Arsenal fans summed up after today’s 1-0 loss to Spurs:
View: https://x.com/22hamza_/status/1950913121658224882?s=46
View: https://x.com/22hamza_/status/1950913121658224882?s=46
PL Opposition Tidbits
- Thread starter Frogfish
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
Fantastic Ange gave him the trophy as captain he deserved before leaving,
What a player he’s been. Wish Klopp got him.
What's that? At Spurs you get a trophy just for being captain? Do they put that on the wall too?
Only Ange has that power. Or rather like the kids say these days, aura
The Guardian is reporting that the Scum are struggling to get the land they need for that big stadium project of theirs. They want to buy the rail terminal for £40-50m, the owners want £400m.
That site will be partly used for the new ground and partly for the wider redevelopment of the area. It's not like they can proceed with any aspect of the project unless they purchase it.
Quite aside from the negotiation / cost perspective on buying the land, any delay in the process will add loads of cost to the other aspects of the build (principally inflation, and exposure to movements in steel prices). Meanwhile, Old Toilet will keep getting more and more dilapidated.
We spent years buying up houses near the ground to build the Main Stand - even if you can persuade the local authority to issue a compulsory purchase order, it's not a quick, or cheap, process.
Sad.
That site will be partly used for the new ground and partly for the wider redevelopment of the area. It's not like they can proceed with any aspect of the project unless they purchase it.
Quite aside from the negotiation / cost perspective on buying the land, any delay in the process will add loads of cost to the other aspects of the build (principally inflation, and exposure to movements in steel prices). Meanwhile, Old Toilet will keep getting more and more dilapidated.
We spent years buying up houses near the ground to build the Main Stand - even if you can persuade the local authority to issue a compulsory purchase order, it's not a quick, or cheap, process.
Sad.
Imagine lowballing by 90% lol.
I’m surprised Utd haven’t offered Garnacha as an add-on.
£450m plus Garnacho….
Garnacho to be used how? Buried alive under one of the corner flags as a human sacrifice maybe?
As a memorial to where his shots on goal normally ended up?
Knowing Man U, they stump up £70m+ for him
View: https://x.com/ManUtdInPidgin/status/1951885794794254736
View: https://x.com/ManUtdInPidgin/status/1951885794794254736
Or Eze?
Spurs being linked with Rodrygo this morning as a Son replacement.
Harvey did pop in to my mind when I saw the Maddison injury.
I bumped into a few of my Spurs mates atvtge weekend and they mentioned Elliot - I think he’d do well there under Frank - maybe a loan deal would a good option for everyone.
Harvey did pop in to my mind when I saw the Maddison injury.
I bumped into a few of my Spurs mates atvtge weekend and they mentioned Elliot - I think he’d do well there under Frank - maybe a loan deal would a good option for everyone.
Most non-story ever full stop, never mind his wage demands.
Only if it comes with an obligation to buy.
The only thing more likely than us buying Rodrygo is him going to Spurs.
That's Amorim's trophy for the season that will secure his future. Well done.
Seeing as how UEFA actually bit back at clubs for financial failures last season, I thought I'd do a quick summary of the likelihood that the Premier League's teams in Europe may be in a spot of bother with our European overloads this coming season.
So, most at risk first:
CHELSEA - they have a €20m conditional fine from last year hanging over them, a profits target they seem as likely to fail next season as they did last (because UEFA isn't having any of that selling the women's team bollocks), and they are going to struggle to register many of their new signings due to restrictions UEFA have imposed on their spending that they seem bound to fail. It just looks like they don't care and will happily fail agin. But if they fail badly, they will not be allowed to compete in Europe the next time they qualify in the following three years (plus their existing settlement agreement will lapse and they could be subject to worse sanctions). Creek. Paddle.
ASTON VILLA - similar conditions to Chelsea but their conditional fine is €5m. They also have squad restrictions and the risk of exclusion in future. On the plus side for them, their profits situation is not as dire as Chelsea's (largely due to heavy player sales last season) and it's not impossible they could turn it around, but they'll probably need to make sales before the end of the window as, despite their heavy sales last year, they still failed. Their squad cost ratio, back in 2023-24, was grim. Not sure how much it's improved since then but they were fined last year and the target has toughened from 80% to 70% since.
PALACE - they may get away with it on a profits level if they sell Eze, as seems likely, but their squad cost ratio is high and could lead to a fine which, given they're only in the Conference League, may wipe out the benefit of being in Europe (as happened with Chelsea last year). They'll need to go deep in the competition.
FOREST - their results were grim through to 2023-24, but they made some sales last year and this summer too, which may help. Squad cost ratio is high, which means there's a good chance of a fine, even if they get through the profits test.
NEWCASTLE - they should be looking to meet the higher €60m limit on losses as they get regular equity injections from the Saudis. A fine for an excessive squad cost ratio looks possible, although their commercial growth since the Saudis took over is remarkable (touches nose) and may mitigate this.
LIVERPOOL, ARSENAL, SPURS, MAN CITY - should all be OK, maybe not City if 115/130 kicks off the way it ought to.
MAN UNITED - don't need to worry as they were too shite to qualify.
EVERTON - See United, Man.
And on a final point, UEFA don't muck around. Chelsea and Villa were both charged in September last year. As soon as the numbers came in showing they'd defaulted, the charges followed.
So, most at risk first:
CHELSEA - they have a €20m conditional fine from last year hanging over them, a profits target they seem as likely to fail next season as they did last (because UEFA isn't having any of that selling the women's team bollocks), and they are going to struggle to register many of their new signings due to restrictions UEFA have imposed on their spending that they seem bound to fail. It just looks like they don't care and will happily fail agin. But if they fail badly, they will not be allowed to compete in Europe the next time they qualify in the following three years (plus their existing settlement agreement will lapse and they could be subject to worse sanctions). Creek. Paddle.
ASTON VILLA - similar conditions to Chelsea but their conditional fine is €5m. They also have squad restrictions and the risk of exclusion in future. On the plus side for them, their profits situation is not as dire as Chelsea's (largely due to heavy player sales last season) and it's not impossible they could turn it around, but they'll probably need to make sales before the end of the window as, despite their heavy sales last year, they still failed. Their squad cost ratio, back in 2023-24, was grim. Not sure how much it's improved since then but they were fined last year and the target has toughened from 80% to 70% since.
PALACE - they may get away with it on a profits level if they sell Eze, as seems likely, but their squad cost ratio is high and could lead to a fine which, given they're only in the Conference League, may wipe out the benefit of being in Europe (as happened with Chelsea last year). They'll need to go deep in the competition.
FOREST - their results were grim through to 2023-24, but they made some sales last year and this summer too, which may help. Squad cost ratio is high, which means there's a good chance of a fine, even if they get through the profits test.
NEWCASTLE - they should be looking to meet the higher €60m limit on losses as they get regular equity injections from the Saudis. A fine for an excessive squad cost ratio looks possible, although their commercial growth since the Saudis took over is remarkable (touches nose) and may mitigate this.
LIVERPOOL, ARSENAL, SPURS, MAN CITY - should all be OK, maybe not City if 115/130 kicks off the way it ought to.
MAN UNITED - don't need to worry as they were too shite to qualify.
EVERTON - See United, Man.
And on a final point, UEFA don't muck around. Chelsea and Villa were both charged in September last year. As soon as the numbers came in showing they'd defaulted, the charges followed.
Similar threads
