Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Southampton' started by TheSecondStain, Jun 28, 2016.
I'm glad I'm not the only one!
First team to concede 60+ goals in 5 conse
consecutive seasons. Only so long that will keep you up for.
Fair well Bournemouth, and thanks for the fake rivalry. Fortunately I think Lallana might just have found us a easy fit replacement..................
While Manchester City may not be everyone´s favourite team, I feel that the morality of these teams is even lower than City´s for trying their best to get City banned from European competition. Here are the nine teams in question. Taken from the BBC website! Good to see that SFC were not part of this little scenario.
However, as City never made such an application, it was never processed. The nine Premier League clubs who made the application were Arsenal, Burnley, Chelsea, Leicester, Liverpool, Man United, Newcastle, Tottenham and Wolves.
I think its disgusting how City's big city suits have got the punishment overthrown. And I think you shifting the spot light on to these meek self serving nine does no credit to the real issues in this case.
Not looking good for Bournemouth.
I think justice was done. FFP is a sham and Uefa are as corrupt as anyone.
What City did or were guilty of should have been of no interest to these "self serving nine" as you put it." I can see why but it makes them more repugnant than City!!
So, were you equally repulsed by the bottom five voting to discontinue the season during the covid outbreak? Clubs always look after their own interests before that of others.
No, as it seemed they had a valid point at the time. But that little issue has been resolved happily, or not if one is a Bournemouth fan. Anyhow I am making the point that these 9 clubs are more repugnant than City, but you haven´t addressed my original point!
I'd prefer the nine to get upset about what has happened to Wigan. That is the real crime. City are just the same as Utd, Real, PSG.....ect
Great response. Game set and match to You.
Why oh why would a middling (at best) Premier League team NOT put in a relegation clause? Maybe the agents didn't want it, but if it was my money as an owner I would insist and move on to the next if they refused.
We get quite a few mentions https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53553300
Including away performance, good after lockdown, average age,, came out well for var decisions, ings gets a mention and article finishes Southampton are a team to keep an eye on when the new season starts.
A false dawn?
Following on the fact that Bournemouth didn't set relegation clauses in many of their squad, this is scary reading:
Near the bottom of the report it says they are still owed about £5m in fees from other clubs, but in 2020 have to find £85m that they owe in fees (I imagine these fees are staggered and are all due this year).
Scary in a world-wide pandemic and no TV rights coming in.
They're ****ed, probably be the next Bury.
Best get down home bargains and pick up a few buckets and starting rattling.
They will have to cash in on their assets!!! Might raise a few million and reduce their onerous wage bill!!