Arsenal set out today without a slightly weakened first team. Diaby was relegated to the bench, Squillaci and Kozzer were foisted into a first time partnership and Jack Wilshere was given a run out with a little bit of negative media glare on his shoulders.
I can’t pretend I managed to catch much of the first half, my feed jittered around so it was tough to tell what went on. Needless to say we took the lead after Jack fired a speculative cross to the back back post, Cesc cut the ball back into danger where Kozzer was on hand to slot home. A delightful move for the Frenchman’s first ever Arsenal goal!
Arsenal were good for their lead after a number of spurned chances mainly squandered by Arshavin.
It didn’t take Kozzer long to turn into the villain after a shocking clearance from a long ball allowed Bolton in to slip a cross over Almunia into the path of the inform Elmander… who took his opportunity well!
Arsenal came out for the second half knowing what needed to be done. After a corner failed to beat the front post, Arshavin laid Cesc in who whipped a solid cross into the box where Chamakh was on hand to head home! We were deservedly back in front.
The next talking point was when Cahill needlessly piled into the back of our Moroccan. The ref pulled out the red card which I thought was a fair decision. This changed the face of the game, but I don’t feel like Bolton deserved anything less!
Our next goal came when Arshavin found Song in the tiniest amount of space, he beat his marker and chipped over the keeper from the most impossible of angles! A truly magical finish from our defensive midfielder!
Diaby had managed to come on only to be replaced almost immediately after a heavy challenge by the always thuggish Paul Robinson. That was a shame… it’s always something with Diaby isn’t it? Lets hope this isn’t a typical 6-9 week incident.
Our final goal of the afternoon came after a 24 pass move… Carlos Vela was swept in through the middle with a gently weighted chipped Cesc pass… the Mexican ran on and slotted home without a chip and plenty of composure!
We took the game 4-1 and continued our assault on the league!
The afternoon had proved we had the fight to deal with the bully boys. Kozzer, despite another clanger had shown strength and a resilience I really like. I noted how well he dealt with a Kevin Davies flying headbutt which I believe was on purpose. Squillaci looked solid all in the defence and I’m hoping he’ll form a good partnership with whoever he is asked to play with. Almunia was adequate all afternoon, dealing with whatever came at him. Some tried to blame him for the Bolton goal, even the most hateful fan of the Spaniard would be clutching at straws there!
Wilshere worked well through the middle, Cesc was back to his productive best and Chamakh proved what a useful addition he is going to be to the squad this season.
Overall, an amazing afternoon for the boys in red and white! Spurs drew and should have lost after battling hard with WBA, Blackburn managed a draw against City who suffered a points loss because of a horrible Joe Harte / Kolo clanger, Chelsea weren’t great value for their win, United lost 2 points in the last ten minutes and were battered for large parts against Everton… oh, and did I mention Spurs best player ended the game on crutches?
It’s all looking rosy on the Arsenal front, with any luck, we should be in a very strong position come the end of September!
I’m not going to do player ratings, I didn’t see enough to be fair, give me yours and I’ll take an average later!
Happy Sunday!
P.S. Whisper it, but I think Geoff got the score bang on…
Gambon, why are you so intent on proving that the rules will mean nothing.
If a restaurant decides not to let you in for not wearing a black tie will you hire a team of lawyers to get around it?
shit mayank, im finding it hard enough making a decision as it is.
Has anyone seen 4 lions?
might go for that then
Mayank
Im not at all, just saying that it is really not easy to tell a group of very powerful clubs what they can and cant do.
If they decide they dont like it, they will walk away from UEFA and set up their own euro league.
I think the rules are a good thing, and make sense, but i thinki some people are relying too much on it, see my post a few minutes back.
The fact is businesses are allowed to lose money, there is no law that says they cant.
gambon says:
September 12, 2010 at 19:23
How do UEFA have any right to decide the value of a contract? Is our £7.5m pa fair? Is Spurs £8m pa fair? What about Liverpools £20m pa? is that fair?
—
Market Value of sponsorship contract of clubs with similar standing and history, previous contract.
Mayank,
I think they have salary caps in the US?
this is probably the better way to do this to make the league more competitive, however, what is there to stop a top player from accepting a sponsorship deal from ‘Sheikh Mansoor Fried Chicken’ or getting an ‘own’ business set up?
Mayank,
no mate, if you have enough wonga, you just buy the damn restaurant!
gambon says:
September 12, 2010 at 19:32
The fact is businesses are allowed to lose money, there is no law that says they cant.
–
Correct but you just wouldn’t be able to enter UEFA competitions.
Haha there is some serious schooling going pm here!
Some people are so far put of their comfort zones when it comes to the financial regs that they resort to blathering on about ” wishful thinking and non specific loopholes” it would be laughable if it wasn’t being used by the uneducated as a means to once again how a go at any arsenal fan that doesn’t think that signing £30m players is the only way to win the league.
Brilliant stuff surfarosa and hitman, don’t let the personal insults (being called a 9 year old) etc put you off!
Supergunner,
I don’t think you got this right: it’s not the club that is to lose the money, it’s the sponsor…
there is absolutely no stopping anyone from paying £1M for something worth £1, simples…
I don’t think people are relying on it, they just realise what football has become big business, it’s good that the sporting side of it should be looked at.
Gambon,
It’s not about relying on them, its more about common sense. It’s the UEFA party and they can decide who to invite. If you and your mates are popular enough you can have your own party. But we all know the Spanish and the Italian powers will not be touched.
Any other business in the world tries not make a loss, whereas making a profit in football is seen as bad business. It’s not Darwinian and the sheer lack of logic attached to is enough for a self regulating body to take a step.
SUGA3,
Like I said there are smart people on both sides, but as it stands the power rests with the UEFA. If the voracious free market like the US can do it Europe will be easy right?
Mayank, there is nothing wrong in correcting someone who is making false statements.
I agree with what Gambon said earlier about these financial regulations making everything better.
I don’t see what would change for us…? People are slapping Arsenal on the back without really understanding what they are getting excited about.
I’m sure last year when we were talking about this homegrown rule everyone was getting excited becuase all the other teams would struggle… it didn’t happen did it?
Supergunner
Bingo. Wouldnt be allowed to enter UEFA competition.
And as you should know, UEFA, just like any body in the western world, arent allowed monopoly on football competitions.
As i say, im all for the rules, but it wont just be a case of rules implemented & Arsenal win everything.
Some people are like little kids who need their mum to help all the time, in this case the ruling is the mum.
Suga, did you say you worked in law? Or am I imagining things?
Mayank,
crooks are always one step ahead of the cops, otherwise we would be living in the utopian world with no crime, etc.
US example: Troy Aikman,ex-Dallas Cowboys QB used to ‘run’ a car dealership in his playing days, then it folded due to ‘weak location’ – wasn’t it always ‘weak’?
http://uweblogsports.blogspot.com/2007/11/troy-aikman-can-not-sell-cars.html
do you think a star NFL player NEEDED to run a damn car dealership? did he fuck – just a way around the salary caps…
Pedro – So all these rules and regulations are going to have no effect at all ?!
The basic fact of the matter is UEFA have realised that is unregulated the PL will have 4 genuine contenders for the CL.
That’s why the rules have come into the limelight. All those years with an English finalists forced their hand.
Wassup everyone?
College is a fucking bitch when it comes to work
but whatever, I’m a beast like that.
Anyway, just thought I’d pop in..Are we playing well then? Have to say that the injuries over the past 5 years have been nothing short of ridiculous.
Pedro,
no, you’re right, I did – don’t have a degree, but I know a fair few things from different areas of the law, having worked in the Supreme Court and a few other interesting places
Mayank
Youre right, very few clubs make a profit, which is silly.
However a club also has no use for retained profits. If a club makes £3 it should be willing to reinvest that in the team, if it makes £40m likewise.
We pay no dividends, we dont produce anything therefore we have no need for capital expenditure, so what reason do we need profits for??….one thing, putting money into the team.
Keyser, it won’t have any effect on the current hierarchy of European football.
It might stop a Portsmouth happening again which is a good thing… it might stop another City coming on the scene… but then again, is that what we want? I know it’s vulgar, but I thought outside investment was what we wanted in the Premiership?
These rules for me seem to be a strangle on smaller clubs?
Keyser,
they will have some effect – on the clubs with no massive sugardaddies, that is…
Evening Rohan… we played very well yesterday… it’s all good!
Pedro, the homegrown thing was never going to help us?
I was pleasantly surprised to see how many homegrowns we had.
Weren’t we the team that was constantly beaten with the foreigners stick?
Also, the financial regs are specifically in place to curb the inordinate spending of the newly emerging English clubs.
Why do people think Inter or RM are going to be affected by the rules?
There’s not gonna be a mass walkout if Chelsea and City are not allowed to play.
The UEFA is a self regulating body. It answers to no one as long as it ensures the basic rights of everyone involved.
Where were these very smart people when English clubs wre banned from Europe?
gambon says:
September 12, 2010 at 19:45
Supergunner
Bingo. Wouldnt be allowed to enter UEFA competition.
And as you should know, UEFA, just like any body in the western world, arent allowed monopoly on football competitions.
–
It is monopoly, clubs themselves voted and signed up for it.
——————————————————
SUGA3 says:
September 12, 2010 at 19:38
Supergunner,
I don’t think you got this right: it’s not the club that is to lose the money, it’s the sponsor…
there is absolutely no stopping anyone from paying £1M for something worth £1, simples…
—
Yes you are allowed to bank that £1m but i just wouldn’t count when they paper calculations towards your Uefa License.
Mayank, you can’t control hooliganism at a micro level.
What were the smart people going to do about that?
Mayank,
the English clubs were nowhere near the position they are in now, no?
and the ban was for a whole different set of reasons too!
Supergunner, who defines what is a fair sponsorship?
Gambon, you’re right making inordinate profits isn’t smart either, but I hardly see a regulation coming out for that.
Pedro,
Is the only way for a small club to come up the City way? I’m sure having a good squad and not getting bullied into selling your best players is another way. Any other year Villa or Everton could’ve gotten into the top 4 last year.
Technically it’s morning here, but that sounds great Pedro. How’ve you been keeping?
Stopping another Citeh/ Chelsea is a pretty big thing for our league at least.
Mayank
I think its very tough to break into the top 4.
The clubs in the CL have a huge advantage. Namely that theyre in the CL in the first place, and have the money that comes with it.
incesc-expandables was out in august..late premiere in uk eh?
I’ve been all good thanks Rohan, how’s college life treating you? Ladies in abundance I trust?
Mayank, I would say it probably is the only way to break into the top 4. By not allowing clubs to take risks, you take away the opportunity to progress.
How many businesses have made it off the back of huge risk over the years? Now we’re shutting up shop… so the status quo will remain.
That the whole point Gambon. Funneling money into a club to circumvent rules makes the payment no longer legitimate.
Supergunner,
one of the things I learned in life is that there is no such thing as equality in the eyes of the law…
people want to watch their clubs play the best clubs and they simply don’t give a toss if someone is chucking money down the drain to finance that and it’s pretty naive to think otherwise, IMO…
without English clubs, the CL would become pretty inferior competition and so would the Europa League – UEFA and FIFA need the big clubs more than the other way around…
The ban was because a rowdy Liverpool crowd right?
Well wasn’t it infringing on the right of other clubs with no previous to play in Europe?
The fact is UEFA can do what it bloody wants if they feel like it. If City can prove to them that their running a clean business then they’ll be allowed otherwise not. It’s not just a simple matter of hiring smart people.
It’s a matter of running a smart enterprise.
@ pedro, Market Value of sponsorship contract of clubs with similar standing and history, previous contract.
Pretty decent, I’d have to say. Berkeley engineering is a lot of work though. Frat row parties are the schnitzel though..And believe it or not, listening to Snow Patrol classifies you as classy.
The birds dig it.
It just sucks getting up at 7 on a weekend with a hangover and getting on a stream to watch us play.
Mayank,
let’s assume for a second that you are a footballer, playing for, let’s say, Wolves, and you play like a second coming of Zidane, then a club like Arsenal comes with ‘double/triple/quadruple-your-money’ offer and also table a reasonable bid – what do you do?
Pedro, that’s why you have to show a profit over 3 years?
You take a risk if it pays off you reap the benefits and pay it off of it doesn’t you sink. That’s the point of a risk. The possibility of failure. With clubs like City and Chelsea there is no possibility of failure ’cause they’ll keep investing till they get the result.
There’s no law preventing Stoke from taking out a 100m loan to buy players and try for the top four. As long as their accountable for the loan.
hitman
The point is just because its wrong in your eyes doesnt make it wrong in the eyes of the law, or even UEFA.
Youre making out they would be comitting some huge crime, when all they would be doing is agreeing very good sponsorship deals, which is far from wrong.
Anyway, this might not even happen, but it does highlight a problem. UEFA can say you have to live witin your means, but they cant tell you how much revenue you’re allowed to generate.
Mayank,
UEFA and FIFA are just a bunch of corrupt cunts, it’s all about the thickness of the brown envelope, nothing else…
I’d take it SUGA3… Why do you ask?
Mayank, you’re comparing chalk and cheese.
Football has so much more money being pumped into it that it did back then.
British clubs are very powerful, so are SKY, so are the billionaires who run the clubs.
If UEFA started booting big clubs out, I’d expect talk of a break away league… it wouldn’t happen.
Like Suga said, UEFA need the clubs more than the clubs need UEFA.
SUGA3 says:
September 12, 2010 at 20:01
Supergunner,
one of the things I learned in life is that there is no such thing as equality in the eyes of the law…
people want to watch their clubs play the best clubs and they simply don’t give a toss if someone is chucking money down the drain to finance that and it’s pretty naive to think otherwise, IMO…
without English clubs, the CL would become pretty inferior competition and so would the Europa League – UEFA and FIFA need the big clubs more than the other way around…
—-
I have never said everything would become perfect [i wasn't born yesterday]. The new rule is a start, clubs have become too reckless in general apart from the German teams and some elsewhere
and the ban was caused by the hooliganism problem as a whole, the ‘incident’ was just an excuse…
Supergunner… the market value constantly changes, so it would be very hard to regulate.
Rohan, I’m glad Snow Patrol has worked out for you… kids in America, starved of good music for so long!
Mayank,
I ask because this is where goes your argument about the clubs not being ‘bullied’ into selling their star players – if the ‘Wolves’ can’t match or at least get close to the offer tabled by the ‘Arsenal’, there is nothing they can do…
That’s the point Pedro, they won’t be booting clubs out. They want status quo, they want the big clubs to remain big.
What they don’t want is 4 clubs from England vying for the CL.
Real, Barca or Inter will not be threatened by the rules. Man U, Chelsea and City might.
Might be the reason Utd and Chelsea are running a clean shift now-a-days.
United not running a clean shift? What do you mean?
Pedro says:
September 12, 2010 at 20:07
Mayank, you’re comparing chalk and cheese.
Football has so much more money being pumped into it that it did back then.
British clubs are very powerful, so are SKY, so are the billionaires who run the clubs.
If UEFA started booting big clubs out, I’d expect talk of a break away league… it wouldn’t happen.
Like Suga said, UEFA need the clubs more than the clubs need UEFA.
——
Its clubs with those £B owners who asked for the rules so as they go into self sufficient model then everybody else would be close/near that type model as well. Moratti, Roman and Berlusconi were the biggest culprit crying to Platini bcuz they don’t want finance their clubs anymore.
Supergunner,
in economy there is something called the snobism effect, which is one of very few causes where the supply and demand theory goes down the pan – for a company, a massive sponsorship deal can be a vulgar piece of PR bling, no?
They can not sell Suga3, regardless of what the player wants. Like we did, like Fulham did.
Also like I said all clubs can take risks but they should be accountable for it, the sugar daddies are removing all accountability from football. Why should it be different from any other enterprise.
Pedro says:
September 12, 2010 at 20:10
Supergunner… the market value constantly changes, so it would be very hard to regulate.
—
Correct that rule is more for people using unrealistic amount rather than couple million hike here & there
I said Utd are running a clean shift. I don’t remember them spending beyond their means for a while now. Neither have Chelsea.
SUGA3 says:
September 12, 2010 at 20:14
Supergunner,
in economy there is something called the snobism effect, which is one of very few causes where the supply and demand theory goes down the pan – for a company, a massive sponsorship deal can be a vulgar piece of PR bling, no?
—-
high economic value & low practical value, the rule is more for people using unrealistic amount rather than couple million hike here & there as i said before
Mayank,
Fulham would have sold us Schwarzer if the ‘right’ offer was tabled and so would we…
this is why I said the bid would have to be ‘reasonable’
and the sugardaddies can do this, because they can buy Platini, Blatter and fuck knows who else along with their families…
Giving a good amount of money for a player is hardly bullying they can use that money to strengthen further. Bullying would be the Mascherano thing.
Supergunner,
there is no such thing as ‘unrealistic’ amounts – if ‘Sheikh Mansoor’s Fried Chicken’ wants to pay £100M p.a. in the sponsorship deal to get off with a bang and has whatever capital is needed to do so, there is no law that will stop this, simples…
evening all,
great day at the game yesterday and vela’s goal really was a crowd pleaser. Those watching the end of the manc v toffee’s match got right up for it in the clock end after the 2 goals in 3 mins just before our game started.. Good banter with the travelling supporters on the song front…
“One arsene wenger” bellowed out from the west stand only once during the afternoon and “wonder of you” before the game were the only low points. Even getting on the tube after leaving on the final whistle was a simple job.
ratings:
almunia – 7 (on a good run of form as of late and continued that here 2day)
eboue – 6 (a few erratic moments defensivly but always an outlet down the right with rosicky)
koscielny – 6 (goal aside looked a little naive at times, although the battle with davies was one the highlights of the match. The shocking backpass header in the 1st half was a blot on an otherwise good performance.
Squllaci – 7 (top debut. Looked cool, assured and physical most of the time and read the game superbly. There’ll be sterner tests as bolton were pretty much a meat and drink side for him. Top quality pace uptop will really be the yardstick for him from what i saw yesterday)
Gibbs – 7 (came in and done excellently both defensivley and going forward. Really putting Clichy under pressure, and with the frenchman’s erratic form starting to come into question we can safely say, at the back on the left we have 2 very, very good options)
Song – 7 (the usual fair plus a good goal from our defensive shield. Passing erratic again at times when going forward, but his maturity in the way he is now reading the game is a bonus. Lack of pace is a worry against the more dynamic gerrard’s and co, of this world)
Fabregas – 8 (put in a good shift today, was everywhere and was well received by the faithful when taking corners. 3 assists for kozz, vela and chamackh aswell as being involved in the build up for song’s tells me he’s getting somewhere back to his best. A dare i say it, captain’s performance)
Wilshire – 6 (buzzed around in and around most the action 1st half and for an ickle lad had a steely element to go with his his often credited technical ability. Been involved in all 4 prem games so far, starting 3. Definantly started the game on merit, not sentiment despite Diaby’s super showing against bosnia earlier in the week. Improving and growing in stature with every 1st team appearance now.)
Rosicky – 7 (involved in alot of the build up and fed a beautiful through ball with the outside of the boot for arshavin early doors. Looking back to something of the magician that 1st came to the club)
Chamackh – 7 (does alot of hard work off the ball with running the channels, flick ons, holding things up etc. He is a grafter and one with a good deal of technical quality. He will quickly establish himself as a firm favourite with the onus on him due to the current injury situation. Great buy, one must say. Another thing I will say is that if anything he doesn’t have a prolific look about him and to me not having that 25+ goal a season striker and top class international goalkeeper are what might cost us)
Arshavin – 6 (continues to frustrate as much as get you off your seat. 3 great chances through on goal and his finish looked that of an 18 y/o debutee. Should of had a penalty perhaps, but that aside he did put in a little more effort off the ball. Still way short of his best form and luckily for him the injury toll and wenger’s releuctance to start vela are of benefit to him at current)
subs:
Diaby – N/A (gave the ball away the first time he got the ball before a naughty robinson tackle had him limping off after what seemed like 5 mins. Another injury!
)
Denilson – 6 (Came on and flitted about with his usual get it, give it style. Looks a little “beefier” and looked like he’d never been away. get’s a lot of stick when the chips are down, but it was good to see the loyal, regular performer under Arsene return yesterday)
Vela – 7 (Came on with a point to prove and did just that with a super cool 1 touch finish to sign off a beautiful “ooley” 25 pass move. Worth the admition alone. A rest is likely in europe, but a start and decent minutes in the carling cup and next prem tie are surely dead certs. Can only keep knocking on the door till he’s let in.)
Mayank, United never spent beyond their means! They were and still are hugely profitable.
The Glazers fucked United with that debt leverage deal. Nothing to do with their player spending.
but it is bullying, as ‘Wolves’ can’t afford the wages offered and this is where the player’s head is turned – they may pocket a good few million quid for the sale, but this will not make them THAT much stronger, certainly not to get anywhere near the level of the ‘Arsenal’…
unless they have a small Zidane factory somewhere
Pedro, I think not too long ago they paid near 35m for Nani and Anderson. Crazy sums for Berba & Carrick also.
Won’t see them doing this now.
Whatever the reason for their debt they sure didn’t act like a club 700m in debt.
There is a law to stop that suga3.
Man city would report a higher income but Sheiks fried chicken would be reporting a significantly lower pbit which would alert the revenue to a tax fraud. Which is of course exactly what that scenario constitutes.
SUGA3 says:
September 12, 2010 at 20:24
Supergunner,
there is no such thing as ‘unrealistic’ amounts – if ‘Sheikh Mansoor’s Fried Chicken’ wants to pay £100M p.a. in the sponsorship deal to get off with a bang and has whatever capital is needed to do so, there is no law that will stop this, simples…
—–
Yes there is an unrealistic amount, the current highest shirt sponsor as far as i know is Man Utd and Pool at £20m pa, so that can be benchmark for clubs competing in europe until some breaks it. Now say Man City do a deal for £100m pa with company setup by Sheik then yes the money legit and can be used by them BUT for UEFA license calculations its the £20m that will be used as FAIR VALUE [its a paper calculaton not monetary calculation]
QoS,
the limited companies law in the UK is extremely liberal and so is the taxman – registering ‘SMFC’ with £400M starting capital and spending £300M on ‘advertising’ is certainly not illegal as long as the HMRC gets their share, it’s as simple as that…
how is that a ‘fraud’? the only thing you cannot do with the money is to physically burn or otherwise destroy them, as this is illegal…
QoS, depends where the Sheikhs fried chicken is based.
I’m pretty sure no one went to Man United and investigated why AIG’s profits went to shit as soon as they signed with the club.
You can’t link profit to shirt sponsorship.
Supergunner
So what you are saying is no club is allowed more than £20m pa?
Or are some clubs allowed to and some not?
Supergunner,
in the market economy, a fair value is whatever a buyer is willing to pay the seller, anything else is just some commie bullshit…
Supergunner, what about if City got a deal worth £40million based on potential growth?
Mayank says:
September 12, 2010 at 20:33
Pedro, I think not too long ago they paid near 35m for Nani and Anderson. Crazy sums for Berba & Carrick also.
Won’t see them doing this now.
Whatever the reason for their debt they sure didn’t act like a club 700m in debt.
–
At the time, they were able to service their debt by making profit bigger than their obligation.
AIG were a much larger entity than their shirt deal. But if a company is set up like some suggest for the sole purpose of diverting funds then it will merit an investigation.
Mayank, you don’t even need to set up a company… take a look at Usmanov’s portfolio of companies… he could just use one of those.
… and why would it merit an investigation and under what law? You’re just making an assumption.
Loads of large corporates set up holding companies to divert profits etc…
Pedro says:
September 12, 2010 at 20:43
Supergunner, what about if City got a deal worth £40million based on potential growth?
—
Plausible, but it might be declined as a world widely known club in Man Utd who are only getting 20m in also a recession. Double of current benchmark is more grey area but if i had to put my neck on the line then i would say Not Accepted
Mayank,
obviously, what I suggested is an extreme example, but still, what would the investigation result be?
‘We have opened 100 restaurants selling shit food all over the world, paid for the sponsorship deal, paid tax for it, go fuck yourselves’
The tax man doesn’t care what the money is spent on, whilst not strictly true is perhaps relevant, however he would consider that sheiks chickens profits have been reduced by the £80m difference in what they have spent compared to a normal benchmark.
He’d want his share of that 80m.
All that is of course completely irrelevant, the uefa regs allow them to disregard that figure anyway when calculating man cities turnover, which they would do because it’s clearly a false figure. They’d equalise it back to around 20m
Supergunner, so what you are saying is UEFA will tell clubs and corporate sponsors what they can and cannot spend on sponsorship?
Can’t see that working out…
Anyway, I’m off! Have a good one!
Not under any law… But if City submitted it as proof of it being their source of income.
If a company worth 200m pays 100m for a shirt deal it’s not illegal and City can use those funds. Just that in UEFA’s calculation the full amount will not be considered.
Also you have to realise all the dirty tricks are used to make money not waste it. No one will risk doing something illegal for a football club if it doesn’t make them money.
QoS,
of course he would, I never said it would involve tax dodging, did I?
and it’s not a ‘false figure’ if the money changes hands on a regular basis, it’s real income…
nite Pedro!
Mayank, if Usmanov got one of his mining companies worth a few billion quid… I don’t think anyone would question the legitimacy of the company being able to afford it.
The chicken example wasn’t meant to be taken in the literal sense.
Night!
SUGA3 says:
September 12, 2010 at 20:43
Supergunner,
in the market economy, a fair value is whatever a buyer is willing to pay the seller, anything else is just some commie bullshit…
—
You might have some Law experience but you clearly have poor concept of accounting so it isn’t wise to have construct argument about accounting matter.
—————————————————
gambon says:
September 12, 2010 at 20:41
Supergunner
So what you are saying is no club is allowed more than £20m pa?
Or are some clubs allowed to and some not?
—
£20m would be benchmark until some get an amount that is bigger than that
I think people are also overlooking that clubs wont need to be so underhanded anyway.
City dont plan to spend silly money every summer, just for a few years until they are competitive and have built the club to the size they need to be to self sustain.
But the legitimacy of a mining co. needing that kind of advertising could be questioned. Doesn’t mean they can’t spend the money just that the amount will not be considered as a source of income by UEFA.
You have to stop thinking of the UEFA as a court of law.
guys any news on Diaby’s injury?
Gambon if that’s the case then I don’t think anyone has any problems. Are you suggesting that in a few years City will ask Wayne Bridge to take a pay cut?
Pedro says:
September 12, 2010 at 20:50
Supergunner, so what you are saying is UEFA will tell clubs and corporate sponsors what they can and cannot spend on sponsorship?
Can’t see that working out…
—-
This is why i stated previously that clubs standing around the world will be used as well as prior contract, thus for a club like Man City that are no were near the standing Man Utd to double £20m to £40m just like that in a recession would make it rejectable.
Supergunner,
well, accounting was never my forte at the uni, but what’s your point?
‘£20m would be benchmark until some get an amount that is bigger than that’
well, how many is ‘some’? and what ‘leap’ can be made at once? who is the one to decide?
and
Mayank,
I’d like to see UEFA trying to argue this case in court, really…
‘Boohoo, big bad SMFC gave away £300M’
and if the Sheikh’s mates were to ‘spend’ enough to ‘justify’ the expenditure, just to give the chicken away to the poor, there is no stopping them either
Supergunner
But that makes no sense.
£20m is the benchmark until someone gets a better deal, but no one is allowed a better deal as £20m is the benchmark?
gambon says:
September 12, 2010 at 21:06
Supergunner
But that makes no sense.
£20m is the benchmark until someone gets a better deal, but no one is allowed a better deal as £20m is the benchmark?
—-
Lets do this stages so that you can get it. Just Answer series of question.
On scale of 1-10, 10 being the highest, globally where would you put Man City along side man utd?
I think SG07 is trying to say any anomalies would be disregarded. As in City getting a large sum in one area while their other sources are below par.
Supergunner,
I think you should ask the dudes buying corporate boxes at Eastlands instead of Old Toilet
Anyway, I’m off too.
Night all.
If city got a £25m deal no-one would think it too unusual. So of course the benchmark can be shifted.
You just can’t make a quantum leap to say £100m without UEFA saying, sorry that isn’t a real deal and oh look its one of the Sheiks companies.
Back to £20m you go.
SUGA – UEFA is the one to decide. It’s their ball until someone shows up with another one.
Supergunner
That has zero relevance, literally zero.
You are using these rulings as your white knight, thinking they will end all wrongdoing in the world and propel Arsenal to huge success.
If you can show me the law that says a football club isnt allowed a bigger sponsorship deal than another club that is considered bigger that would me much appreciated, and your point will be entirely valid.
Thank you mayank and Suburbia
Gambon – like i said last time we spoke about this; read the UEFA regs. The “law” you are looking for is in there.
UEFA have given themselves scope to regulate and equalise unusual deals back to a benchmark they set.
QoS,
it’s obviously very simplistic, but there is more than one way to skin a cat, isn’t there?
when there is a will, there is way
*there is a way
I totally agree that clubs arent going to be able to agree ridiculous deals, but people are overstating the problem.
What is going to be the most important things to consider when the rule comes in?
1- Revenue
2- Costs
What have Chelsea & City done a very good job of since their takeovers?
Grown revenue.
Abramovich spent a lot of money, but now Chelsea are a legitimate big club, they dont need to pay huge money anymore as theyre already a more attractive proposition than Arsenal, Liverpool and pretty much anyone else in the league. The only thing they need to worry about is making sure they have costs that are equal to revenue by 2018, really not a big ask.
City are still a way off on the revenue side, but have moved forward enourmously, grown their sponsors massively, have a big following, and need to get into the CL to jump that final step.
gambon says:
September 12, 2010 at 21:20
Supergunner
That has zero relevance, literally zero.
You are using these rulings as your white knight, thinking they will end all wrongdoing in the world and propel Arsenal to huge success.
If you can show me the law that says a football club isnt allowed a bigger sponsorship deal than another club that is considered bigger that would me much appreciated, and your point will be entirely valid.
—
For the 2nd time, i not saying hurray Arsenal have monpoly over all trophies, in fact i am just appalled in general with the way clubs are running themselves. Ask yourself why football league clubs are always relying on big cup ties to keep themselves going if they weren’t over paying in wages nevermind prem & european clubs. Mallorca were stopped from entering Uefa cup this year because they were in administration.
As for sponsors issue, all clubs know the parameters by which they will be judged and signed for it so legal case at the moment is a non starter. Even though it starts in 2012, you actually have another years for which you can make small losses meaning by 2015 you should be close to break even within Uefa rules or else NO LICENSE
Jack fired a speculative cross to the back back post, Cesc cut the ball back into danger where Kozzer was on hand to slot home.
my arse he did. it was great vision by wilshere he looked up and let his feet do the rest. watch cesc’s reaction after the goal was scored. he pointed to jack. he knew.
If you look closely at Cesc’s and Jacks boots they’ve got a P and a J on them for Project Youth.
yawn
I agree it was good vidion.
However, what are the odds you would be saying the same if Scholes or Gerrard did it?
Zilch.
Night guys.
huh gambon?!
if scholes or gerrard did it then people would be lauding scholes getting better by age (as they have since the start of the season) or saying gerrard is back to his best!
nite, SG07
good debate…
Someone mentioned somewhere, Stewart Robson when commentating for other channels/ broadcasters, goes too far in the opposite direction in his analysis, maybe in the hope of showing people that he doesn’t have any bias towards Arsenal.
A
What have “people” got to do with what I said?
I didn’t realise you were addressing it specifically at the one person gambon, apologies if you were.
I was thinking the same as “yawn” when i read the match report, hopeful ball is massively underselling the quality of the pass.
I dont think Jack does ‘hopeful balls’.
Good photographer as well.
Hola guys. I really see us winning trophies this yr if our guys stay fit. I am falling in love with Chamakh and Rosicky again. Also Wilshere. Denilson looks like the hulk. Love the little afro
Yeah Denilson did look to be a bit bigger he’s starting to look like the Original Ronaldo though.
http://www.whoateallthepies.tv/77979972.jpg
Keyser – Sorry 4 not responding earlier.
It’s the MIDFIELD. You know the reasoning, ad nauseum, by now.
Wenger comes out with trash like ‘maturing’ and says we look more solid based on three games. I’m sure i remembering saying how solid we looked this time last year as well.
The much vaunted ‘revolutionary’ pressing system that last about two minutes.
*I’m sure I remember people saying how solid we looked this time last year*
And yep I know – injuries, consistency, building an understanding etc.
when since has maturing been trash. Seems a rather immature thing to say. Its only expected that a group of players playing together for a number of years would get better and mature,thus by creating a greater understanding.
Paulinho – Don’t be sorry, I’m sure you were hoping to see Hleb back today, I never followed his career over at Stuttgart, is he simply a crock now or is it just temporary ?!
Birmingham could’ve used him today and I think Liverpool would have been there for the taking.
I don’t get how you can disregard all that though, we do look good, if not solid, and we have improved, even if in short bursts.
Well we’ll see how much we’ve matured later on in the season when we play against proper teams and when the pressure is on. If anything our midfield has become more naive with Wilshere coming in, although I like the balance he brings.
The Brum-Liverpool game could have done with Hleb – pretty dross affair. I think he’s crock though, and I’ll be surprised if he plays any meaninful role this season. I remember writing him off when he played at the Nou Camp lasy year. He’s lost that zip.
I remember the game he looked good just not to that standard, especially with the players he had around him, for almost the same reasons you must be impressed with Rosicky ?!
I don’t think Rosicky’s the same after his injury either, but you can still see the maturity and creative energy he brings to the midfield.
If Hleb can offer as much as Rosicky still does, he’ll be quality for Birmingham, especially with a hard working and organised team around him, at least enough to still have some sort of impact.
The thing about him is, even though it’s Birmingham, he will still try and be ‘the man behind the scenes’ in the sense of trying to set the whole team up instead of realising he’s in a different league to the rest of them and going for goal himself. Craig Gardner and will love the countless free strikes at goal that get lined up for him.
The Brum fans think he will the new Christophe Dugarry though and carry the team on his shoulders. I think that’s a bit beyond him now, and he would have trouble with that at his peak.
Gambon -
You summed it up so long ago, clutching at straws. Why youve spent the entire night arguing with the same retards who still think that we are broke is beyond me.
You should have known to call it a night when Hitman came out with “rules are rules” to explain that money laundering is when one of the portfolio of companies that a chairman owns invests a large amount into his club as sponsorship.
Honestly.
Rules are rules. Fucking classic. Dem the rules, it be that way sometimes.
Night.
The Brum fans ? How thorough have you been in your research ?!
I think he will realise how good he is and he’s got somethig to prove again.
If players like Larsson and Mcfadden are clever they’ll realise how much he can help them, though I think you’re right in that even he doesn’t have it in him to get Jerome to score regularly.
I checked a few forums. Major wank-fest on deadline day when he signed.
I think Hleb will dribble through the entire opposition and square it to Jerome who’ll miss!
I was thinking that, but Jerome should get a couple here and there he can’t miss all of them, Larsson should benefit quite a lot, I can see Hleb either taking it on himself or sitting and picking out passes for Larsson and others to run onto.
Also anyone watching Motd2 ? They didn’t show the Diaby challenge yesterday and today they decided to highlight the inconsistency of refs by saying that the Cahill challenge wasn’t even a yellow ?!
How about highlighting that by showing Robinson’s challenge who didn’t even get a card ?! Makes Dixon look a mug to.
Its been what 2 seasons since he left?
And he’s not exactly been playing, I think he’s going to frustrate a lot of Brum Fans!
choy – Did you catch the game today ? With Liverpool ? Both teams were pretty hopeless, thought Birmingham looked a bit better, if that’s the standard he’s got to play with, then I don’t think it’ll take much from him as long as he’s fit.
good to see motd2 confirming modric is alright and showing zamoras injury but no mention of diabys injury wahtsoever.
they did say it wasnt a red for cahill about 10 times tho
I was very impressed with Birmingham Keyser, they hammered Pool but Reina was outstanding the first half!
Hleb was technically amazing at Arsenal, but I don’t know what shape he is right now!
incesc – Saw you mention it yesterday aswell, they glossed over it on Goals On Sunday, and yeah I’m tired of reading myself moan about it to.
When our players get injured, we just have to accept it and carry on again and again, if they’re just going to ignore tackles like that, we’re just going to have to wait for the next player to get his leg broken.
Honestly I can see Talksport or the papers making a big deal over how we’re getting too much protection now.
Also it just proves how crap Atwell is, the linesman blatantly saw it, but I bet Atwell realised how he’d have to send off another Bolton player.
There’s an article doing the rounds titled Coyle Sticks Up For The Little Clubs. It is literally wringing wet with irony. Owen Coyle reckons that Bolton should have had a free kick on the edge of Arsenal’s box immediately prior to Cahill’s two-footed, off the ground, from the rear, tackle on Chamakh. I think he is right. It was a free kick and Bolton did not get it. The fulcrum of his rather tedious argument seems to be that the whole game and certainly the result hinged on that decision. From this he draws the conclusion that the “little clubs” by whom he presumably means Bolton, just don’t get the decisions at grounds like the Emirates and we are left to suppose that this is costing them points. How many decisions did Arsenal not get yesterday? Seven, eight, ten? He has conveniently forgotten Davies’s appalling violent fouling and cheating which should have cost him at least 3 yellow cards, the targeting of Fabregas, Robinson’s vicious assault on Diaby etc, etc. How many penalty shouts were there yesterday? Wasn’t Eboue’s a cert? What about Arshavin. But no. Coyle, at his sanctimonious best, is going on about one decision that they didn’t get and using it to deflect attention from what was a horrible turn-out by Bolton. A performance that harked back to the days of Allardyce.
24 pass with 24 oh-ah from fans, beat that Barca! Squeaky seems to be a Keown clone but Kos sadly our ‘dirty Scholes’. Song looks more like Viera a tough badass, while Diaby looks a certain Gilberto(tough but lazier bit). Using 4231 means Song and Diaby a definitive DM pair that Wenger must keep. The balance 4 spots midfield and striker is a matter of variation trick. With a solid defence and pair of tough DMs, bring on ermm, Drogba? Yes DROGBA!
cese was sharp and happy looking.
mornin
Morning all,
2nd and two points behind Chavs who, lets face it, have played the bottom four teams (WBA, Stoke, West Ham and Wigan).
That’ll do for now.
And my “doomy” moment for the day is that I still think come the end of the season we will curse not having splashed out on a twenty goal-a-season man. Hope I am so wrong.
Morning/Evening Grovers.
NEW POST!