Rival watch

  • 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!
So it would appear that the league are the ultimate owners of the clubs as they sell the franchises. Just as MacDonalds sell the franchise to individual owners who also have to fulfil conditions or MacDonalds could withdraw the franchise leaving a hamburger restaurant minus the signage and and advertising and stock. That wouldn't quite work with sports clubs so I suppose they just transfer the franchise to a new owner.
They can take away ownership and sell to a new owner. But they usually allow owners to sell the franchise to someone else, as long as the new owner is approved by a vote of the other owners. In a case where they banned an owner for racist remarks, they banned his wife as well; "the league stated that "if a controlling owner's interest is terminated by a 3⁄4 vote, all other team owners' interests are automatically terminated as well". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Sterling. He was allowed to sell the franchise to someone else, but he did that under pressure, as it appeared that if he didn't, the NBA would repossess the franchise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spurf
They can take away ownership and sell to a new owner. But they usually allow owners to sell the franchise to someone else, as long as the new owner is approved by a vote of the other owners. In a case where they banned an owner for racist remarks, they banned his wife as well; "the league stated that "if a controlling owner's interest is terminated by a 3⁄4 vote, all other team owners' interests are automatically terminated as well". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Sterling. He was allowed to sell the franchise to someone else, but he did that under pressure, as it appeared that if he didn't, the NBA would repossess the franchise.
Interesting system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redwhiteandermblue
Good match, Fulham might think themselves unlucky not to have won perhaps. No idea how they got 5 minutes extra time though. Whilst you might say that you could just about explain it, the problem is that in another game with the same stoppages a completely different number of minutes would have been added (fewer I think!) I suspect if Liverpool were winning then it would have been fewer. But the main point is that there should be independent timekeeping, and you should be able to see the clock stopped when nothing is happening, then there's no suggestion of bias or wrong timekeeping.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Billy The Spur
Good match, Fulham might think themselves unlucky not to have won perhaps. No idea how they got 5 minutes extra time though. Whilst you might say that you could just about explain it, the problem is that in another game with the same stoppages a completely different number of minutes would have been added (fewer I think!) I suspect if Liverpool were winning then it would have been fewer. But the main point is that there should be independent timekeeping, and you should be able to see the clock stopped when nothing is happening, then there's no suggestion of bias or wrong timekeeping.
You would just have fights about stopping the clock. An Independent time keeper is a good idea though, it's just a question of how you do it.
 
Right, what're the rules for the Norbert post-match drinking game?

Take a shot for
- Whinging about the Community Shield
- Whinging about the penalty
- Whinging about imagined fouls in the buildup for Fulham's first goal
- Whinging that somebody mistook him for Michael Fabricant on the street
Correct about the bitching, the pitch was too dry , some of his salty tears will sort that out