someone who’d been being trained for years and would be as selfless in their task as their predecessor. Naïve, yes... So? I watched it happen. The money came - and with it and so did the cocksuckers who'll take it... If we’re only going to support corporations why don’t I pick Sony or Apple? Why don't I cheer for Tesco or Halliburton? Because this was a sports team a few miles from my house. What could be more simple? But yeah, now, it’s a raped granddad. A game of soggy biscuit, getting jacked off all over by cunts who I hate.

So now we all talk contracts and debt and TV rights and stadium naming and banks sticking their names on your team’s shirt, and all the other baggage that surrounds a simple team game. I mean I thought the popularity of footy was rooted in the ability to take men out of the boardroom or away from the coal face or docks and just get stuck in and forget about the boring seriousness of life. You know the shit bits of life, the boring ones? That’s what this is. That’s what this deal is. That's what all of this is.

You know the good bits where you forget who or why you are? A passion? A goal? An orgasm? A smoke, a pint, a few pills? That’s football. That's Stevie G twatting one in from 30 yards. He'd have done that with or without all this shit.

Imagine someone walking into the Louvre and sticking a Standard Fucking Chartered top on the Venus de Milo and an Aon top on the Mona Lisa… Well that’s what I’ve watched unfold.

Let’s make Rachmaniov more accessible to dickheads in Corfu by sticking a beat behind it. Is that ok?...Er, can we keep the original? No, we fuck with it forever!

Maybe I’m wrong - I probably am, but whatever, not that long ago, 20 or 30 years maybe, there were things that mattered to a lot of people that weren’t primarily commercial, but that debate seems to have ended. The idiots have won. Now all that's sacred and protected are the casinos on Wall Street and in The City...

Well fuck it. I hate it. And why haven’t you already had your fucking funeral?
 
Fuck me. What a fucking post.

Made me sad though, cos it's all fucking true, probably worse for me as Sky got involved when I was younger, that said I still got those magical years before it, got to see us win the league, & stood in the Kop when it was the Kop, hell, when Sky got involved it didn't even seem so bad at first, until we were priced out of going the match after 6 years of religiously going to every fucking home game.

I need to stop using the word fuck so much.
 
Imagine someone walking into the Louvre and sticking a Standard Fucking Chartered top on the Venus de Milo and an Aon top on the Mona Lisa… Well that’s what I’ve watched unfold

Let’s make Rachmaniov more accessible to dickheads in Corfu by sticking a beat behind it. Is that ok?...Er, can we keep the original? No, we fuck with it forever!
Click to expand...

Those sentences are just fucking boss.

That's a brilliant post Krump, brilliant. As Jon says, it's very sadly true. And we still do it don't we? We still go the game or pay money to watch it and invest our emotions into the club. We financially support the cocksuckers because we're hooked on the Liverpool drug even though we know the quality of the drug has declined, the buzz ain't the same and when it comes it's infrequent. We also pay a lot more for that drug and the side effects leave a bitter taste in the mouth and an unending sense of frustration. It does let you escape from the shit things in life at times but, when it becomes one of the shit things in life like when the club is near to administration you kind of almost feel all hope is lost and why the fuck do you bother. The miniscule glimmer of hope that remains I guess is what keeps you hooked in.

Bang on post though and one of the best of the year.
 
I agree with everything in Krumps post, it seems to me that the entire financial system of the game will need to collapse before we see anything like a return to the game being run sensibly, with any luck thats not far away. I was thinking about this the other day when I saw a kid walking down the street wearing a Liverpool jersey with Standard Chartered on the front, made me smile cos I remembered getting my first Liverpool kit as a kid, one with Crown paints on it. When you see teams being sponsored by global corporations like Aon Standard Chartered etc you know there is something going wrong. Years ago teams were sponsored by companies who were selling a product to the man in the street, a beer a tv a tin of paint, doesnt matter that was the market for football, normal people. Now I see a company like Aon and think, what the fuck? who is sitting on the stretford end thinking 'oh I really hope my insurance company underwrites their exposure to losses with Aon' nobody I would imagine but thats the point, the game is not ours anymore, it doesnt give a fuck about the man in street, sure they will take his money as he comes through the gate but he better not get any ideas that it give a fuck about him. It sold its sold for Ruperts silver and now its something else entirely, its a self perpetuating bubble of no intrinsic value that gets further and further detached from reality by the year

This proposal would ruin multiple clubs financially, probably forever, if thats what it takes for us to compete with City/Utd then we have already lost no matter what we gain by doing it
 
I was born in '87 - don't remember the glory days. Don't remember Kenny's first spell. Don't even remember us winning the league. I do, however, remember the treble of 2001. I remember 25th May '05. And I enjoyed 'em more than I enjoy laminating my own excrement...and I enjoy that. Alot. Even then we had the Bitters saying '01 was the 'Mickey Mouse treble' cos we'd bought it. And although no-one can say we 'bought' that European Cup in '05, we still got stick - Apparently we 'got lucky'. At the same time, we still justify our desire for Chelsea or Citeh to win the league because they 'bought' it, cos it's preferable that they take it instead of the dirty Mancs. As though the fucking Mancs haven't bought it. Fact is: if we do happen to go and win the league in the next few seasons there will be plenty of opposition, declaring that we've 'bought' it. If you completely object to the fact that, nowadays, it is an extremely competitive game/league and thus, a team needs serious investment in order that they be competitive: you're in the wrong game lads. Cos that's the way it fucking is. In the wise words of Kevin Keagan I would 'LOVE IT' if it wasn't, if it were the idealistic 'working man's' game that we want it to be. But then, maybe that's easy for me to say, cos I don't know any different...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
welcome to the site Basil.


And that's a brilliant posr from Krump. I just sat here nodding and smiling my way through it
 
I completely love and respect crumps post


but


for me i've known no different. My memory is shite and i got fully into football quite late (like....10+) so i don't remember the glory days etc. I remember us being a good side with occasional silverware

I WANT us to be at the top. i NEED to see it for myself. IF the way we're going to do that is by shilling out and being all business about it then so be it.

Its sad but its fact. We need as much revenue as we can get to try and topple some giants
 
I understand that some people are balls deep in the economics of the enterprise. I just don't get why you don't support Asda over Sainsburys or something if that's all it boils down to.
 
Yeh, welcome Basil - top first post mate. No-one denies that the game is what it is these days and we have to do what we do and spend what we spend to get back to where we need to be. I think for me, and this aligns with what Krumps saying, is that it's all very....complicated these days. No-one gave a shit about finances, account balances, leveraged buy-outs, WAGs, roasting, obscene player wages and even more obscene strops. It was just go the game, cheer on your team, have a few beers and laughs along the way and then go about your day. It was simple and fun. Not to say I don't still have a craic these days - that bits generally the same. It's the shite you hear and the endless bombardment of footy and the shite you don't want to hear about it by the media. And them internet footy fans forums - they're the fucking worst thing they are.
 
[quote author=Woland link=topic=47157.msg1411417#msg1411417 date=1318457017]
I understand that some people are balls deep in the economics of the enterprise. I just don't get why you don't support Asda over Sainsburys or something if that's all it boils down to.
[/quote]

Asda don't have the history that M&S have though
 
[quote author=Fabio link=topic=47157.msg1411415#msg1411415 date=1318456880]
I completely love and respect crumps post


but


for me i've known no different. My memory is shite and i got fully into football quite late (like....10+) so i don't remember the glory days etc. I remember us being a good side with occasional silverware

I WANT us to be at the top. i NEED to see it for myself. IF the way we're going to do that is by shilling out and being all business about it then so be it.

Its sad but its fact. We need as much revenue as we can get to try and topple some giants
[/quote]

It's not just about the winning Fabs it's about BOMBARDMENT

Bombardment - Part 1 - 1 Giant Leap

Bombardment - Part 2 - 1 Giant Leap
 
[quote author=RedStar link=topic=47157.msg1411421#msg1411421 date=1318457374]
[quote author=Woland link=topic=47157.msg1411417#msg1411417 date=1318457017]
I understand that some people are balls deep in the economics of the enterprise. I just don't get why you don't support Asda over Sainsburys or something if that's all it boils down to.
[/quote]

Asda don't have the history that M&S have though
[/quote]

Fuck off Sainsburys
You ain't got no history
Polish Jews and refugees
Why M&S makes better tea
 
Great post before Krump.No, it's not being naive, it's sad the way it's all happened, and I agree with everything you say about the escapism of the game.
Sadly, as I said before, the genie is out of the bottle, and there ain't no putting it back -for the foreseeable future, it will eventually, as football will surely go into melt-down. That is going to be very messy and I am not sure if I want to be around when it does.
I knew the game was up when David Moores and Parry were forced to admit defeat. They were not ideal , they made big mistakes, but their heart was in it but they knew it and admitted they did not have the financial clout to compete, besides that there was a baying crowd that wanted them out and wanted the money in. The Premier League started the mess and danced with the devil, but we all lapped it up, and still to a large extent do.
It is, what it is , a far cry from when I first started going to the game with Portly in the late sixties, that said we have no option but to try our best to compete in whatever way we can and that brings profit to the owners and success to us or shrivel and die. Me? I would rather take the former and live to fight another day and hope that when the melt down happens those in a stronger position can mange the decline better than most.
I have seen the good days, I thought they would never end, but I would like to see the younger generation have their spot in The Lying Rag too. It's different for them , they have grown up with money Sky, The Premier League and owners, not boards of directors, to them it should not seem so bad, but it does seem to.



regards.
 
[quote author=Woland link=topic=47157.msg1411396#msg1411396 date=1318452787]


If we’re only going to support corporations why don’t I pick Sony or Apple? Why don't I cheer for Tesco or Halliburton?

[/quote]


You could argue people already do , the way people fight over things like Apple V Windows , Samsung etc etc .

And i don't think the commercialisation of football is unique to that one sport ...it's just following the trend of modern society . It's a pity but it will take a momumental shift for it to change .
And i'm sure there was some old lad in the 70s who was moaning about the price of a ticket , the game has lost it's way etc etc
 
I'm in agreement with you Woland, but you didn't really answer my question. The slippery slope began long long ago, it's pointless raging at every manifestation of its shitness while you fuck Grandpa's ghost. You're fucking it, and you don't have to be. There is still enough there for you, it's habitual, it's obligatory, and they aren't registering any of your anger.

And the game itself still works enough to keep people going, there was certainly still some magic in Istanbul. The problem is when you aren't doing well, the strategy and discussion concerning how to get back up there has to do with stadiums, wages etc etc.
 
The thing I find interesting isn't that big money infected English football but how it was kept out for so long. I'm too young to remember much of the pre-Sky era, but it seems from a distance that the domestic game was strangely conservative for a long time. When Maradona signed for Napoli for £6.9m what was the British transfer record? £1.5m for Robson wasn't it? When Barcelona were paying Cruyff £20k a week in the 70s, how much was our top earner getting?

Are we all looking back with rose-tinted glasses or was there really some kind of happy Butskellism in effect? Whatever, I'm not sure we (as a club) have any right to the moral high ground - Hitachi, anyone?
 
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=47157.msg1411153#msg1411153 date=1318372418]
What the fuck does this have to do with John Henry specifically? This is the way things have been going forever, so it's long past the time for your tears.

As you say, this is all about getting leverage to secure what is in business terms, a fairer deal. His argument is 100% correct from that perspective. Liverpool deserve more of the overseas broadcasting rights. A trip to a football bar anywhere in the world makes that plain as day.


Do you want a business owner who is somehow not thinking in that way? Do you want him to have some sort of naive idealism and then watch as we, with principals intact, fade into oblivion?


Or is your issue that this is not in the long term best interests of the sport, that the teams as a whole should be interested in the security of the league, ala the NFL. That's certainly a valid opinion, but at what point over the last couple decades has that been true? How much more plutocratic could the league become, anyway? The same teams win it year in and year out, and the same teams are chasing. This has been the case for years and it is only getting worse. The only thing that changes it is when some oligarch wants a new toy.
[/quote]

Agreed, great post
 
[quote author=Fabio link=topic=47157.msg1411415#msg1411415 date=1318456880]
I completely love and respect crumps post


but


for me i've known no different. My memory is shite and i got fully into football quite late (like....10+) so i don't remember the glory days etc. I remember us being a good side with occasional silverware

I WANT us to be at the top. i NEED to see it for myself. IF the way we're going to do that is by shilling out and being all business about it then so be it.

Its sad but its fact. We need as much revenue as we can get to try and topple some giants
[/quote]

I'm exactly the same. People should feel privileged to live through such an era, not bloody complain at how it's changed.

Anyone of our generation would kill to have see what some of you had witnessed.
 
Henry liked the money press that Man U is and wanted some. Nice article. Bear it in mind next time we're discussing our owners.
 
there's a load of stuff on this on the Telegraph website, surprised nobody's posted it:-

rant from Honest Dave Whelan:

They are trying to follow an American model, they want to create a European Super League and this is the first step towards trying to do that.

This is down to one word — greed. Do the fans of those clubs in this country want that to happen? Do they want to be travelling all over Europe every week? I doubt it.

They take, take, take. They want more and more, they want to take all the money for themselves, but they know the top six cannot play each other every week, so they will eventually look to Europe and the creation of a European league.

The next step will be to only receive domestic television money when your game is shown on television.

The top six are on television all the time, so they will receive all the money. If this happened, it would lead to the destruction of the Premier League, I have no doubt about that.

I’m not speaking as the chairman of Wigan, I’m speaking on behalf of English football. We have the best, most watched league in the world and we have given the game to the world.

The reason our league is so popular is because of the excitement. The smaller clubs cannot realistically win the title, but they can, on any given weekend, hold their own against one of the top six and.

If this proposal happened, the gap between the rich and poor would become even larger than it already is.

It would wreck the game, but they don’t care about that, they care about money. I cannot see it happening but wee would fight this if it is proposed by Liverpool or anyone else, we have to.
Click to expand...

report that we apparently did discuss the issue with the Glazers:

Ayre’s suggestion that the biggest clubs in the league abandon the Premier League’s collective selling model and exploit their overseas rights individually has met with opposition from the league and clubs concerned that it would ultimately weaken the competition.

Manchester United have also distanced themselves from the comments, but the Glazers and Liverpool’s ownership are thought to have discussed the implications of such a move during talks earlier this year.

Sources have suggested that Liverpool believe they are not a lone voice among Premier League owners even after the lack of public support yesterday for Ayre’s comments.

Despite their clubs’ rivalries, set to be renewed on Saturday at Anfield, the American owners at Manchester United and Liverpool are said to be close and to consult on a number of issues relating to their English football interests.

The Glazers are acutely aware of the value of United’s brand around the world and television rights issue are the most valuable way of exploiting that value. For now they have made no formal move to challenge the collective model, but the very fact the issue has been discussed with Liverpool’s owners Fenway Sports Group, even in abstract terms, indicates that it is on their radar.

The Premier League remains confident that there is still overwhelming support for their collective selling of television rights, even among those clubs with the largest global fan-base and potentially most to gain.

Bruce Buck and Ivan Gazidis, the respective Chelsea and Arsenal chief executives, spoke in favour of the collective selling of rights at last week’s Leaders in Football conference at Stamford Bridge. Sir Alex Ferguson, the Manchester United manager, also recently outlined his belief that Premier League clubs should split their broadcast revenue. “We’d love to have our own but I don’t think it should happen that way,” said Ferguson. “It’s quite fair to have all equal shares.”

In his interview with Telegraph Sport, Arsenal’s new majority owner Stan Kroenke spoke of his experience in American football and the success of rules which maintain a competitive balance in the National Football League.

The Premier League believe that the huge growth in their global popularity is underpinned by their success in delivering matches that are generally very competitive. In Spain, Barcelona and Real Madrid earn around 12 times more than their rivals by selling their television rights individually, yet no club has finished within 20 points of them for the past two years.

The Government yesterday also outlined its support for the Premier League’s current model. “It’s a provocative kite to fly,” said sports minister Hugh Robertson.

“One of the strengths of the English game has been collective selling. I don’t want our league which, in many ways, is this country’s greatest sporting export to be like other less competitive leagues elsewhere in the continent. I think the collective selling rights is a crucial part of maintaining the Premier League’s primacy.”

For Liverpool to initiate any change in how the Premier League distributes its £1.4 billion overseas broadcast deal, they would need to secure support from 14 of the 20 clubs.
Click to expand...


interesting commentary from Jermey Wilson:

Ostensibly, it appeared that Ian Ayre, the Liverpool chief executive, had given a series of interviews to coincide with the one-year anniversary since Tom Hicks and George Gillett were successfully ousted as owners.

Yet, deliberately or not, the story today is not the changes at Liverpool over the past 12 months but his call for the Premier League to allocate more of their £1.4 billion from overseas television rights to its most popular clubs.

As it stands, the Premier League markets its product collectively and broadly shares the income.

It means that Manchester United, with their vast global fan-base, benefits just as much as Swansea City or Wigan Athletic from the sale of television rights to 212 countries outside the United Kingdom.

Liverpool have understandably pointed out that in some other countries, notably Spain, clubs sell their rights on an individual basis. It means that Barcelona and Real Madrid can generate considerably more income from this specific revenue stream than any English club.

Yet it also means that the smaller clubs in Spain’s La Liga earn dramatically less than their counterparts in the Premier League.

As a whole, La Liga also earns considerably less than the Premier League. The result? Barcelona and Real Madrid are exceptionally wealthy and well-placed to dominate in Europe while the rest of La Liga begin just about every season playing for third. Indeed, over the past two years, no club has finished within 20 points of either Barcelona or Real Madrid.
In that context, it is easy to understand the temptation for the likes of Manchester United, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool.

They are the clubs with the largest global fan-bases and, in theory, the most to gain from selling their television rights individually. The wider and more long-term question, however, is just why those clubs have developed such a vast worldwide fan-base.

All of the evidence suggests that it has really snowballed during the incredible booms years of the Premier League. And why has the Premier League been so popular? Because it is generally very competitive. Widen the gap between the clubs and that key quality would be lost. The Premier League certainly subscribe to this theory and are certain that it is the collective strength of all the clubs which underpins its vast global reach.

In his interview, Ayre cited the 80,000 fans who came to watch Liverpool in Malaysia, but would they really have been so aware were it not for the type of league his club plays in?

In any case, the hard reality of the situation is that it is not the Premier League who Liverpool have to convince of their case. To pass a change in the way overseas television income is distributed, they would have to persuade a two-thirds majority of their rivals clubs. That’s 14 of the 20 Premier League clubs. Given that Manchester United, Chelsea and Arsenal are all opposed to the idea, it is clear that there is little prospect of change.

If Ayre cannot convince those who would most benefit, he has no chance of persuading others to sign up to something that would reduce their income and further cement the dominance of the elite clubs. It should also be noted that Ayre’s comments have been met today with significant scepticism from around the country.

After all, with Liverpool having made such little progress on building a new ground and with their commercial revenues dwarfed by Manchester United, they are currently faced with limited options as they try to build their income.

Yet at a time when Uefa are introducing regulations relating to ‘financial fair-play’, Ayre was right to highlight the obvious anomaly of clubs like Barcelona and Real Madrid being able to sell their TV rights individually.

If Uefa are serious about financial fairness and introducing collective fiscal rules, they should surely also insist on a uniform method among the major leagues for selling their television rights. And it is the model of Spain’s La Liga which should be changed rather than that of the English Premier League.
Click to expand...
 
[quote author=LarryHagman link=topic=47157.msg1411605#msg1411605 date=1318514111]
Bruce Buck, the Glazers and Henry. The future of English Footy.

Fucking hell.


[/quote]

I see your comment and raise you a...

Mike Ashley, Karen Brady, and yer man that sells dildos at West Ham.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom