leeslover Posted September 10, 2019 Share Posted September 10, 2019 6 hours ago, bigfatjoe1 said: How sad to reduce football to a mere product. Latics isn't for me, but for people whose favourite TV show is Premiership football on their mobile on the way to work, it sort of is? 6 hours ago, bigfatjoe1 said: Nationalise them. Multiple ownership of competing clubs, and you can cast your parliamentary vote based on whether you or your rival signs the player you wanted? Uber pissboil 6 hours ago, lookersstandandy said: IMO, a microcosm [excuse the irony] of what UK society is grappling with in trying to define a direction for the country..... PARKL Sorry, but I still just don't get comparing the situation between big and small clubs with that of the whole society. Latics players must be in the top 5-10% highest earners in the town (or hopefully were until we added 15 no-marks to the squad). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 11 hours ago, leeslover said: Sorry, but I still just don't get comparing the situation between big and small clubs with that of the whole society. Latics players must be in the top 5-10% highest earners in the town (or hopefully were until we added 15 no-marks to the squad). In this instance, I’m talking about a rejection of globalisation. I know plenty of Spurs, Arsenal & Chelsea fans who are equally disenfranchised with their loss of local identity. ManYoo sick of the Glazers. Their clubs care more for the ‘stereotypical’ - is that an oxymoron - fans in Singapore & New York, that you talk of.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 2 hours ago, lookersstandandy said: In this instance, I’m taking about a rejection of globalisation. I know plenty of Spurs, Arsenal & Chelsea fans who are equally disenfranchised with their loss of local identity. ManYoo sick of the Glazers. Their clubs care more for the ‘stereotypical’ - is that an oxymoron - fans in Singapore & New York, that you talk of.... True, but they don't mind having Son, Aubameyang, Jorginho and whoever is good at United playing for them, or sitting in billion pound stadia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 16 minutes ago, leeslover said: True, but they don't mind having Son, Aubameyang, Jorginho and whoever is good at United playing for them, or sitting in billion pound stadia. There’s plenty of hypocrisy for sure.... I’d like to see a referendum result of all professional club season ticket holders, on keeping the status quo vs changing the ownership/funding model of association clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_Og Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 1 hour ago, lookersstandandy said: There’s plenty of hypocrisy for sure.... I’d like to see a referendum result of all professional club season ticket holders, on keeping the status quo vs changing the ownership/funding model of association clubs. It would be about as clarity providing as some referendum or other from 2016 that keeps popping up inthe news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowenicki Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 Too late. Nobody is going to legally be able to take control of multi billion pound organisations such as United and Liverpool... nor should they be able to. The horse has bolted. Also. The argument about distribution of tv income etc would then be moot... there wouldn’t be anywhere near as much... if any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowenicki Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 2 minutes ago, Dave_Og said: It would be about as clarity providing as some referendum or other from 2016 that keeps popping up inthe news. Absolutely... talk about a vague question. “Do you want something that might be ‘better’” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 1 minute ago, Dave_Og said: It would be about as clarity providing as some referendum or other from 2016 that keeps popping up inthe news. Possibly.... at least then the societal comparisons leeslover doesn’t accept, would be more visible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 Just now, kowenicki said: Absolutely... talk about a vague question. “Do you want something that might be ‘better’” Do you want 50+1 or 100% private ownership? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlossopLatic Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 2 minutes ago, lookersstandandy said: Do you want 50+1 or 100% private ownership? 100% Private ownership 50+1 model just looks like a load of populism Just with a few more controls in place on owners to stop a Bury situation happening again Next Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowenicki Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 Just now, lookersstandandy said: Do you want 50+1 or 100% private ownership? Have you learned nothing from the last 3 years? Provide the implications, the pros and cons of both first please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 1 hour ago, GlossopLatic said: 100% Private ownership 50+1 model just looks like a load of populism Just with a few more controls in place on owners to stop a Bury situation happening again Next I'm happy with said controls..... but, it doesn't have to be 50 + 1 vs the status quo... feel free to propose something else, while accepting that the status quo is only truly successful for the few..... 1 hour ago, kowenicki said: Have you learned nothing from the last 3 years? Provide the implications, the pros and cons of both first please. Ha. 50+1. Pros: Means a club/members/supporters maintain majority of it's voting rights, thereby providing suitable protection for those who value the long term existence over short term success & retaining some semblance of meritocracy in competition. Cons: There is less of an incentive for dubious oligarchs and oil barons to invest in clubs for egotistical purposes with motives that are opaque. Status quo. Pros: Your club could win the football club equivalent of the lottery and feast at the top table one day. Your lottery owner might have morals, they might not. The system to filter out those that are unscrupulous doesn't' work. Cons: Your club will never be able to compete without winning the lottery, thereby making the 'competition' redundant. It clearly wouldn't be easy. It's easy to put up barriers and present a long list of reasons why change isn't possible - I can do that for you if you like..... but I'd like the debate to be had. I don't believe the vast majority of football supporters, I mean season tickets holders / members - not some tw@t who watches on TV in the UK or abroad - are happy with the status quo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 1 hour ago, lookersstandandy said: Possibly.... at least then the societal comparisons leeslover doesn’t accept, would be more visible. Thing is, it doesn't seem like you're making a comparison, it seems more like you're saying the 92 clubs are a society Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hinchy Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 The only way out of it I can see, is for free agents to sign with a centralized body such as the FA/FIFA/PFA rather than with a club. Transfers for those players would occur in a similar fashion to the NFL draft where players picked in earlier rounds would earn bigger salaries, the salary levels would be determined by the centralized body. It would take 15-20 years to get all players onto the system I propose as clubs wouldn't want to lose out on the transfer fees they have already spent money on. Richer clubs could even pay the smaller clubs for their picks spreading out the wealth to all the leagues. Sadly I can't see something like this ever getting voted on, let alone voted in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 3 hours ago, leeslover said: Thing is, it doesn't seem like you're making a comparison, it seems more like you're saying the 92 clubs are a society Obviously the comparison is loose..... but I do maintain that many of the Premier League clubs - whom opted out of the football league for this very purpose, (we were one of them*) - are able to ensure they secure their future's by acting as a cartel & avoiding their equivalent of sporting income tax. That cartel is to the detriment of everyone else. This is (should be) a sporting competition. There is nothing competitive about it. But ManYoo have always been rich, why is that different now some folk argue. It's the scale of difference that is abhorrent. Supporters of the Premier League in its infancy argued it would improve the fortunes of the national team. It most certainly has not. I see/hear supporters regularly bemoan the unjust nature of the haves and have nots in our society. Too loosely regulated City of London bankers gambling with the UK economy for short term personal gain. Vastly overpaid fat cats of UK plcs with immoral pension schemes/bonuses, while at the same time there are scores of families reliant on food banks in towns/cities up and down the UK. Yet, some of these folk celebrate their latest Uruguayan CF earning £500k per week, in their new £1bn stadium that seeks to attract more supporters from communities that surround them whose football clubs are less able to compete as a result. Where have all the butchers, bakers and candlestick makers gone from my high street they say, while jumping on the bus to Tesco. But Tesco exists side-by-side with your local greengrocer argues Martin Samuel of the Daily Mail, https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-7408485/MARTIN-SAMUEL-Dont-blame-elite-demise-Bury-fall-business.html, conveniently ignoring Tesco now own Londis, Budgens, Premier and One Stop convenience stores. These stores are Tesco's B-team. All 4 of them. Whether you voted to Leave or Remain in 2016, I think it's fairly safe to say, not many expected Leave to win, just like not many expected Trump to be POTUS. Globalisation and the homogenisation of society and communities within it are under more scrutiny & debate than ever, for both noble and distasteful purposes. https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2019/aug/31/turning-clubs-global-brands-means-more-burys. Manchester and Leeds, as commercial centre's are increasingly competing with London, as businesses and their workforce look for better value/standard of living. A refocusing around locaI & community is arguably what people want/already underway. Are the 4 professional football leagues of England perfectly aligned to society, of course not. Are there plenty of parallels, synergies or mirror images. You're damn right there are. Hence why I'd love for there to be a national debate about what we want for our national sport. Maybe it would provide no answers. Maybe those answers would be too difficult to implement, at least we'd have had the debate. For what it's worth, I'm on the side of the Guardian over the Daily Mail, from the articles included above. *I recall walking down Sir Matt Busby way on 28th Aug 1991 with my Dad. There were scores of people at makeshift tables along the way asking for Yoonited's supporters to sign petitions. I said to my old man, "What's all that about?", he said, "It's a petition against the Premier League". "Why?" I asked. "Son, the rich will get richer, the poor will get poorer and money will ruin the game". He's said a lot of nonsense over the years my old man, but he was fkin bang on with this one. Edit: This was 1 year after England had reached the World Cup S/F and we were all gutted we hadn't gone on to win it. It took us another 27 years to achieve the same & we were shocked/made up how far we'd gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 Capitalism in football for ya. "New Blades owner Prince Abdullah would do business with Bin Laden family" https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49759940 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanny Adams Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 Id forgotten about Bury until you posted on this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 1 hour ago, lookersstandandy said: Capitalism in football for ya. "New Blades owner Prince Abdullah would do business with Bin Laden family" https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49759940 If friends of the Saudi royal family is setting you off I can't wait till you find out that the President of the FA's uncle was a massive Satanic paedophile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 22 minutes ago, leeslover said: If friends of the Saudi royal family is setting you off I can't wait till you find out that the President of the FA's uncle was a massive Satanic paedophile Right now Andy, it wouldn’t surprise me to find out Rose West was Head grounds-person at St. George’s Park, such is the state of our national game..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted September 19, 2019 Share Posted September 19, 2019 3 minutes ago, lookersstandandy said: Right now Andy, it wouldn’t surprise me to find out Rose West was Head grounds-person at St. George’s Park, such is the state of our national game..... Nah, she was Club Chaplin at Leeds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted September 23, 2019 Share Posted September 23, 2019 On 9/19/2019 at 5:21 PM, lookersstandandy said: Capitalism in football for ya. "New Blades owner Prince Abdullah would do business with Bin Laden family" https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49759940 The ugly side of capitalism, I defy anyone who says that the remuneration package of the failed Thomas Cook CEO is justifiable. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/comment/thomas-cooks-annual-report-shows-whats-wrong-with-bosses-pay-the-pms-reforms-wont-change-it-a7443366.html Does Marco draw down a Salary from our meagre budget? What he does he pay his Sporting Director? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peanuts Posted September 23, 2019 Share Posted September 23, 2019 On 9/19/2019 at 6:57 PM, leeslover said: Nah, she was Club Chaplin at Dirty Leeds there fixed it for you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsPete Posted September 23, 2019 Share Posted September 23, 2019 4 hours ago, lookersstandandy said: The ugly side of capitalism, I defy anyone who says that the remuneration package of the failed Thomas Cook CEO is justifiable. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/comment/thomas-cooks-annual-report-shows-whats-wrong-with-bosses-pay-the-pms-reforms-wont-change-it-a7443366.html Does Marco draw down a Salary from our meagre budget? What he does he pay his Sporting Director? I would expect both of them to be salaried. Don’t see a problem with that. Perhaps there may be an issue with the amount but not the practice hardly uncommon at clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookersstandandy Posted September 23, 2019 Share Posted September 23, 2019 35 minutes ago, LaticsPete said: I would expect both of them to be salaried. Don’t see a problem with that. Perhaps there may be an issue with the amount but not the practice hardly uncommon at clubs. .....I'd have a bit of an issue with it if one of their motives for owning a football clubs was to provide an income. Expenses I can understand, but Marco sorting his brother out with a steady £100k per year say, to be Sporting Director with no prospect of him ever being sacked for poor performance strikes me as a big problem.....! In addition, not a single Director at Burnley draws down a Salary. In short, they all do it for the love of their club..... it's what dreams are made of, if you're a fan of a club. http://priceoffootball.com/burnley-your-names-not-down-youre-not-coming-in/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsPete Posted September 23, 2019 Share Posted September 23, 2019 Thanks Andy. I think Burnley is a fine example of a well run club. It would be great if we were ever to emulate it. I don’t know if the Lemsagams had a “motive” of receiving a salary and it would also be great if we had a Board made up of supporters who , whilst receiving no salary, also had the financial wherewithal to maintain the club. Apparently we don’t, and he who pays the bills can include amongst them emoluments to directors. As I said, it’s not uncommon . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.