Transfer Embargo

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

What’s gonna happen

  • Temporary blip

  • Complete ****ing collapse

  • It’ll all be ok

  • Relegation


Results are only viewable after voting.
Martin Samuels in the The Times has published an article about 'How to stop rogue football club owners'

https://www.thetimes.com/sport/football/article/football-club-owners-martin-samuel-0rplt0w9q

How to stop rogue football club owners: take their keys

new
We spend so much time finding ways to punish investment and ambition in football, yet the real menace goes ignored. Why is it so hard to target the actual culprits?
Martin Samuel

Saturday July 05 2025, 6.00pm BST, The Sunday Times
Just take the club off them. Dejphon Chansiri at Sheffield Wednesday, Acun Ilicali at Hull City. When you cannot pay the players, when you cannot cover your transfer commitments, that should be an end to it. We spend so much time, in football, finding ways to punish investment and ambition, yet the real menace goes ignored.
Once an owner cannot pay the staff, or another club its money owed, the league should have the power to seize the asset and call in administrators. Not to shut the club down, because that punishes the wrong people — the fans, the employees — but to run it in such a way that commitments are met.
To ensure there is money to cover wages; to guarantee all responsibilities to the industry. If the league does not have the will to do this, then a government regulator should. If we are going to have one, at least give it teeth to address a real problem. Rogue owners are football’s blight. Not ambition.
You must log in or register to see images

Sheffield Wednesday supporters held protests against owner Chansiri last season
GEORGE WOOD/GETTY IMAGES
As it is, supporters at two clubs with a history dating back a combined 278 years find themselves in the same position as fans of Reading until recently, not knowing if they will have a team to follow at all next season. Sheffield Wednesday players are handing in their notice after wages, again, were not paid. Hull have been banned from signing players across three transfer windows after failing to pay Aston Villa more than £1million from the loan deal for Louie Barry.
Taking over the club may seem a harsh reaction for one misdemeanour, but defaulting on expected payments is not a small offence. Villa have financial pressures of their own. Not receiving the money expected for Barry could have an impact on their finances, too. And while £1million does not appear a significant shortfall at a Premier League club, if Hull defaulted on a player from League Two, say, it could be catastrophic. That is why football debts are prioritised when clubs go into conventional administration. It is to maintain this very delicate economic system.
Football has its priorities wrong. Leicester City are being pursued to the ends of the earth, but there is no question the club cannot meet its wage bill or pay its transfer debts. What is happening at Wednesday and Hull contains considerably more jeopardy.
It was interesting that when Uefa punished Chelsea and Aston Villa on Friday for breaking financial rules, the sanctions were largely financial and intended to deter, not destroy. Too much of what English football sets out to do puts clubs on the brink — as happened with Everton — yet truly dangerous stewardship is met with scant limitation from those on high. As fans despaired, how long was Dai Yongge allowed to steer Reading towards an iceberg before a deal to sell the club was done? It should not have been his club to sell. Once he began missing wage payments Reading should have been removed from his control and run by a third party, appointed by the EFL. They should then have overseen Reading’s transfer into new ownership, paying Yongge only after all other debts had been settled.
You must log in or register to see images

Chelsea, who won the Conference League last season, were fined £27million by Uefa for breaching its financial rules
RICHARD HEATHCOTE/GETTY IMAGES
It would seem the new regulator intends to operate a licence system, but fans don’t want to lose their club. What if a regulator had revoked Reading’s licence, what good would that have done? The campaigners would have been left with no club to support, the schedules and standings of League One would have been spoiled. And for what? The protesters did not want Reading shut, they wanted Yongge out. It’s the same at Sheffield Wednesday, where fans have been calling on Chansiri to sell up and go all season.
A points deduction seems sure to follow, but again that seems to hit innocent parties: coaches, players and the fans once more, who never asked for their club to be made less competitive, or ruined. Why is it so hard to target the actual culprits? Take the keys, and it’s done.
Always been a bloody good Journalist has Martin Samuel.
 
Absolutely outrageous article from know nowt fat Samuels.
Lazy, misleading, sensationalist, ....
No mention whatsoever about the actual circumstances & mitigations behind the situation. No mention of the appeal. No mention of the expectation of reduction or oveturn. There's been no suggestion that players won't get paid nor that we might not have a team to follow this coming season. No mention of how much he's put into the club from his own pocket. No mention of the positives he's brought for the fans. No mention that the debt is only to himself. Etc etc.
How the fcuk can he chuck our owner in with Wednesday's owner, or mention him in the same breath as Yongge at Reading. just for technically missing a loan payment to a club we reportedly had an agreement with about it and who owes us money back.
As Amin says, no mention of Man City (odd that eh).
I hope he's made to issue a public apology and withdraw his comments, or better still, that he's sued for defamation.
It's absolutely disgraceful from him.
Calm down hun
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kalman II
Absolutely outrageous article from know nowt fat Samuels.
Lazy, misleading, sensationalist, ....
No mention whatsoever about the actual circumstances & mitigations behind the situation. No mention of the appeal. No mention of the expectation of reduction or oveturn. There's been no suggestion that players won't get paid nor that we might not have a team to follow this coming season. No mention of how much he's put into the club from his own pocket. No mention of the positives he's brought for the fans. No mention that the debt is only to himself. Etc etc.
How the fcuk can he chuck our owner in with Wednesday's owner, or mention him in the same breath as Yongge at Reading. just for technically missing a loan payment to a club we reportedly had an agreement with about it and who owes us money back.
As Amin says, no mention of Man City (odd that eh).
I hope he's made to issue a public apology and withdraw his comments, or better still, that he's sued for defamation.
It's absolutely disgraceful from him.
There’s no mention of Citeh because like Everton these are clubs ‘not allowed’ to fail as it wouldn’t be good for the game - but f*** everyone else . These reporters haven’t got the bottle to tackle the hierarchy , people like Durham and Brazil are also the same - feeding off them .
 
Samuels used to be good but recently has basically just become a mouth piece for pl elite.
Good Journalist IMO. Sadly in fact annoyingly nearly everything revolves around the Prem which has not made football better but killing it. The golden egg of the prem and the temptation for owners to chase it is one on the reasons clubs get into financial difficulties. As Amin posted earlier, the sooner the big 6 **** off to the European elite league( or whatever they will eventually call it as they will get their way the better). Never would I thought I would say that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Evington
Good Journalist IMO. Sadly in fact annoyingly nearly everything revolves around the Prem which has not made football better but killing it. The golden egg of the prem and the temptation for owners to chase it is one on the reasons clubs get into financial difficulties. As Amin posted earlier, the sooner the big 6 **** off to the European elite league( or whatever they will eventually call it as they will get their way the better). Never would I thought I would say that.
I can’t get my head round the fact Madrid etc are still playing now!!! wtf
 
Nope. He’s criticising the owner. If anything, he was sympathetic to City and Sheffield Wednesday supporters.

Yes, he was sympathetic to us supporters, but Acun is our owner and currently represents our club as such. He's implying we are a basket case of a club, comparable with Wednesday and where Reading were. You don't think that has any influence on how anyone outside of our club will now be thinking of us? He's trashing our club, simple as. What he's written is nothing short of outrageous.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: nbetiger
It's no real secret who I am is it. I've said enough over the last two years to make it obvious. You're another gimp who pops up with a little dig from behind a hidden name. No respect for that, keep hiding you sausage.
Jesus, I knew you were fond of yourself but that still took me by surprise. I know you've posted plenty of times about how important you are and how many important people you know, but I've never had the slightest interest in who you are in real life, any more than I care about who any of the posters on here are. We all have usernames because that's what the forum asks for when you register. It's not a 'hidden name' you wombat. People on here are allowed to have differing views, and they're allowed to make fun of you when you post one of your frequent 'nothing to see here, stop worrying your pretty little heads, listen to a man who knows important people' posts. If any of this doesn't make sense call up another of your CEO mates to explain it.
 
Yes, he was sympathetic of us supporters, but Acun is our owner and currently represents our club as such. He's implying we are a basket case of a club, comparable with Wednesday and where Reading were. You don't think that has any influence on how anyone outside of our club will now be thinking of us? He's trashing our club, simple as. What he's written is nothing short of outrageous.

We are. He criticised our owner’s disastrous running of the club and said we deserve much better.

You’re more angry at the journalist who repeated the established facts surrounding the club’s three-window fee restriction than the actual man responsible for it. There’s no reasoning with you.
 
Yes, he was sympathetic of us supporters, but Acun is our owner and currently represents our club as such. He's implying we are a basket case of a club, comparable with Wednesday and where Reading were. You don't think that has any influence on how anyone outside of our club will now be thinking of us? He's trashing our club, simple as. What he's written is nothing short of outrageous.

Do you think we are a well run club?
 
Nothing he wrote was defamatory.
In naming Acun in person directly and following it with "Once an owner cannot pay the staff, or another club its money owed, the league should have the power to seize the asset and call in administrators." and the inference of the article general, what has to be remembered is the Times is an institutional newspaper viewed globally and the comments 'could' affect other aspects of his business or business relationships and reputation. As it stands, much of what has happened the last few days may be appealed, explained, reversed or reduced and even if that happens, the dye has been cast. Now I'm no lawyer, maybe some here are, but if your name had been sullied through what might be a legitimate mistake and I know no more than you or any of us, other than what has been written, if you are a public figure would you not take action.
 
Last edited:
We are. He criticised our owner’s disastrous running of the club and said we deserve much better.

You’re more angry at the journalist who repeated the established facts surrounding the club’s three-window fee restriction than the actual man responsible for it. There’s no reasoning with you.

"Disastrous running". Drama queen. Not that I'm happy with the prospect of a fee restriction, even for just one window. Suggesting it's 'disastrous', that we are a basket case along the lines of Wednesday or Reading (previously) is ridiculous.
He hasn't repeated the established facts, he's been ridiculously selective in the facts he's used, completely omitting to offer any background, context, etc (as per my earlier post). He's taken jumping the gun to a whole new level and badly misrepresented the reality.
Hopefully come next week he looks pretty stupid, if not even in legal bother himself.
There's no wonder you can't reason with me. It's almost like you want us to fail and to be a basket case. I don't get you at all. Yes I'm 'angry', I care about my club. It seems you and a few others revel in thoughts of our demise and take joy in steering the narrative that way; so odd.
 
Last edited:
Remember the time when the elite used to complain about fixture congestion and player burn out. So reduced top league, no replays in FA Cup etc. Now look at them.
Saw an article by rummenigge Bayern chairman or whatever he is
He said players can’t complain about playing loads of games as it’s their continued demand for bigger and bigger wage packets that’s driving it
 
In naming Acun in person directly and following it with "Once an owner cannot pay the staff, or another club its money owed, the league should have the power to seize the asset and call in administrators." and the inference of the article general, what has to be remembered is the Times is an institutional newspaper viewed globally and the comments 'could' affect other aspects of his business or business relationships and reputation. As it stands, much of what has happened the last few days may be appealed, explained, reversed or reduced and even if that happens, the dye has been cast. Now I'm no lawyer, maybe some here are, but if your name had been sullied through what might be a legitimate mistake and I know no more than you or any of us, other than what has been written, if you are a public figure would you not take action.

The only thing in the article, I can see, that might be able to be challenged is the ‘supporters wondering whether they will have a team next season’ as there isn’t much suggestion yet that will be the case (although some supporters may feel it!)

I do think it’s a bit of a dramatic article, however the problem for Acun is that two of the things Samuels has mentioned that suggests ‘we have run out of money’ has happened.

Acun might be able to explain it but if we had the money to pay the wages on time, why didn’t we? If we had the money to cover the transfer fee on time, why didn’t we? The article may not tell the full story but I think they’d have a hard time suing for defamation on those two points.