Latest Martin Samuel rant

  • 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!
It's a bit like saying that the Daily Mail will never get into the top 6 UK newspapers.

They are miles behind the following
Telegraph
Times
The Sun
Star
Mirror
My local rag full of cr4p for sale

And then you have the Daily Mail.
Anybody with half a Brain at the Daily Mail will move onto someone bigger.
 
To me this FInancial fair play thing is simple

Currently the big clubs win almost everything but the smaller clubs may be able to muscle in on it if they are either well run or get a richer owner

Once FFP comes in the danger is the big clubs will still win everything BUT nobody else gets a look in
 
TSS highlighted the start of the problem; the home gate receipts staying with the home club. That was the start of the big clubs protecting themselves.

As for the article, I found myself swinging one way and then another while reading it. I'm still not sure if it was a dig or a compliment.

Anyone know which club Samuel supports?

West Ham.
 
TSS highlighted the start of the problem; the home gate receipts staying with the home club. That was the start of the big clubs protecting themselves.

As for the article, I found myself swinging one way and then another while reading it. I'm still not sure if it was a dig or a compliment.

Anyone know which club Samuel supports?

I really don't think the article was meant to reflect on Southampton per se, it was just using Southampton as an example of how unfair the 'fair' rules are.
 
I do hate a false extrapolation, especially at this time of the morning. However, having now read the article I'm inclined to agree with Fran on this point. Having said that, I found the spirit of the article largely in line with what we must all surely fear. I don't (just) mean the fear that Lallana will come back from Brazil and sign for Real Madrid. But the very real concern is that, yet again, the big boys in the playground have made sure that their positions in the pecking order are maintained. Cortese obviously saw through this so called "Fair Play" sham. If it is true that we will never again see a Jack Walker at Blackburn situation then it is a sad day for all of us. Let's re-site the Manchester teams in London, and leave them, Chelsea and Arsenal (perhaps?) to play out a mini league. They might invite Liverpool and Everton to join them, while the rest of us scrap to win a devalued league.

The author may be a prat, I really can't comment (anyone who puts his name to the Daily Mail is under suspicion in my book). However, he is right to say that this is the moment for SFC. We have a nucleus of very good young players. This is our opportunity to demonstrate to Shaw et al that they are playing for a club with real ambition. Whether our owner wants to invest in a world class striker is a moot point. If she chooses to keep the piggy bank intact is for her to decide, and if she does she'll have to accept that players will go in search of honours elsewhere. But if the author's suggestion that she may be restricted by the rules is correct, then this is absurd.

Unlike the Mail to play on peoples fears.

I believe the Uefa FFP Panel are currently doing their 1st review of clubs who failed and will be issuing the relevant punishments. Will be interesting to see if those punishments are effective.

If an owner really wants to pump their money into the club then they can simply arrange a ridiculous sponsorship deal and there is nothing anyone can do about it and why would they? The football bubble has been built on 3rd party investment for years.
At least with financial fair play it prevents want away owners from taking their money and running or in the more sinister Portsmouth farce, using the club as a way of borrowing to line their own pockets
 
Anyone who thinks we can or will spend anywhere near enough to be penalised by FFP is deluded, including Samuels, who probably doesn't even believe that and is just using people's ignorance as an excuse to write another article about how we must sell our stars and descend back to the mediocrity in which we belong.

In order to make a loss of more than £105m over three seasons we'd have to spend probably upwards of £60m a year. Does anyone really believe that is going to happen? And what onerous penalty are we afraid of exactly?

Probably a fine. :(
 
It's a typical one for him and in a way, he's being "nice" about Saints, in a round-a-about kinda way. However, not sure his facts are facts at all because isn't financial fair play restricted to clubs who only play in the Champions League (or maybe Europa league as well) ?

So we wouldn't need to sell players in the summer and could buy who we wanted & spend as much as we wanted (although clearly we will only do it within our means anyway).

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...Persie-John-Terry-instead-sell-sell-sell.html

So, is this either a back-handed compliment by Samuel?

or...

Just another way to do a piece about Shaw & Lallana & him thinking they are too good for us?

Couldn't be arsed reading the article. Van Persie looks quite good in that Adidas shirt though. If we could keep him injury free it might be worth us taking a chance.
 
Good for José.

Nice to see the comments of the players all pulling in the same direction. José, Rickie, Adam, Luke, they all say the same thing - this club can do great things in the next few seasons and beyond.
 
TSS highlighted the start of the problem; the home gate receipts staying with the home club. That was the start of the big clubs protecting themselves.

As for the article, I found myself swinging one way and then another while reading it. I'm still not sure if it was a dig or a compliment.

Anyone know which club Samuel supports?


You must log in or register to see images



Tottenham Huttspurs.....:emoticon-0136-giggl
 
But it has. Southampton always sold because they produced gems in single batches. In Shearer’s last game for Southampton, a 5-1 defeat at Arsenal, he was not part of a thriving young squad with potential.

So lets forget about the fact that we also had our home grown Le Tissier, Benali, The Wallaces (Danny,Ray and Rod) in that squad. It was also in the 1988 season that we had all 3 wallaces playing in the same game.

Me thinks he picked the wrong example in Shearer there. Guys a c**k
 
So lets forget about the fact that we also had our home grown Le Tissier, Benali, The Wallaces (Danny,Ray and Rod) in that squad. It was also in the 1988 season that we had all 3 wallaces playing in the same game.

Me thinks he picked the wrong example in Shearer there. Guys a c**k

Indeed...Rod, Le God & Shearer were a huge part of the 89/90 side which finished 7th

Bale & Walcott Roomed together at youth level and had it not been for financial reasons would surely have played together. Surman, Lallana & Dyer all played around that time and Chamberlain was the single batch during that drought period between 2009-2012 :-)

He would of been better off using Bridge as an example of a single batch