Shearer's ebar
- Thread starter ToonSi
- Start date
-
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
-
Albert, I also like Turkish food (well, obviously - it is food after all), but that 'Testi Kebab' sounds like a load of bollox to me.
c
The ONLY money was from gate money ( And Pies ) hence Sunderland and Newcastle were relatively rich , about one million times less rich than Chelsea are now , to say clubs are using their financial resources is in fact very dependent on the resources of the owner , Man United account for 72% of the profit made in the Premier League , an exception
The ONLY money was from gate money ( And Pies ) hence Sunderland and Newcastle were relatively rich , about one million times less rich than Chelsea are now , to say clubs are using their financial resources is in fact very dependent on the resources of the owner , Man United account for 72% of the profit made in the Premier League , an exception
Albert, I also like Turkish food (well, obviously - it is food after all), but that 'Testi Kebab' sounds like a load of bollox to me.
That's an extra mate...
Big portions so you will like it my rotund friend.
Correct I'm sure they were nicknamed the Bank of England Club at one stage (40's). Had very wealthy backers. They were even caught using that wealth to make illegal payments to players in the 50's. Some things never change, hence they happily appoint someone like Allardyce.
Let me give you a tip, When you stop to think try to remember to start again
"Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings"
Sponsorship probably started in the 1970s 1980s eventually spread to football, in the time you speak of NO ONE had wealthy backers, only a comparative few had wealth and they hung on to it
The fact that you in your lifetime have never ever gone without does not mean that it never was that way
It is not the only time Sunderland have made illegal payments or tried to buy titles. 1904 was another and again they were fined.
Nothing to do with sponsorship. In 1887 professionalism became legal. Sunderland were able to begin buying the best from Scotland where it was still illegal. After being voted into the league in 1890 Sunderland continued to use the funds from their wealthy backers from the coal and shipbuilding industry to buy a few titles.
Crowds helped after the war but it was the wealthy backers providing most of the funds. I'm afraid Fredor needs to learn a little more about his own club. Its sad when fans don't even know the facts about their own club history, its very easy to research. I can only put it down to laziness.
Worst of all you only have to name the owners in said periods to realise where the money was coming from.
Sunderland bought their titles and tried to financially bully the opposition with illegal payments to players. This is not conjecture, its factual information. I have no problem with the buying the league, as now it should not be possible if the league was set up correctly. However the continuous illegal practices should have seen this rag tag club abolished a long time ago. They have a long held history of trying to misuse funds to buy an advantage. Probably why Ellis keeps its so tight, he knows what the locals will do given too much freedom.
Nothing to do with sponsorship. In 1887 professionalism became legal. Sunderland were able to begin buying the best from Scotland where it was still illegal. After being voted into the league in 1890 Sunderland continued to use the funds from their wealthy backers from the coal and shipbuilding industry to buy a few titles.
Crowds helped after the war but it was the wealthy backers providing most of the funds. I'm afraid Fredor needs to learn a little more about his own club. Its sad when fans don't even know the facts about their own club history, its very easy to research. I can only put it down to laziness.
Worst of all you only have to name the owners in said periods to realise where the money was coming from.
Sunderland bought their titles and tried to financially bully the opposition with illegal payments to players. This is not conjecture, its factual information. I have no problem with the buying the league, as now it should not be possible if the league was set up correctly. However the continuous illegal practices should have seen this rag tag club abolished a long time ago. They have a long held history of trying to misuse funds to buy an advantage. Probably why Ellis keeps its so tight, he knows what the locals will do given too much freedom.
The other interesting thing I learnt was that they were only allowed into the league by offering to pay the travelling costs of the away teams as no one wanted to come to Sunderland to play. Now everyone wants to play there - its a guaranteed 3 points.
