Fixtures

Guru of Ipswich said:
Just the last part about, as i understood it, that a debt belonging to one person (i.e. the owner) is risky. they are unlikely to cut and run, I would rather have it our way than worry about somebody externally calling in the debt.
Click to expand...

I qualified that by saying in the weird world of football... In a sense, it is impossible to generalise about who is likely or is not to call in their debt if there is a default, especially in football. I can understand preferring the "internal" debt, but realistically that just means that there is an insider who has a good idea of what the club can or can't afford in the immediate term - this means they are (a) likely to push interest rates (i.e. profit for them) to the limits and (b) if there is a default, they are more likely to take a subjective view. The latter could go either way: I think you'll probably find banks are more likely to give borrowers the benefit of the doubt rather than try to get them wound up, because they can absorb the losses and be patient, whereas individuals are more likely to view it as a headache. Equally though, if the internal individual has info that means they are confident that the club will be able to eventually pay them back, they are more likely to take an "uncommercial" decision than a bank.
 
Canary Rob said:
I qualified that by saying in the weird world of football... In a sense, it is impossible to generalise about who is likely or is not to call in their debt if there is a default, especially in football. I can understand preferring the "internal" debt, but realistically that just means that there is an insider who has a good idea of what the club can or can't afford in the immediate term - this means they are (a) likely to push interest rates (i.e. profit for them) to the limits and (b) if there is a default, they are more likely to take a subjective view. The latter could go either way: I think you'll probably find banks are more likely to give borrowers the benefit of the doubt rather than try to get them wound up, because they can absorb the losses and be patient, whereas individuals are more likely to view it as a headache. Equally though, if the internal individual has info that means they are confident that the club will be able to eventually pay them back, they are more likely to take an "uncommercial" decision than a bank.
Click to expand...

tried telling him this before (although not in quite as well constructed manner) - got told to take a hike. the man doesn't know his arse from his face but he sure as hell talks out of the former
 
Forgive me for banging on about the point, you said that supers wasn't going on about expenditure, yet he quite clearly says and i quote "simply because their wage structures are so much more than anyone else's it's not a level playing field"
 
Guru of Ipswich said:
Forgive me for banging on about the point, you said that supers wasn't going on about expenditure, yet he quite clearly says and i quote "simply because their wage structures are so much more than anyone else's it's not a level playing field"
Click to expand...

This is exactly what draws the battle lines - expenditure. This has always been maintained.

The step you're not making is that this is a generalisation. I.e., while Villa's expenditure was very high, this was reflective of their previous "league" position and did not take into account that they have recently been demoted into relegation candidates.

There are always exceptions that prove the rule - Newcastle, Villa and Swansea tend to be the ones.

Generally speaking, though, and this is undeniable Guru, that the point was that, as a consequence of wide discrepancies in expenditure, it is much easier to predict roughly how the table will look in the Premier League than it is in the Championship. Do you disagree? The reason this is important is because it reflects the realities of our ambitions. Realistically, we can't be more ambitious than to target c. 8th in the league - that's not to say that I don't believe we could get higher, but I am confident that this is unlikely, would take a long time and a substantial amount of luck, and that as a result, finishing about eighth for us next season could be seen as "doing the best that we can" and therefore could be classed as "our own first place".
 
Canary Rob said:
This is exactly what draws the battle lines - expenditure. This has always been maintained.

The step you're not making is that this is a generalisation. I.e., while Villa's expenditure was very high, this was reflective of their previous "league" position and did not take into account that they have recently been demoted into relegation candidates.

There are always exceptions that prove the rule - Newcastle, Villa and Swansea tend to be the ones.

Generally speaking, though, and this is undeniable Guru, that the point was that, as a consequence of wide discrepancies in expenditure, it is much easier to predict roughly how the table will look in the Premier League than it is in the Championship. Do you disagree? The reason this is important is because it reflects the realities of our ambitions. Realistically, we can't be more ambitious than to target c. 8th in the league - that's not to say that I don't believe we could get higher, but I am confident that this is unlikely, would take a long time and a substantial amount of luck, and that as a result, finishing about eighth for us next season could be seen as "doing the best that we can" and therefore could be classed as "our own first place".
Click to expand...

"as yes, but............"

NO! there is no 'but' guru - this is what i've been banging on about for the last 208 posts <yikes>
 
I can honestly say that I have never encountered anyone quite as obstinate, so much so that I would imagine it is something you would need to work on for some years to be as good at is as Guru is.

I know I have been banging on about what a "wum", "prat" (or whatever) that he is (I saw it 2 years ago) but hopefully those who may have defended him until now will finally have their eyes opened by this latest bout of self indulgent tripe <ok>
 
ThaiCanary said:
I can honestly say that I have never encountered anyone quite as obstinate, so much so that I would imagine it is something you would need to work on for some years to be as good at is as Guru is.

I know I have been banging on about what a "wum", "prat" (or whatever) that he is (I saw it 2 years ago) but hopefully those who may have defended him until now will finally have their eyes opened by this latest bout of self indulgent tripe <ok>
Click to expand...

Thanks Thai, I think most of us know his agenda, unfortunately some of the more discerning posters are staying away, if that progresses any further I will have no choice but to wield the axe!

I don't want to, but I will not lose good posters for the sake of one self-indulgent numpty! Anyone else note the change in JWM's behaviour when Guru is around? That's the reason I came up with his nickname of Guru's lapdog!

If anyone is as pissed off as we are of his total lack of manners, don't leave, pm me and I promise whatever the outcome, I will keep you informed!
 
canary-dave said:
Thanks Thai, I think most of us know his agenda, unfortunately some of the more discerning posters are staying away, if that progresses any further I will have no choice but to wield the axe!

I don't want to, but I will not lose good posters for the sake of one self-indulgent numpty! Anyone else note the change in JWM's behaviour when Guru is around? That's the reason I came up with his nickname of Guru's lapdog!

If anyone is as pissed off as we are of his total lack of manners, don't leave, pm me and I promise whatever the outcome, I will keep you informed!
Click to expand...

Quite honestly David, I reckon more fans have been lost by 'your favourtism' to certain posters than my debating skills.

Can anybody remember 'Munky Gate' and how many norwich fans were lost not me, JWM or any other ipswich fan, but by David, and this last post has you actually condoning bullying and name calling which is against your own board rules and totally against what a mod stands for!

I'm on holiday from now for a week, so will be offline. so have fun all of you beating to the same drum that is dictated to you.
 
Guru of Ipswich said:
Quite honestly David, I reckon more fans have been lost by 'your favourtism' to certain posters than my debating skills.

Can anybody remember 'Munky Gate' and how many norwich fans were lost not me, JWM or any other ipswich fan, but by David, and this last post has you actually condoning bullying and name calling which is against your own board rules and totally against what a mod stands for!

I'm on holiday from now for a week, so will be offline. so have fun all of you beating to the same drum that is dictated to you.
Click to expand...

I think you'll find that "munky gate" was an argument between me and munky, for which we both went overboard and I have apologised - it had nothing to do with Dave. Part of the problem with that episode was that you and other Ipswich fans decided to maliciously keep bringing it up again, prolonging it and actually becoming a major part of the problem. This is precisely the reason you have the reputation you do and very few Norwich fans can tolerate you.

As far as I am aware, the only poster to leave was munky, at least I assume he has left because I haven't seen him post since. If anything, it was my fault, so I suggest (and repeat) that you drop this once and for all because you Ipswich posters seem to have this single minded vendetta against Dave where you are constantly trying to stir it between him and Norwich posters. It's not fooling anyone on here and it simply draws more abuse (for which you then moan, despite having brought it upon yourself).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back