One of my Spanish clients I was working with today (Don't panic, he has lived here as long as me) mentioned he was very popular in Spain as a player and then pundit.
Apparently so. I’m sure I saw him on Sky Sports News or Football Focus or something, being interviewed as the Spanish football expert.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-52465137 Any views on this? I for one think our relationship with such regimes is reprehensible
Agreed - but I don't think that billionaires, regardless of nationality, should be allowed near the game anyway. Too much money = too much power = too much say in how it is run.. I sometimes really do miss the game I fell in love with back in the 60's...
Money talks - Newcastle fans won't care if this new ownership brings them some kind of success. Its why the Premier league want to keep going with this season - to avoid the clubs going to the lawyers and bringing legal action. 20-25 years everyone would have just accepted this situation and called it all off.
Absolutely right, chaps. Toon fans would welcome a consortium of Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden and Jacob Rees-Mogg. Which puts Mike Ashley in perspective.
UEFA planning to revamp the Champions League and Europa League. Another case of funneling cash upwards to the 'elite' clubs? https://www.football.london/premier-league/champions-league-arsenal-chelsea-tottenham-18164019
The odd world of professional sport in the US. Women players in the national squad, even after negotiating their own pay deal, went to court to demand equal pay with the men. I know nothing about the popularity of either in the US, but would have thought that the income generated in each would be a major factor in deciding the salary scales in each. To me it could be no different to players from Accrington Stanley demanding the same salary as players from Liverpool - probably financially unsustainable. https://www.voanews.com/usa/us-court-rules-against-womens-national-soccer-players-equal-pay-suit
It is only unsustainable if the Accrington players have pay rises. It is very sustainable if the Liverpool players get paid the lower rate. As for the US women perhaps their teams should play in the men's leagues then they could get similar pay rates. This happens in other sports, usually ones that involve horses. Is archery such a sport, too?
I don't know about archery, but rifle shooting has separate men's/women's events - which seems rather illogical. I'm too sure that either sport is professional...
In professional sport people are paid according to their ability and so, if women want to be paid the same as men, they have to be able to compete with them on the pitch. If it is necessary to have separate tournaments for men and women because of this lack of parity then it is self explanatory that the pay will be different. One of the few sports where men and women are in direct competition is in equestrian events such as show jumping - there the rewards must be equal, but not in sports where a gender separation is necessary.
So how come Man U aren't in trouble over this sell on clause if they are the buying club when we are over the Sarr transfer ? https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....ndes-sell-on-clause-in-manchester-united-move
Some rule changes in the offing, to start immediately when/if the season restarts. https://www.hertfordshiremercury.co...r-substitution-changes-impact-watford-4117225
Just think of the time wasting antics near the end of a game with sub after sub to break up the play.
There is some talk about having shortened matches. Let's have 5 minutes each way, where both sides agree not to score. That satisfies Sky, every side gets a point from each game, Liverpool are happy, the PL take in the top two from the Championship, no relegation this season, so there are more matches next season to show. Most clubs happy, what could be better?
