@henrywinter: Scudamore tells BBC Sportsweek no room for winter break, 'no legislative appetite' for return of standing & hopes #hcafc don't become Tigers. Some strong support there! Thoughts ?
What a ****er. I hate how the premier league think they're the be all and end all and think they can run our club for us.
A rare shaft of common sense from a man who has done immense harm to our game with his money-obsessed agenda.
Bring back standing areas, my dream is for home fans to be able to stand up and the north stand being our new bunkers. All seat stadiums ? Grrrrr
I am not saying you are wrong, because I lack a bit of knowledge about his (positions) actual influence. I agree that the PL have brought a great deal of money into the game, but who was it that decided to give obscene amounts of it to players, agents, managers, etc.? It has made me laugh when I have read (frequently) that it is Sky's fault. Imagine how different our clubs would be and just how they could invest in development if players and managers Salaries and bonus were capped at £150,000 - £250,000; a bloody good wedge by any standard - and I've never been impressed by the 'finite playing career' bullshit, because to apply that noble sentiment correctly the cash should be more fairly distributed down through the pro and semi-pro ranks of football. Is he?
He has been in the chair in a period of unprecedented wealth, turnover, investment and we're left with what? A rubbish national team, a Premier League where British players are in the minority, the most expensive admission prices in the world, a glut of egocentric uncomprehending foreign owners, sterile stadia and a matchday experience which alienates traditional fans and financially prohibits young or working class fans from getting to games. Screwdemall has actively encouraged this state of affairs as he sought to jack up revenues for Premier League owners= screw the other 72 clubs and the fans, and the game in general.
He just has a vote on at the board meeting. I assume as he doesn't want the name change, he vote nay.
Posted this a few times now. http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2013/jan/17/fa-birthday-sober-150th-anniversary Last February, in response to the government's call for firmer governance and an enhanced role for supporters, the FA's chairman, David Bernstein, formally agreed that the FA would give up any influence at all over "club ticket prices, commercial and financial matters, club business and operating issues", and even the distribution of money through the game. It was an extraordinary, historic surrender, the FA ceding all responsibility for these key areas to a Premier League whose top clubs are owned by individual billionaires from overseas. This lamentable vacation of the FA's duties could be chalked up as a victory in an administrators' turf war by the Premier League's chief executive, Richard Scudamore, but the Premier League would itself benefit from more solid governance. As Stuey says Scudamore's role is to allow the clubs to make money and lots of it at the expense of everything else. He's just done a meaningless soundbite on a radio show, no more no less. He doesnt give a **** about anything but money. Mr Allam shows him it can/may make money it will sail through.
But how will Mr Allam show him this ? It can't make money, and as Scudamore knows a thing or two about money, he will know this.
Thats the million dollar question kempton. None of us can say it cant as we dont know what Mr Allam is going to do.
If we stay in the premier league, the income will rise year on year and the case will have been made. The name of the entity matters not. I think the name change is already a done deal.
Scudamore's role is to do what the Premier league clubs as a majority want. If Manchester City don't want to become Manchester Hunter they will tell the FA to stop the name change. If Swansea City think that it will take away some of their far eastern revenue they will tell the FA to stop it. If Liverpool and Everton think it will destroy the traditional image of English football they will tell the FA to stop it. Then you have Arsenal, Spurs, Chelsea and Ferguson at Manchester United. How many Premier League clubs have said they support us becoming Hull Tigers? Assem Allam is small fry in the world of Premier League football, especially as he couldn't afford the extra £1 million to buy Shane Long on the last day of the window.
As in the case Mr Allam will put there will be no mention of Manchester City becoming Manchester Hunter so Manchester City will only vote as to whether they see Hull City AFC becoming Hull Tigers is a good thing - and with foreign owners they will only look at commercial side of the proposal not the "heritage and tradition" of the English game. That will also apply to Liverpool, Fulham, Sunderland, Aston Villa, probably Chelsea and Arsenal too. Ferguson at Manchester United is not the owner let's not forget and if the Glaziers see Americanisation of the game as a way of generating even more revenue in America they will probably vote for the name change of Hull Tigers.
No its not. He lets them have free rein to do whatever they want to maximise income. Dont give it that **** about WBA they did exactly the same to QPR and Odemwingie. They pulled the plug not us. All that **** is part of the reason Clarke got the sack, he didnt want Long to go the board did.
