The 'Model'

[Gil T Azell]

Someone said the other day that the term 'the model' is not used within the club. That makes sense, to them it's just running the club. The fans seem to use the term all the time though. There appears to be no real consensus as to what it really is and people assign all sorts of things, often things they don't like, to the 'model'. People seem massively hung up on the 'model', so let's have a look at it in detail.

So what is the definition of the 'model'? The way I see it, it is the fundamental differences between KLD's regime and previous ownerships. Those differences are: the Director of Football/Head Coach system, as opposed to a Manager (let's call this, for arguments sake, the structural element), and; the policy of focusing on signing players that are below a certain age, have potential to be very good, but have maybe stalled in their careers slightly (e.g. Clarke, Roberts, Mundle). Let's call this, for ease of reference, the transfer policy.

Beyond this, we don't know much more about the inner workings of the club. Rumour and gossip don't really count as a working knowledge of how the club operates, despite what some people like to think. Many of the assertions made about the 'model' can be disproved by the facts that exist in the public realm.


Is the 'model' unusual? The structural element certainly is not. This set up is commonly used at European clubs and it makes sense that KLD would want to operate in that way as it is likely to be the structure that he is most familiar with. Many British clubs are moving towards a similar kind of set up but we tend to hear less about them.

This is how Manchester Metropolitan University describe a Sporting Director/Director of Football:

"Usually football sporting directors are responsible for a club’s overall philosophy, beginning with the youth team all the way up to the first team, as well as working with the head coach and CEO to identify transfer targets, coaches, discuss budgets, buy and sell players, and offer existing players new contracts."
https://www.mmu.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/story/?id=16133#:~:text=Usually football sporting directors are,offer existing players new contracts.

The transfer policy is essential a version of moneyball. Bring quality in for as little possible and then maximise the potential of that quality, occasionally selling a player or two for more than you brought them in for. It's maybe a bold approach but also a very responsible one from a financial point of view. Not everyone is doing things this way, so it's maybe slightly unusual but not unheard of- we all know about Borussia Dortmund.

What is the purpose of the 'model'? If you look at the two most successful post-war teams in England, Liverpool and Man Utd, their success is built on continuity and an established identity. In Liverpool's case this was built on the 'Boot Room' era, with managers being promoted from within. In Man Utd's case success occurred in two sustained spells with very long-serving managers who were allowed time to build successful teams. The structural element of the 'model' is a way of ensuring this continuity. If you have a Sporting Director responsible for the club's philosophy (horrible word to use in terms of football), you are ensuring a consistent approach and culture that won't be ripped up if a manager/head coach leaves for whatever reason. If you look at Barcelona, they have for years followed an approach based on Cruyff's way of doing things and have consistently made appointments as Sporting Director and Coach on this basis.

This is, of course, a romantic way of looking at things. More pragmatically, this is becoming the more normal way of doing things and means that, for once, SAFC isn't behind the times.

The purpose of the transfer policy is quite obvious. Financial responsibility and getting value for money.

What are the drawbacks of the model? Not every manager/coach will be happy working in this structure, especially the more old school types. It means we can probably rule out appointing people like Sam Allardyce, David Moyes, Roy Keane, Neil Warnock, despite the fact that most of them are good at their jobs and have good reputations within the game.

The transfer policy means that we might have to wait a season or two for many of the signings to hit their peak. Some won't reach their potential. But that's not unusual; when we've had different transfer policies, not every signing has worked out, no matter how good people thought they might be. Will Grigg, anyone?

Does the 'model' need to 'flex'? Well, how do we know it won't flex and hasn't already flexed? It's a myth that Head Coaches aren't allowed to bring their own people in. Of the three head coaches that KLD has appointed, only Beale didn't bring his own people in, and before he left he said he was thinking about it. Its also a myth that we don't sign 'experienced' players. Evans, Baath, Defoe, and Dack have all been signed since KLD has been involved and, although still quite young, Rusyn and Styles have played a good number of games at other clubs and have international experience. If you're going to operate to a budget though, you have to operate to a budget. Do people really want us to spend our way to promotion if it means putting the club's existence at risk? Would it have been worth blowing the budget on Kieffer Moore? Well, no- our players can't create chances for the forwards we have got. Should KLD spend his own money on transfers? That's also a no for me. He is, as the cliche goes, only the current custodian of the club. We don't want to be in debt to him if and when he decides he's had enough. Look how that turned out last time.

Is the 'model' suitable for Sunderland? I've seen people say that the 'model' won't work up here or that the club need to appoint people who understand the area. What does this even mean? I've lived all round England and with some very slight differences in taste (people in the M62 corridor are strangely attached to Rugby League), people are people wherever you go. They have the same range of tastes, attitudes, ideas, fears, worries, and attachment to their football clubs the country over. People make out there are differences because the accents are slightly different or because people traditionally worked in different industries from region to region, but really people have more similarities than they do differences.

Sadly, SAFC isn't a special club any more. We haven't really stood out from the morass of well-supported clubs who won things in the past for the last 90 years. So there's no great tradition that we're breaking by adopting the 'model'.

Saying we're not willing to listen to or accept a Frenchman and some southerners makes it sound like people from the north-east are unfriendly and backward. Which we're certainly not. This attitude makes me really angry.

And now the big one!

Is the 'model' working? Yes, of course it is. Under KLD, we have seen consistent progress and a rapid rise from League 1 to being one of the biggest clubs in Championship again. Its not that long ago that the owner's policy was being lauded.
https://sportsbyte.sunderland.ac.uk...adapted-club-policy-has-lead-them-to-success/

Yes, this season has been very disappointing but to expect there not to be any bumps in the road is unrealistic. Surely the people running the club will realise this. We need to realise this too. We've been spoilt under KLD so far and it's sad to see people start to turn against him and what the club are trying to do. Just because this season hasn't lived up to the excitement and success of last season doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with the way that KLD is trying to do things.

In summary

In short, I think we need to stop thinking that the 'model' is some kind of strange arcane and intransigent way of running a football club. It's not, it's just that the new owner wants to run things with a coherent plan, in a modern, European style, in financially responsible manner.

Maybe not spending millions on big name players isn't exciting enough for some people. Personally, I think this is more interesting.

Sir I salute you. Excellent post.

 

[FellTop]

Having re-read my first post and subsequent ones on this thread, it does seem as if I think the club can do no wrong. That's certainly not the case and I'd probably largely agree with you on those three points.

I am fairly forgiving and experience has taught me never to make assumptions about why thing have happened so I'm prepared to consider the possibility that at least some of the gaps in the squad are due to a lack of availability, particularly in the case of the centre forward but less so with regard to a second goalkeeper. Its possible that restrictions of the budget have exacerbated that lack of availability. It is, of course, also possible that it's all down to poor performance on the part of the people responsible for recruitment.

The Head Coach situation has definitely been messy. I wasn't desperate for Mowbray to go but I thought initially that they were maybe being ruthless and decisive. Then it dragged on. I still think Beale should have been given more time but the weird backlash against him made him staying untenable. Maybe the recruitment people should have considered the PR side of that appointment more.

I'd imagine (breaking my own rule and making an assumption) that an organisation on this scale would have a rigorous review process and that they will look back on this season and make any changes necessary to improve performance. I think that Speakman and Harvey (and KLD) do have to shoulder some of the blame for this season being a comparative disappointment. Like you say, not everything is the fault of the Head Coach.

However, if we're going to keep referring to the 'model', I think its important that we are aware that there is a distinct difference between poor performance in certain areas (which can be rectified) and the 'model' being flawed.

I am with you in the main, and wasnt thinking you werent able to spot improvements at all. I just have a real disappointment in this season and class it is a regression. I make it 2 and a half good seasons, and 1 poor (at this point) season. Folk may challenge the poor, but I stand by it at this point in time for the reasons I said.

The approach / model though I am not demanding changed. I would like to see tweaks, but that is just my opinion. For example I would make a major budget available for coaching changes, and set the bar incredibly high. Imagine giving Steve Cooper a bumper contract, and bringing his whole team in. That would be a really great tweak for me.

 

[Bazza2310]

I am with you in the main, and wasnt thinking you werent able to spot improvements at all. I just have a real disappointment in this season and class it is a regression. I make it 2 and a half good seasons, and 1 poor (at this point) season. Folk may challenge the poor, but I stand by it at this point in time for the reasons I said.

The approach / model though I am not demanding changed. I would like to see tweaks, but that is just my opinion. For example I would make a major budget available for coaching changes, and set the bar incredibly high. Imagine giving Steve Cooper a bumper contract, and bringing his whole team in. That would be a really great tweak for me.

Three years into a five year plan. Because we over achieved last year expectations for this season hightened. Yes there's been mistakes made and we may have taken a backwards step recently but as a whole we were absolutely outstanding last season best football I've ever seen us play.
As previously said though this is the first time we've had players worth a decent amount of money. Next season I fully back us to be serious contenders. Rome wasn't built in a day and we are 100% on the right road.

 

[Smug in Boots]

Three years into a five year plan. Because we over achieved last year expectations for this season hightened. Yes there's been mistakes made and we may have taken a backwards step recently but as a whole we were absolutely outstanding last season best football I've ever seen us play.
As previously said though this is the first time we've had players worth a decent amount of money. Next season I fully back us to be serious contenders. Rome wasn't built in a day and we are 100% on the right road.

It's amazing that the owners are being criticised for possibly selling some players for a massive profit ...

... despite being the same people who found them, took a chance and brought them into the club.

Perhaps the angry brigade would be happier if they brought in players no f*cker wanted.

 

[Bazza2310]

It's amazing that the owners are being criticised for possibly selling some players for a massive profit ...

... despite being the same people who found them, took a chance and brought them into the club.

Perhaps the angry brigade would be happier if they brought in players no f*cker wanted.

Thing is a dodds said the Clarke we signed isn't the Clarke we have now. Players take time personally we've got some absolutely amazing young players at the club. Academies are full of young promosing players too. Just an all round feel good factor deep down even though right now is difficult, but it requires patience. Rigg is going to be an exceptional talent.

 

[Sour Patch]

You must log in or register to see media

Are we the only club not breaking the rules?

 

[Smug in Boots]

You must log in or register to see media

Are we the only club not breaking the rules?

The RTG experts have all the answers mate ...

 

[John Wick]

You must log in or register to see media

Are we the only club not breaking the rules?

They're basically a Premier leauge squad in the Championship that have breached according to that article to gain am unfair advantage to get promoted. Ipswich are another. The obsession to get to the Premier leauge blinds so many. absolute **** tip

 

[DELETED ACCOUNT 1234]

great post.

I have no problem with “the model”. My problem is with how we are executing it. What we want to do is similar to many other clubs, but actually the profile of player we are signing is much younger. It’s almost like we’ve tried to run before we can walk (in that we are signing lots of high potential players too early in our cycle, before we have a “set” first team).

This is the middle ground between “we need experience” and our current approach. I want to see us go out and sign more young players, but with much more first team experience. Like Ballard and Clarke, rather than Mayenda and Hemir for example.

Hopefully in the summer with a lot more money to spend, that’s what we get.

I agree with this, but just a slight counter too it - are Hjelde and Styles not more in the bracket of signings you're asking for profile wise? Both first team experience at this level, both international experience (Hjelde at every youth level up to U-21).

 

[The Norton Cat]

I am with you in the main, and wasnt thinking you werent able to spot improvements at all. I just have a real disappointment in this season and class it is a regression. I make it 2 and a half good seasons, and 1 poor (at this point) season. Folk may challenge the poor, but I stand by it at this point in time for the reasons I said.

The approach / model though I am not demanding changed. I would like to see tweaks, but that is just my opinion. For example I would make a major budget available for coaching changes, and set the bar incredibly high. Imagine giving Steve Cooper a bumper contract, and bringing his whole team in. That would be a really great tweak for me.

I think it would be a failing of any organisation, or any model, not to review its processes. The club has ISO9001 certification- I wonder if that extends to the football side of things? There are obviously going to be improvements that can be made in all sorts of areas. It would definitely be brilliant if review of one of those areas resulted in them bringing Cooper in. The main thing that concerns me slightly at the moment is the Mike Dodds situation. He was supposed to be the top boy for the Head of Individual Player Development role. It's fair enough that he has ambitions for the Head Coach role but surely that player development job is crucial to how the club want to operate? It all seems to have gone a bit wafty in that area now. Have the club replaced him? Who's taking over from him if he's the best at it?

 

[Monkey69]

I am enjoying reading a lot of the comments on this thread but I do think a lot of fans miss the reason why our team is so young.
As a club we have had to invest and re-build our academy pretty much from the ground up which has led the recruitment team to scour all clubs for promising young talent that we can develop to make our first team better. This has led us to the point we are at now, where we need some of these players to push on in terms of first team football and we are finding out who is ready and who is not.
I don't know if they will all be what we hope for and would guess we will get a mixture of great success, moderate to good players and some absolute bangers but the club have stated they are not in this for sales but to build a great team and that will take time. What we do have now is a very good academy which has improved greatly in a little over 2 years which bodes well for the future and means that recruitment can maybe look at adding slightly older players in to the mix and as such maybe at the end of the season when we pick the bones out of it we will see that we are probably short of a couple of older heads for the first team and TBH the head coach situation was probably a mistake given that who I think was our first choice stayed at his current club (I do not think for 1 minute that MB was first or probably even second choice). Again as the club have said we are only half way through what was initially a 5 year plan and we have already competed in the play offs which was probably ahead of schedule.

 

[Monkey69]

It will be hard for all of us in the short term.

Robert Louis Dreyfus was an extremely successful businessman and marketer before he bought a majority stake in Olympique de Marseille.

Kyril Louis Dreyfus dropped out of a degree in sports and business management at Leeds Beckett University before he bought a stake in SAFC.

Just as a thought how much do you think KLD has paid for his Majority shareholding in Sunderland 40-50 Million at a guess ???
What value would you put on the club now if he were to sell 100-120 million maybe even more. If he was in it to flip it for a profit (too buy Marseille) like Donald and Methven then he would be hawking the club around all over the world so I really find it hard to see your point.

 

[FellTop]

I think it would be a failing of any organisation, or any model, not to review its processes. The club has ISO9001 certification- I wonder if that extends to the football side of things? There are obviously going to be improvements that can be made in all sorts of areas. It would definitely be brilliant if review of one of those areas resulted in them bringing Cooper in. The main thing that concerns me slightly at the moment is the Mike Dodds situation. He was supposed to be the top boy for the Head of Individual Player Development role. It's fair enough that he has ambitions for the Head Coach role but surely that player development job is crucial to how the club want to operate? It all seems to have gone a bit wafty in that area now. Have the club replaced him? Who's taking over from him if he's the best at it?

Definitely a gap on individual player development without somebody in that role. I said elsewhere it is a major role in a football club, and quite specialised. It runs through late academy phases, maybe u16 through to first team. People sometimes wonder why first team, but look at our average age. All of them still learning their individual game. I remember Bobby Robson going into Newcastle and working 1-1 with Shearer because he wasnt receiving on the half turn. Imagine that, Shearer at that stage having refinements. Happens though, or it should do. It was there is a huge difference between individual coaching and team coaching, often way too much going on with 20 players to spot a tweak that can give a player an extra edge in their game.

I am in the process of being retired off from my current role in an academy (doing it to me early as well I feel unloved like Beale ) but if I were to do anymore elite coaching and I dont suspect I will it will be 1-1 for players on the brink at u18 level. Very rewarding.

 

[Pure River Slut]

You must log in or register to see media

 

[Pure River Slut]

Someone said the other day that the term 'the model' is not used within the club. That makes sense, to them it's just running the club. The fans seem to use the term all the time though. There appears to be no real consensus as to what it really is and people assign all sorts of things, often things they don't like, to the 'model'. People seem massively hung up on the 'model', so let's have a look at it in detail.

So what is the definition of the 'model'? The way I see it, it is the fundamental differences between KLD's regime and previous ownerships. Those differences are: the Director of Football/Head Coach system, as opposed to a Manager (let's call this, for arguments sake, the structural element), and; the policy of focusing on signing players that are below a certain age, have potential to be very good, but have maybe stalled in their careers slightly (e.g. Clarke, Roberts, Mundle). Let's call this, for ease of reference, the transfer policy.

Beyond this, we don't know much more about the inner workings of the club. Rumour and gossip don't really count as a working knowledge of how the club operates, despite what some people like to think. Many of the assertions made about the 'model' can be disproved by the facts that exist in the public realm.


Is the 'model' unusual? The structural element certainly is not. This set up is commonly used at European clubs and it makes sense that KLD would want to operate in that way as it is likely to be the structure that he is most familiar with. Many British clubs are moving towards a similar kind of set up but we tend to hear less about them.

This is how Manchester Metropolitan University describe a Sporting Director/Director of Football:

"Usually football sporting directors are responsible for a club’s overall philosophy, beginning with the youth team all the way up to the first team, as well as working with the head coach and CEO to identify transfer targets, coaches, discuss budgets, buy and sell players, and offer existing players new contracts."
https://www.mmu.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/story/?id=16133#:~:text=Usually football sporting directors are,offer existing players new contracts.

The transfer policy is essential a version of moneyball. Bring quality in for as little possible and then maximise the potential of that quality, occasionally selling a player or two for more than you brought them in for. It's maybe a bold approach but also a very responsible one from a financial point of view. Not everyone is doing things this way, so it's maybe slightly unusual but not unheard of- we all know about Borussia Dortmund.

What is the purpose of the 'model'? If you look at the two most successful post-war teams in England, Liverpool and Man Utd, their success is built on continuity and an established identity. In Liverpool's case this was built on the 'Boot Room' era, with managers being promoted from within. In Man Utd's case success occurred in two sustained spells with very long-serving managers who were allowed time to build successful teams. The structural element of the 'model' is a way of ensuring this continuity. If you have a Sporting Director responsible for the club's philosophy (horrible word to use in terms of football), you are ensuring a consistent approach and culture that won't be ripped up if a manager/head coach leaves for whatever reason. If you look at Barcelona, they have for years followed an approach based on Cruyff's way of doing things and have consistently made appointments as Sporting Director and Coach on this basis.

This is, of course, a romantic way of looking at things. More pragmatically, this is becoming the more normal way of doing things and means that, for once, SAFC isn't behind the times.

The purpose of the transfer policy is quite obvious. Financial responsibility and getting value for money.

What are the drawbacks of the model? Not every manager/coach will be happy working in this structure, especially the more old school types. It means we can probably rule out appointing people like Sam Allardyce, David Moyes, Roy Keane, Neil Warnock, despite the fact that most of them are good at their jobs and have good reputations within the game.

The transfer policy means that we might have to wait a season or two for many of the signings to hit their peak. Some won't reach their potential. But that's not unusual; when we've had different transfer policies, not every signing has worked out, no matter how good people thought they might be. Will Grigg, anyone?

Does the 'model' need to 'flex'? Well, how do we know it won't flex and hasn't already flexed? It's a myth that Head Coaches aren't allowed to bring their own people in. Of the three head coaches that KLD has appointed, only Beale didn't bring his own people in, and before he left he said he was thinking about it. Its also a myth that we don't sign 'experienced' players. Evans, Baath, Defoe, and Dack have all been signed since KLD has been involved and, although still quite young, Rusyn and Styles have played a good number of games at other clubs and have international experience. If you're going to operate to a budget though, you have to operate to a budget. Do people really want us to spend our way to promotion if it means putting the club's existence at risk? Would it have been worth blowing the budget on Kieffer Moore? Well, no- our players can't create chances for the forwards we have got. Should KLD spend his own money on transfers? That's also a no for me. He is, as the cliche goes, only the current custodian of the club. We don't want to be in debt to him if and when he decides he's had enough. Look how that turned out last time.

Is the 'model' suitable for Sunderland? I've seen people say that the 'model' won't work up here or that the club need to appoint people who understand the area. What does this even mean? I've lived all round England and with some very slight differences in taste (people in the M62 corridor are strangely attached to Rugby League), people are people wherever you go. They have the same range of tastes, attitudes, ideas, fears, worries, and attachment to their football clubs the country over. People make out there are differences because the accents are slightly different or because people traditionally worked in different industries from region to region, but really people have more similarities than they do differences.

Sadly, SAFC isn't a special club any more. We haven't really stood out from the morass of well-supported clubs who won things in the past for the last 90 years. So there's no great tradition that we're breaking by adopting the 'model'.

Saying we're not willing to listen to or accept a Frenchman and some southerners makes it sound like people from the north-east are unfriendly and backward. Which we're certainly not. This attitude makes me really angry.

And now the big one!

Is the 'model' working? Yes, of course it is. Under KLD, we have seen consistent progress and a rapid rise from League 1 to being one of the biggest clubs in Championship again. Its not that long ago that the owner's policy was being lauded.
https://sportsbyte.sunderland.ac.uk...adapted-club-policy-has-lead-them-to-success/

Yes, this season has been very disappointing but to expect there not to be any bumps in the road is unrealistic. Surely the people running the club will realise this. We need to realise this too. We've been spoilt under KLD so far and it's sad to see people start to turn against him and what the club are trying to do. Just because this season hasn't lived up to the excitement and success of last season doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with the way that KLD is trying to do things.

In summary

In short, I think we need to stop thinking that the 'model' is some kind of strange arcane and intransigent way of running a football club. It's not, it's just that the new owner wants to run things with a coherent plan, in a modern, European style, in financially responsible manner.

Maybe not spending millions on big name players isn't exciting enough for some people. Personally, I think this is more interesting.

I don’t think it’s the model that’s gone awry I just think they’ve made misjudgments on players. They’ve gone from players in being mostly good to mostly not right. We do have strikers we just haven’t got ones that are ready to compete in this league. It’s good to sign tomorrows players but they have to follow on from todays and we are short of some of those. Similarly you have to have the right coach. Arguably we had one but didn’t manage the relationship right or provide the right quality of player. Speakman has done a lot right but not in the last 18 months at first team level.

 

[John 11:35]

Just as a thought how much do you think KLD has paid for his Majority shareholding in Sunderland 40-50 Million at a guess ???
What value would you put on the club now if he were to sell 100-120 million maybe even more. If he was in it to flip it for a profit (too buy Marseille) like Donald and Methven then he would be hawking the club around all over the world so I really find it hard to see your point.

Where did I say he's planning to flip the club?

 

[Saf]

You must log in or register to see media

Are we the only club not breaking the rules?

Leicester City say they are seeking "an appropriate overall outcome" into an ongoing English Football League inquiry into a possible breach of profitability and sustainability (P&S) rules.

The EFL has published a decision which found its own Club Financial Reporting Unit (CFRU) had acted outside its powers in dealings with the Foxes.

The club was forecast to breach loss limits for the current three-year term.

It was asked to submit a business plan on how it would comply with P&S rules.

But an independent Club Financial Reporting Panel (CFRP) concluded that under the rules "as currently written", Leicester were "under no obligation to submit and agree to a business plan".

The Foxes said they were "pleased" the panel found in their favour but "concerned" that it was necessary for the CFRP to "intervene in this way to prevent the CFRU from acting outside established EFL rules".

"Leicester City confirms it is in discussions with the football authorities regarding its profitability and sustainability calculations," a club statement continued.

"Notwithstanding the CFRP's decision, the club remains committed to seeking an appropriate overall outcome in this matter."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68496645

 

[Smug in Boots]

There's quite some contradictions in what people, with 'serious concerns', think about 'The Model'.

On one hand they're claiming the owner is only in it for the money ...

... while simultaneously claiming he's content to trundle along in the Championship thereby avoiding the riches of the PL.

How can both possibly be true?

And if he's already achieved his goal, and doubled the value of the club, why not sell now, especially as he's currently covering losses.

 

[FellTop]

Leicester City say they are seeking "an appropriate overall outcome" into an ongoing English Football League inquiry into a possible breach of profitability and sustainability (P&S) rules.

The EFL has published a decision which found its own Club Financial Reporting Unit (CFRU) had acted outside its powers in dealings with the Foxes.

The club was forecast to breach loss limits for the current three-year term.

It was asked to submit a business plan on how it would comply with P&S rules.

But an independent Club Financial Reporting Panel (CFRP) concluded that under the rules "as currently written", Leicester were "under no obligation to submit and agree to a business plan".

The Foxes said they were "pleased" the panel found in their favour but "concerned" that it was necessary for the CFRP to "intervene in this way to prevent the CFRU from acting outside established EFL rules".

"Leicester City confirms it is in discussions with the football authorities regarding its profitability and sustainability calculations," a club statement continued.

"Notwithstanding the CFRP's decision, the club remains committed to seeking an appropriate overall outcome in this matter."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68496645

This is an example of what worries me. Clubs will continue to stretch beyond the boundaries of the rules, or plain ignore, and trust to their lawyers to get them off the hook, or the regulator themselves being to weak to apply the rules. It is happening more and more and whilst we are doing things the right way I worry it will leave us sat on a high hill of moral ground, but uncompetitive in football terms.

 

[The Norton Cat]

This is an example of what worries me. Clubs will continue to stretch beyond the boundaries of the rules, or plain ignore, and trust to their lawyers to get them off the hook, or the regulator themselves being to weak to apply the rules. It is happening more and more and whilst we are doing things the right way I worry it will leave us sat on a high hill of moral ground, but uncompetitive in football terms.

Some people believe we're still being punished for the 1957 payments scandal when we weren't the only ones doing it. That might be paranoia but I'd rather not take that risk again