Not saying it's not a good idea, but hasn't FIFA very strong views on government interference in football. I'm sure countries have been threatened with expulsion before, but that may have been interference in different areas.
Back to the original question (not a dig, this is an interesting thread), the answer has to be "NO". I was bought up by my communist (socialist post Hungary) parents to believe that the natural order was not natural but created and could be changed by enough determined people. Up the revolution, comrades! Let's follow Nicola and Mauricio to the barricades.
The most recent would be Nigeria after their poor showing in the World Cup. The President suspended the entire team, and FIFA threatened them with a ban from international football, so it was lifted.
Oh Lapras... "surviving not being enough" is a lot different to top 6. It does not 'imply' top 6 straight away, which is what you said and I asked you to show me where he states this. He hasn't. He stated his target is to become a top 6 club; he doesn't say straight away. This is how journalists work; take a sentence and give it a completely new meaning.
So your "No" is to the first part ... "is there a natural order in football..." and not a "no," to the "should we try to upset it part?"
With Everton currently siting in 4th, and well known fact we've sold the young talent we have, and have generous backing. Why on earth would a sports journalist think the top half of the table is 'above our station.' No-one has really combined a successful youth set up and splashed a decent amount of cash amongst the upwardly mobile clubs as of yet. Chelsea & Man City made up the numbers not so long ago.
Most of the team in the top half (barring a few) have at one stage or another upset the apple cart and are now portrayed as 'the natural order'. No-one mentions Liverpool. They are more similar to us in that they came through in 'relatively' modern times and have grown to their present size. Then of course as mentioned you have the Derby's, Forests, Ipswiches that had brief encounters with success. Then you have the likes of the Leeds revival and following that the Leeds' gamble. The latter gamble is the most recent example of what Cortese is trying to do however Cortese has a much tighter hand on the financial side of things than Risdale had and there is not a free for all on wages or contract negotiations. On another note I remember when Man City were in the 3rd tier and Lincoln drew them in the Carling cup. Rosler scored at Sincil Bank in the first minute and we thought...here we go. We beat them 4-1 and then went on to win 1-0 at Maine Road. Funnily enough we then got a draw at the Dell before succumbing to Souness's instructions to Ostenstad. lol. Ideas above our station? No such thing. Achievable? Maybe.
Just come up on Sky that we are 11th in the form table and obviously the best team (on this basis) in the bottom half.
i think the stats show that over the last 3 years we have consistently spent more than any other team in our respective leagues...
With us though, we're spending money we actually have i.e. money we made from transfers. What else are we gonna do with it? Between the start of this season and the 2009/10 season, when Cortese took over, we made a net profit of about £5m. Obviously the Chamberlain deal helped us, and also this season, it's somewhat larger because we haven't sold anyone for any real value. Yes, we're spending a lot of money, but we're hardly spending our way to oblivion like Swindon are. At least, I hope we're not anyway...
Important to remember that transfer budget is not the only aspect of spending. If we had to sell our first team players we would comfortably recover the approx £25m spent in fees in the Summer. Some clubs have average quality players signed on long contracts with such high wages that their value is practically negative.
If Roman Abramovich {sod checking the spelling} bought a team like Eastleigh or Havant & Waterlooville he has the funds to have them in the Premier League within 10 years. As mentioned above, during the days of the more level playing field of yesteryear a team would know its 'level', give or take the odd promotion or relegation in some cases. Now football clubs are businesses that are, in some cases, used as playthings of the rich, with no consideration for the fan who's been paying at the turnstiles for the past 20, 40 or 60 years.
Without ever knowing what's round the corner, I am happy with our owners. There's no sign that we are playthings because after Markus's death the family have scarcely been here. So from near extinction, we are being run as a business. They may yet sell us at a profit, but that is what investors do...it's still miles better than a few years ago.
Yeah I'd agree to a certain extent - in L1 we did spend more than other L1 teams - in Championship, I'd say we were about midtable in terms of spending that year, there were several teams (that were already established in the league) that spent more than us - in Prem, yes we have spent a lot of money. My argument would still be 'context'. Teams that have had a couple of seasons in the Prem don't need to spend as much to still have a squad that is (on paper) better than ours as they are coming from a very different start point.
Damn straight. If it all goes wrong, or he wants to leave, it's no problem. Bottom line, you can be rich and prudent, just as easily as you can be poor and reckless.
