Leicester winning would be absolutely fantastic in terms of shaking up the premier league, but I wonder if it is good for FA as a whole. They spent a ton of money, as did Bournemouth. And to be fair so did we. And so did West Ham. And Middlesbrough seems set to do the same. And QPR, which maybe didn't work out so well. It just sort of seems like a broken system. Either allow the teams to spend what they want and open up the playing field for wise investors willing to take a risk (and also risk destroying teams that spend stupidly) or level the playing field so no one goes bust. As it is, it feels like FFP does nothing. Why fine Bournemouth for spending when they spent well, and without a penalty could make a better go of it? That behavior should be encoraged. Or if the FA decide they know what is best, then put some teeth into the rules and do not allow teams to flaunt them. We are a model club in terms of being smallish for PL and having been in major financial difficulty and turning it all around. And we voted against FFP stuff, so if it isn't helping us then who is it helping?
In answer to your last question of who is it helping, the established old guard. Keeps the big boys on top. They won't be happy with what Leicester are doing. Separate TV deals next. That'll stop us dirty little scoundrels from breaking through again.
I'm just wondering how the smallish club in the PL description ties with the data that we are the 22nd largest football club in the world.
But it didn't make us smallish. I made us average sized in the PL. We're 10th. That's my non-negative perspective.
The PL's versions of FFP serves almost no useful purpose; the change in the finances of the PL ensured that. Consequently, FFP as it currently exists is very likely to be overhauled, because events have made it rather difficult for teams that remain in the top tier to go bust. Teams in the FL are a different story (as are their financial rules), and that's where Bournemouth got a fine.
Yes. Basically, they were fined for daring to be ambitious, even though they could afford it, seeing as they are very well financed these days.
Why on earth would anyone from the smaller clubs not want Leicester to win the premier league? It would certainly be one in the eye for the usual crowd. I always for that........
Can feel a Black Adder/Baldrick conversation coming on here. You see Baldrick, if a big club owes oodles of money the FA go and see them and ask them nicely if they'd mind awfully paying some players a little bit less. But if a little club spends money it actually has got they get fined and put on the naughty step. Oh, so it's like Google paying no tax and getting away with it, but when I forgot to put down the sausage roll you once gave me as a gift I was fined? Exactly, Baldrick But it doesn't seem fair to me. Well there is a flaw. It's bollocks.
You cynic, you. I shall be seeing a Chester City supporter this morning who will, no doubt, again ask the question why Portsmouth FC didn't suffer the same fate as Chester. My rather tired response is always the same. It's ****, mate! (And before anyone gets the wrong idea, this isn't an anti-Pompey rant, but a complaint about the way justice is administered in the footnall world.
It's difficult not to be when you see how lenient UEFA can be with big clubs and how grinding they can be with smaller ones. Only last week I read that Barcelona are going to have their transfer embargo lifted temporarily while they appeal a decision. Why ? Presumably because they need to refresh their squads. So where's the punishment ?
Was watching a piece about Walter Tull....the first black footballer. He had a bad time with racism at Spurs....though the historian pointed out that it was brave of Spurs to employ him at the time. Walter became an officer in the army rising through the ranks in WW1, although it was forbidden in the rules. He was put forward for the Military Cross but never received it as it would have highlighted his commission. Again...appalling that it happened, but also showed that others at the time were bending the rules.
Better known for playing for Cobblers (Northampton). Only played a handful of games for Spuds. The Sixfield Stadium where they play is off Walter Tull Way and the memorial below is outside the ground.
That's where they were broadcasting from....just needed a reason to mention it....the Spurs link was my invitation.
All of this highlights the problem of the underdog, when it starts consistently winning, and when it's not your dog... It's like the Lib Dems... Everyone liked them when they were no challenge to the establishment. I even voted for them before Nick Clegg... Then they got into sort-of power and everyone stopped loving them, kicked them out of the political establishment, and now relish nothing more than kicking them now they are down and out entirely. I want to feel like a lot of people on here seem to feel about Lord badge-kissing twatbeard - i.e. that he is not involved in Southampton's story anymore and so he is of literally no consequence anymore. So Leicester City and their astonishing form this year is nothing to do with Southampton and I couldn't give a toss who wins the PL if it ain't Saints. However... I do give a toss. I totally want Leicester to win it, to upset the order of things. But I equally totally don't want them to as well, because (a) it's not us, and (b) I used to like Gary Lineker, and I don't like him now he is a happy gloating winner...
Arsenal or Manchester City from the current top four, then? Because Spurs are not a regular top 4, so it is good for them to have their day in the sun!!
I think it is Atletico and Real M that are appealing against the transfer embargo. Barca will shout "foul play" if it is not implemented as they had a transfer embargo, not that it harmed them as they won 5 trophies last season and look to do the same this year.