11/12 Football Thread

[king mob]

I think an important point to make is that with signings possibly hitting 70 million, Man U have never bought the league. Liverpool certainly didn't buy the league with Pools money in the 70s either. Real Madrid have never tried to buy their league with their frugal signings, and Barcelona is obviously the modern model for small clubs, they all need to have over 400 million in debt with a reasonable youth system, and their best players circumventing tap-up rules by mentioning possible signings. It's the honourable way.

I know you're taking the piss, however it should be made clear that Man Utd had the buying power to get players who ensured they won the league so often in the Sky era because they were the first to exploit the game in the way they have in the UK. Same with Liverpool in the 70's who could replace probably the best player in Europe at the time (Keegan) with the next best player in Europe (Dalglish).

There's an argument that the last team not to have bought their way to the title was Ron Saunders Villa side in the early 80's. Even Howard Kendal's Everton title winning side could sign a player like Gary Linneker.

[Aubergine~!]

Is it really possible to buy the league when you finish above another team who've spent more than you have?

[king mob]

Is it really possible to buy the league when you finish above another team who've spent more than you have?

Well yes, it is. Man City's spending will eventually win them the league but Man Utd's and Chelsea's spending has been longer term, and as said, Man Utd were the first to exploit and understand what the Premier League and the Sky era was. they took advantage of what Murdoch gave them more than any other club til the early 21st century.

[Captain Clarkie]

Is it really possible to buy the league when you finish above another team who've spent more than you have?

I don't actually think you can buy the league, but having lots and lots of money helps. I was just highlighting the fact most of the top clubs spend huge amounts of money, but only some clubs are criticised for it.

[Aubergine~!]

Well yes, it is. Man City's spending will eventually win them the league but Man Utd's and Chelsea's spending has been longer term, and as said, Man Utd were the first to exploit and understand what the Premier League and the Sky era was. they took advantage of what Murdoch gave them more than any other club til the early 21st century.

Wasn't really referring to Man City / Chelsea. Liverpool, for instance, have spent more (both net and total) than United since the start of the EPL and obviously haven't done anywhere near as well.

I don't actually think you can buy the league, but having lots and lots of money helps.

Oh, definitely.

I was just highlighting the fact most of the top clubs spend huge amounts of money, but only some clubs are criticised for it.

That's certainly true as well.

[mcgaffer]

Manchester City have agreed a £23m fee with Arsenal for midfielder Samir Nasri.

And Arsenal are also prepared to let captain Cesc Fabregas leave the club and re-join Barcelona, providing the Catalan club pay £35m.

Manchester City have made an approach to sign Atletico Madrid striker Sergio Aguero after landing a reported record £400m stadium sponsorship deal with Etihad airways.

As well as Aguero, City are also looking to sign Inter Milan striker Samuel Eto'o in a double deal worth £55m.

Liverpool boss Kenny Dalglish is reportedly ready to switch his attention from Aston Villa winger Stewart Downing to Wigan wide man Charles N'Zogbia.

Chelsea have given up hope of signing Tottenham midfielder Luka Modric and have instead turned their attention to Werder Bremen midfield star, Marko Marin.

Spurs boss Harry Redknapp will sell midfielder Niko Kranjcar to Fiorentina to raise the £20m needed to secure Espanyol striker Pablo Osvaldo.

Tottenham are ready to sign the 'new Didier Drogba' - Ivory Coast's teenage striker Souleymane Coulibaly.

Reports out of Italy are linking Sunderland with a move for Liverpool flop Alberto Aquilani.

Sunderland manager Steve Bruce is keen to make Wigan winger Charles N'Zogbia his 10th signing of the summer.

Stoke boss Tony Pulis is set to make Carlton Cole his first signing of the summer in a £4.5m deal.

Martin Jol wants £3.5m Mexican striker Aldo de Nigris to freshen up his Fulham attack.

Fulham are lining up a move for Tottenham striker Robbie Keane as a replacement for QPR and West Ham target Andy Johnson.

Manchester City striker Craig Bellamy has refused to take a wage cut to smooth the way for a return to former club Celtic.

Chelsea fear midfielder Michael Essien will miss all of next season after suffering a training ground injury on Friday. The Ghana international may have damaged knee ligaments that will sideline him for up to six months.

St Johnstone chairman Geoff Brown is angry that the Perth club are still owed £10,000 from Dunfermline Athletic for last season's loan deal for defender Kevin Rutkiewicz.

[king mob]

I don't actually think you can buy the league, but having lots and lots of money helps. I was just highlighting the fact most of the top clubs spend huge amounts of money, but only some clubs are criticised for it.

It is and it's utterly annoying to see fans of one multinational club full of millionaires criticise another multinational club full of millionaires about 'buying' the league when they've done the same.

The truth is they're all in the same boat together. They all hurt the league and the competitive nature of the English league.

[king mob]

Wasn't really referring to Man City / Chelsea. Liverpool, for instance, have spent more (both net and total) than United since the start of the EPL and obviously haven't done anywhere near as well.

As said, Man Utd were the first to realise the potential of what Sky's money would bring and the first to commercialise the game and themselves like no other club had done previously in history. Chelsea upped the game a decade ago and now Man City have upped it again, so to finish even mid-table you've got to spend stupid money on average players or decent players who will eventually get nicked by one of the wealthier sides. The idea of it being a fair competition is long, long gone.

The others have spent in order to catch up with Man Utd's success, and the one interesting thing in that table is how few clubs have actually balanced their books from dealing in the transfer market.

[Aubergine~!]

As said, Man Utd were the first to realise the potential of what Sky's money would bring and the first to commercialise the game and themselves like no other club had done previously in history.

The table says otherwise.

The idea of it being a fair competition is long, long gone.

At the end of the day it's still 11 men vs 11 men.

The others have spent in order to catch up with Man Utd's success, and the one interesting thing in that table is how few clubs have actually balanced their books from dealing in the transfer market.

There's no reason transfer market books should balance out, as footie clubs generally generate revenue from other sources to spend on transfers.

[king mob]

The table says otherwise.

No it doesn't. It fails to take into account inflation, and the fact Chelsea and Man City have only spent huge sums in the last decade and five years respectively and the fact that values of players have been over-inflated beyond belief.


In the early days of the Premier League Man Utd could blow stupid money on a Andy Cole or a Dwight Yorke and not blink an eye. Those players today would cost three times what they were bought for.

At the end of the day it's still 11 men vs 11 men.

Not if you can swan out and spend 30 million on a Rooney or a Tevez or a Drogba. These clubs exploit the commercial aspects of the game so that the basic concept of 11 against 11 is lost in a frenzy of Sky Super Sundays and Wayne Rooney pyjamas or Man Utd credit cards.

If you can afford (or not as most clubs find) to spend money on better players then the poorer clubs are always going to struggle to compete so that's why the English top flight is three leagues in one now, rather than one hugely competitive league.


Hoestly, if you want 11 against 11 go down the park on a Sunday. That's where it only really exists these days.

There's no reason transfer market books should balance out, as footie clubs generally generate revenue from other sources to spend on transfers.

If you're a fan of a multinational business like Man Utd it's easy to say that, but a number of clubs don't and rely upon the Sky money, sponsorship and door income to pay their way. Balancing the books used to be a basic requirement of football managers but it's not now which is one reason why clubs struggle in an overpriced market.

[Aubergine~!]

No it doesn't. It fails to take into account inflation, and the fact Chelsea and Man City have only spent huge sums in the last decade and five years respectively and the fact that values of players have been over-inflated beyond belief.

It doesn't take everything into account, as that would be impossible to do in a little graphic, but it pretty clearly shows that Utd haven't spent that much more than everyone.

In the early days of the Premier League Man Utd could blow stupid money on a Andy Cole or a Dwight Yorke and not blink an eye. Those players today would cost three times what they were bought for.

Andy Cole was bought for 7m the same season Utd sold Paul Ince for around the same amount. Also the same window Hughes, Gillespie and Dublin were sold, so it's not like they just pulled the cash out of nowhere.

In fact throughout the 90s alot of Utd's spending was balanced out by player sales. Net spending wise I think Liverpool at least spent more, though I'm not 100% sure about that. The 00s were another story, of course.

Not if you can swan out and spend 30 million on a Rooney or a Tevez or a Drogba. These clubs exploit the commercial aspects of the game so that the basic concept of 11 against 11 is lost in a frenzy of Sky Super Sundays and Wayne Rooney pyjamas or Man Utd credit cards.

Still 11 vs. 11 though.

Hoestly, if you want 11 against 11 go down the park on a Sunday. That's where it only really exists these days.

*Checks*

Nope, I'm pretty sure all EPL sides still get to field only 11 players per game.

If you're a fan of a multinational business like Man Utd it's easy to say that, but a number of clubs don't and rely upon the Sky money, sponsorship and door income to pay their way. Balancing the books used to be a basic requirement of football managers but it's not now which is one reason why clubs struggle in an overpriced market.

I was talking about 'balancing the books' via transfers, which I thought was what you were referring to.

By that I mean net transfer spending = net revenue from player sales. That's just not a realistic expectation for most clubs.

[king mob]

It doesn't take everything into account, as that would be impossible to do in a little graphic, but it pretty clearly shows that Utd haven't spent that much more than everyone.

Because it doesn't take into account inflation. You can't say Man City are trying to buy the title and Chelsea have and ignore Man Utd's spending which have aided them in winning titles.

Andy Cole was bought for 7m the same season Utd sold Paul Ince for around the same amount. Also the same window Hughes, Gillespie and Dublin were sold, so it's not like they just pulled the cash out of nowhere.

That's what Wikipedia tells you but you're being disingenuous and ignoring the story of the Premier League. They had the cash because they were the first club to ruthlessly exploit the game and completely take what Sky and Murdoch had given them. By the time the likes of Chelsea started spending the only team keeping up with them spending wise was Liverpool, but they were desperately pumping money into overpriced players in an attempt to regain past glories. It didn't work for them.

Still 11 vs. 11 though.



*Checks*

Nope, I'm pretty sure all EPL sides still get to field only 11 players per game.

And it's a fair playing field? Are you honestly, seriously suggesting the English top flight is an equal league?

It isn't, and hasn't been anything like that for a few decades now.

I was talking about 'balancing the books' via transfers, which I thought was what you were referring to.

By that I mean net transfer spending = net revenue from player sales. That's just not a realistic expectation for most clubs.

It used to be or a manager would be out on their arse. Now you have huge discrepancies and it's written off a reasonable business. This is how far down the road the English game has gone, in that it'll happily fleece fans as much as possible to pay for this.

[mcgaffer]

Jose Mourinho's decision to leave midfielder Lassana Diarra out of Real Madrid's pre-season tour of the United States could alert Manchester United and Tottenham.

Manchester United and Manchester City are poised to sign Inter Milan midfielder Wesley Sneijder and Atletico Madrid striker Sergio Aguero respectively in deals worth a combined total of at least £100m.

Tottenham are set to offer striker Jermain Defoe plus £5m in exchange for Sunderland's Asamoah Gyan.

Tottenham are planning a £22m bid for Manchester United striker Dimitar Berbatov and defender Jonny Evans.

Stoke City chairman Peter Coates says the Potters are in negotiations to sign West Ham striker Carlton Cole and former Tottenham defender Jonathan Woodgate.

Arsenal could be set to hijack Liverpool's move for Aston Villa winger Stewart Downing.

Liverpool are set to let midfielder Raul Meireles speak to Italian clubs Juventus and Inter Milan about a £12m move.

Real Madrid will offer Manchester City either of strikers Gonzalo Higuain or Karim Benzema plus £25m cash in exchange for Carlos Tevez.

Alternatively, Tevez could be on his way to Chelsea as part of an £80m double swoop by the Blues for the Argentine striker and Tottenham midfielder Luka Modric.

Arsenal are ready to bid £12m for Real Madrid midfielder Esteban Granero.

Sunderland boss Steve Bruce will try to tempt his old boss Sir Alex Ferguson into letting him have striker Danny Welbeck on loan for another season.

Rangers are close to signing Spanish defender Raul Rodriguez and will enter negotiations with Espanyol, who value the 23-year-old at £500,000, on Monday.

Ally McCoist admits Rangers' bid for Aston Villa defender Carlos Cuellar is nearing collapse and the Ibrox manager has voiced his frustration at agents preventing him speaking directly with players.

Spartak Moscow's Croatia goalkeeper, Stipe Pletikosa, will fly into Glasgow this week for a trial with Celtic.

Motherwell striker Jamie Murphy says he is no rush to quit the club despite being linked with English top-flight outfits Bolton Wanderers and QPR.

Paul Scholes blames England's international failures on "very selfish" stars who use the Three Lions as a platform to boost their club careers and bank balances rather than playing for the team. He revealed: "I got fed up. When you are going to a team, you want to be part of a team and play well, but there are individuals who are after Spampersonal glory.

Rangers manager Ally McCoist says the early start to the Scottish Premier League has made it more difficult for Scottish clubs to bring in new players.

Kilmarnock manager Kenny Shiels believes Scottish football will be held back until there is a switch to summer football as it would help clubs develop young talent.

Manchester City lead Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal, Real Madrid and SpamBarcelona in the chase for Anderlecht's 14-year-old midfielder Charly Musonda.

Europe's top clubs will petition Uefa to block Manchester City's new stadium sponsorship deal.

[mcgaffer]

Hearts owner Vladimir Romanov has told BBC Scotland that defender Craig Thomson will not play for the Scottish Premier League club again.

[mcgaffer]

The "whistleblower" behind a series of corruption allegations involving Fifa executive committee members and Qatar's 2022 World Cup bid has told the BBC she fabricated the claims.

Phaedra Al Majid, a former international media officer for Qatar 2022, said she wanted to exact revenge after losing her job on the campaign.

She decided to go public after she said her "lies had gone too far".

Al Majid has now signed a legal affadavit retracting the allegations.