Project Big Picture

  • 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!
PleaseNotPoll

PleaseNotPoll

Well-Known Member
Forum Moderator
May 31, 2011
97,704
60,162
113
That's the name that's being used for the power grab by the Scouse and the Mancs.
Attempting such a scummy move during a pandemic is about their level, frankly.
What do people make of it and how quickly should Rick Parry be sacked as EFL chairman?

In case people don't know what the **** I'm on about:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/54502459
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
That's the name that's being used for the power grab by the Scouse and the Mancs.
Attempting such a scummy move during a pandemic is about their level, frankly.
What do people make of it and how quickly should Rick Parry be sacked as EFL chairman?

In case people don't know what the **** I'm on about:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/54502459
Click to expand...
I prefer Project **** Off And Form Your Own Super League Then
 
The Grauniad article really makes clear what's happening here

In return the top flight’s “long-term shareholders” – Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United, Chelsea, Tottenham, Arsenal, Everton, Southampton and West Ham – would be afforded voting rights which would enable any six of them to pass and veto certain new rules.

"Long-term shareholders", you say? Well let's have a little look at the data of how long teams have been in the Premier League to see if that stacks up...

Arsenal - 29
Chelsea - 29
Everton - 29
Saltypool - 29
Manchester Penalty Merchants - 29
Tottenham - 29
Aston Villa - 26 ⬅️
Newcastle - 26 ⬅️
West Scam - 25
The Sheikh Mansour Team - 24
Southampton - 22

Well would you look at that? The data doesn't stack up at all, so I guess the three "long-term shareholders" who have been in the Premier League for less time than Villa or Newcastle can **** off back into the Football League
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: PleaseNotPoll
humanbeingincroydon said:
The Grauniad article really makes clear what's happening here

...

Well let's have a little look at the data of how long teams have been in the Premier League to see if that stacks up...

Arsenal - 29
Chelsea - 29
Everton - 29
Saltypool - 29
Manchester Penalty Merchants - 29
Tottenham - 29
Aston Villa - 26 ⬅️
Newcastle - 26 ⬅️
West Scam - 25
The Sheikh Mansour Team - 24
Southampton - 22

Well would you look at that? The data doesn't stack up at all, so I guess the three "long-term shareholders" who have been in the Premier League for less time than Villa or Newcastle can **** off back into the Football League
Click to expand...

1. Regarding the Spanners, the only "long-term shareholders" are every taxpayer
rinsed for the "state aid" of the White elephant arena.


2. Citeh > Villa ??

Have they won the "big one" ?? < QED.> < Holte Logic >
 
  • Like
Reactions: humanbeingincroydon
humanbeingincroydon said:
The Grauniad article really makes clear what's happening here

In return the top flight’s “long-term shareholders” – Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United, Chelsea, Tottenham, Arsenal, Everton, Southampton and West Ham – would be afforded voting rights which would enable any six of them to pass and veto certain new rules.

"Long-term shareholders", you say? Well let's have a little look at the data of how long teams have been in the Premier League to see if that stacks up...

Arsenal - 29
Chelsea - 29
Everton - 29
Saltypool - 29
Manchester Penalty Merchants - 29
Tottenham - 29
Aston Villa - 26 ⬅️
Newcastle - 26 ⬅️
West Scam - 25
The Sheikh Mansour Team - 24
Southampton - 22

Well would you look at that? The data doesn't stack up at all, so I guess the three "long-term shareholders" who have been in the Premier League for less time than Villa or Newcastle can **** off back into the Football League
Click to expand...
It's reminiscent of a previous Manc/Scouse scam, when they promoted Arsenal to make their match-fixing scandal go away.
They claimed that it was due to the filth's long-standing service to the league, despite Wolves finishing above them and having been in it longer.

We know that Karrrrren Brady is onboard with this bullshit, so I can only assume that Villa's owners aren't.
If something appears to be too disreputable for Mike Ashley to touch, then you know it's ****.
 
  • Like
Reactions: humanbeingincroydon
I think that the obvious solution to this problem is for the ****ty clubs responsible to join their local league, instead.
I'm sure that there's a place for them in the League of Wales, as TNS are English and they play in it.
Think of it as a reverse of the Cardiff/Swansea/Newport/Wrexham/Merthyr situation.

It would be inappropriate for them to be named after English cities though, of course.
They should revert to their original names and colours.
I'm sure people can't wait to watch the green and yellows of Newton Heath running out against the blues of Everton Athletic. <ok>
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/54505270

West Ham are utterly opposed to this proposal now that they've seen how badly it's been received, ITK's claim! <laugh>
Click to expand...

The Spanners being "involved" in this, is akin to Italy being
"involved" in the fate of the Sudetenland at the 1938 Munich conference.

[ The fact that the capital cities of both Italy and the Spanners have a
large stadium not fit for any current purpose, is purely coincidental. ]
 
  • Like
Reactions: PleaseNotPoll
The RDBD said:
The Spanners being "involved" in this, is akin to Italy being
"involved" in the fate of the Sudetenland at the 1938 Munich conference.

[ The fact that the capital cities of both Italy and the Spanners have a
large stadium not fit for any current purpose, is purely coincidental. ]
Click to expand...
Gary Neville Chamberlain?
 
  • Like
Reactions: The RDBD
You must log in or register to see media

I think Levy might be in favour, then! <laugh>
 
If the Spanners oppose it, then I'm suddenly much more positive about the idea...

But FWIW I actually do think reducing the size of the PL makes sense. Its some of the other recommendations that I'm more concerned about.
 
Left on the Shelf said:
If the Spanners oppose it, then I'm suddenly much more positive about the idea...

But FWIW I actually do think reducing the size of the PL makes sense. Its some of the other recommendations that I'm more concerned about.
Click to expand...
The thing is that, if teams want a reduction of fixtures, asking for four less league fixtures is not how to go about it

Ditching the Season Killer Cup, on the other hand, absolutely is - as our playing three games in a week demonstrates
 
humanbeingincroydon said:
The thing is that, if teams want a reduction of fixtures, asking for four less league fixtures is not how to go about it

Ditching the Season Killer Cup, on the other hand, absolutely is - as our playing three games in a week demonstrates
Click to expand...
I don't agree with this, either. Clubs have large squads. It's up to them if they want to pick a strong team or not.
The situation this season was silly, but that's not because of the cup, it's because those in charge are arseholes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The RDBD
PleaseNotPoll said:
I don't agree with this, either. Clubs have large squads. It's up to them if they want to pick a strong team or not.
The situation this season was silly, but that's not because of the cup, it's because those in charge are arseholes.
Click to expand...
As I keep saying, England has a bizarre fetish with cup competitions that borders on unhealthy when you consider that every season there's four of them going on
FA Cup
Season Killer Cup
EFL Trophy

And this is the issue: League One teams don't have large squads, yet they're getting flogged to death in three cup competitions every season
 
I definitely don't want the League Cup ditched, I've had the fortune of seeing us winning it live and trust me it's more than worth being there for it.

I don't want the Prem reduced and I disagree the third from bottom club should essentially get a second chance to remain up by competing in the playoffs - you had 38/ 34 games to stay in the league already ffs!

I don't like the idea a select amount of clubs gaining considerable voting power.

So yeah... Basically, project big picture can go **** itself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BobbyD, BrunelGunner, crackerman jack and 3 others
humanbeingincroydon said:
As I keep saying, England has a bizarre fetish with cup competitions that borders on unhealthy when you consider that every season there's four of them going on
FA Cup
Season Killer Cup
EFL Trophy

And this is the issue: League One teams don't have large squads, yet they're getting flogged to death in three cup competitions every season
Click to expand...
The EFL Trophy has been ruined by a previous attempt at this ****.
It needs to go back to it's previous format, as it's helping nobody at the moment.
You've only named three cups, though. I wouldn't count that one, either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back