Beyond belief indeed, http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20972061 , the 'crazy merry-go-round' spins put of control....
Depends if this is still the case. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2002/may/15/newsstory.sport6 I know they still hold the same veto, the only question being whether their position is the same.
It would not surprise me if their position had changed. That article is ten years+ old and if anything has changed in that time, it is the ability of money to talk. Given the options of the pulling power of a Rangers or Celtic (40-50K attendances each every week) against that of a Watford or Wigan, both of whom would rub their hands together in glee at the thought of half those figures, I suspect that the popular vote would go to the former.
Well done to gravel voice, would like to see him get to playoffs if we get an auto spot, 4 wfc managers in top 6 at seasons end what odds?
An interesting article about Brighton and the effect that the financial fair play rules will have on them. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20980190 I suppose that with their new stadium they will have to pay high admission charges; maybe a good reason to have a ground with one broken down side.
"The figure of acceptable loss will decrease to £5 million from the 2015-16 season." Don't you just love that term - acceptable loss? I never thought I'd hear it in the same sentence as £5 million.
The fair play financial rules combined with the 'temporary' transfer regulations must be a godsend to the Pozzos. Udinese can buy our players and pay them in Euros, so no costs go onto the WFC balance sheet.
You have raised something there that we do not know the answer to. Who actually is paying all these players? Will they appear on the Watford balance sheet?
Isn't all this a long wat from the £20 a week maximum wage and autocratic chairmen from the local chain of butchers?
Poor old SD can't get it right with some people despite having Burnley in a good league position. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21028065
Well I presume its not the same fans happy to see Eddie Howe go because they kept losing goals? Anyone remember this guy? Was a great hope before injuries and a lack of motivation to get fit maybe because he knew the money was coming in regardless? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...leased-Manchester-City-pictured-takeaway.html
Martin O'Neill is openly looking to buy Danny Graham according to reports from the north-east. 15% sell on anything above £3.5m I believe.
£4.5m quoted this morning, but hopefully it would be more. You'd have thought his value would have increased by more than £1m seeming he has scored a decent amount of goals in the Prem
http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs...ship-club-challenges-booze-ban-150915866.html Not sure if this was fit for discussing on it's own thread, but what do people think of this? Ipswich are looking to over-turn the rule of not being able to drink 'in view of the pitch' I would suggest football has changed since when this came into rule, especially with all-seater stadia. If people want to get drunk on match-day, then they will anyway. I also always find people in a rush to down their drink to get to their seat on time before the match adn at half-time. This may make peope drink a bit slower when in the ground, knowing they can take the dirnk up to their seat with them. You also won't get so much of the half-time rush, people leaivng their seat a couple of minutes early, and also the massive queues, which means you have less than 5 minutes ot finish off your drink! I would think the biggest negative would be a constant flow of people getting up and going to get a drink... could become rather annoying!
or going to the loo! lol. The guy who sits 2 seats away from me leaves for the bar on the beat of 30 minutes, and doesn't come back! Makes you wonder why he has a season ticket...he used to come back for the second half but he doesn't now..weird. Meanwhile, i see him at away games where he tends to do the same! I think he'd love it if you could drink in the ground!
