It's rare that I find myself completely and inexorably angry about a situation, but The Project has left me so.
The idea that these thieves, these ransomers, are attempting to rip the soul out of our game is bad enough. That they choose to fire their shots at the moment when the game is in desperate need, all the worse. That they get Rick Patsy on side, worse still. A £100m "gift"? Again worse. And yet now I'm reading that the proposal has garnered broad support across clubs in the football league?
What has happened to our game?
This is getting to the point of craziness now. I get that there's desperation around at the moment; it's a sign of the times. The whole PPV situation from last week was representative of that, when Premier League clubs banded together to squeeze fans for money that they don't have while paying 5 or even 6 figures a week to our supposed sporting heroes. But at least it had something resembling a certain logic to it even if it left a bad taste in the mouth, an attempt to maintain constancy in a time of abundant change and destruction. But I can't understand how any club outside the top ones could possibly find anything other than a cheap, short term bribe in the proposal of The Project.
For it would be a death knell to all clubs outside the very elite. I remember our days in the Championship, dreaming of days when we might compete in the Premier League, maybe even nicking a European spot or reaching a cup final or two. We might even have been able to win the FA Cup in my lifetime. That was the dream. But The Project takes that dream and drips a slow, dulling poison into its veins. What can fans of these clubs hope for if the proposals are accepted? How can they possibly survive into the future once the realisation hits that they can no longer have aspirations, for there would no longer be any point?
It's really angered me to see the state of the leadership in our sport. And I say our sport, because it is ours and is not the property of any individual. It would be great to have genuine backbone in positions of authority, someone who could put the likes of John Henry and the Glazers in their place, people who would have Steve Minion Parry ousted for his sorry and transparent actions. But we don't have that right now, in this country, Europe, the world or anywhere. So it remains up to us to call the villains out for their actions.
This is the sport we love. It's up to us to fight for it.
</rant>
Project Grim Reaper
posted on 15/10/20
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 10 minutes ago
Out of an unwritten responsibility to, and respect for, the sport. Because the very foundations of what these clubs are built upon is the fans who go to their matches. Because even the largest PL clubs were built up and popularised by the fans themselves, and if you have no respect for opposition fans then you have no respect for your own fans; therefore you demonstrate your willingness to cast them aside, to steal their hard-built club from them. From us.
It is a difficult time for all clubs, I agree. But a difficult time for football league clubs is still a drop in the ocean compared to the difficult time of Premier League clubs. The amount of money difference is massive. And with that sheer amount of money involved, it should be up to the Premier League clubs to aid in the circumstances. This is not a mismanaged club going to the wall and demanding a handout when others have been following the rules. This is a national crisis. Why should the taxpayers have to bail out league clubs in this time when the riches of the Premier League are built upon us as fans in the first place?
Just because something isn't a legal obligation doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.
(re-written because I messed up the first attempt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But when PL clubs are already trying to balance the books but also appease the fans by signing players (LFC as an example here) they are also being asked to stump up millions of pounds to help other clubs.
I don't feel any club so be made to put its hand in its pocket to give another club a handout for free, that would never be asked of any other business.
Also I do somewhat see where clubs are coming from with voting rights. United have been in the league since its inception so why have they got the same voting rights as Leeds who've not been in the PL in 16 years?
posted on 15/10/20
But football is not any other business. Football is a sport. And the success of a sport isn't like in business, where it's measurable by financial gains. Success in football is based on glory. You don't see open top bus parades for making the most profit.
And with any sport, you have to have a level playing field. Leeds are part of the English football hierarchy which, as Greg Clarke reminded people, is the FA's decision. They have met the same level as achievement as Man Utd in being in the Premier League. And both clubs are simply members of that league. I'd exactly reverse the question: Why should two clubs in the same league, who start with the same points total each season and competing on supposedly a level playing field have different voting rights? I'd argue more than no clubs should have any voting rights, that their opinions should be just that and no more. But if there must be voting rights, how can they possibly be made unequal and still have a level playing field? How can it still be a sport?
I see exactly where Man Utd and Liverpool are coming from with regard to voting rights, but it isn't about making a good and competitive sport. It is as it has been expressed thousands of times now across the game: A power grab. Two clubs who, granted, are bigger than anyone else, but are trying to make a claim for also being better and deserving more. For our own respect and enjoyment as fans, that must never be the case.
posted on 15/10/20
Incidentally, you do realise that, if Liverpool are willing to cast fans of other clubs aside and destory their chances of their team ever getting any sort of meaningful glory, if that is their approach toward ordinary fans, then eventually you as a Liverpool fan will become expendable as well? i.e. They're no longer representing you in any way, because they quite clearly don't believe in that; so how long until they decide they don't need you and that your support is worthless beyond filling the coffers? After all, there's likely far more money available in London. Might as well just move the club there.
posted on 15/10/20
Mahomes. It’s hard to see a premier league player earned £300,000 a week and clubs spending £100m in transfers whilst standing by and watching lower league clubs fold.
Money needs redistributing to save other clubs.
There’s no easy way of doing it, but taking 5% off player wages and distributing that would be a start.
posted on 15/10/20
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
But football is not any other business. Football is a sport. And the success of a sport isn't like in business, where it's measurable by financial gains. Success in football is based on glory. You don't see open top bus parades for making the most profit.
And with any sport, you have to have a level playing field. Leeds are part of the English football hierarchy which, as Greg Clarke reminded people, is the FA's decision. They have met the same level as achievement as Man Utd in being in the Premier League. And both clubs are simply members of that league. I'd exactly reverse the question: Why should two clubs in the same league, who start with the same points total each season and competing on supposedly a level playing field have different voting rights? I'd argue more than no clubs should have any voting rights, that their opinions should be just that and no more. But if there must be voting rights, how can they possibly be made unequal and still have a level playing field? How can it still be a sport?
I see exactly where Man Utd and Liverpool are coming from with regard to voting rights, but it isn't about making a good and competitive sport. It is as it has been expressed thousands of times now across the game: A power grab. Two clubs who, granted, are bigger than anyone else, but are trying to make a claim for also being better and deserving more. For our own respect and enjoyment as fans, that must never be the case.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry but football is a business, whether we like it or not these are businesses.
posted on 15/10/20
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
But football is not any other business. Football is a sport. And the success of a sport isn't like in business, where it's measurable by financial gains. Success in football is based on glory. You don't see open top bus parades for making the most profit.
And with any sport, you have to have a level playing field. Leeds are part of the English football hierarchy which, as Greg Clarke reminded people, is the FA's decision. They have met the same level as achievement as Man Utd in being in the Premier League. And both clubs are simply members of that league. I'd exactly reverse the question: Why should two clubs in the same league, who start with the same points total each season and competing on supposedly a level playing field have different voting rights? I'd argue more than no clubs should have any voting rights, that their opinions should be just that and no more. But if there must be voting rights, how can they possibly be made unequal and still have a level playing field? How can it still be a sport?
I see exactly where Man Utd and Liverpool are coming from with regard to voting rights, but it isn't about making a good and competitive sport. It is as it has been expressed thousands of times now across the game: A power grab. Two clubs who, granted, are bigger than anyone else, but are trying to make a claim for also being better and deserving more. For our own respect and enjoyment as fans, that must never be the case.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry but football is a business, whether we like it or not these are businesses.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It doesn’t really change the arguments if we say that football is just a business. Businesses are regulated to ensure a level playing field. This power grab was an unsubtle attempt to create a cartel.
The regulatory framework also has to take into account the peculiarities of the given business. Would we let the Russians run our water companies or the Chinese run our nuclear industry. In this case we’re protecting the cultural institutions of a sport, which began in this country.
posted on 16/10/20
comment by Jobyfox (U4183)
posted 17 hours, 56 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
But football is not any other business. Football is a sport. And the success of a sport isn't like in business, where it's measurable by financial gains. Success in football is based on glory. You don't see open top bus parades for making the most profit.
And with any sport, you have to have a level playing field. Leeds are part of the English football hierarchy which, as Greg Clarke reminded people, is the FA's decision. They have met the same level as achievement as Man Utd in being in the Premier League. And both clubs are simply members of that league. I'd exactly reverse the question: Why should two clubs in the same league, who start with the same points total each season and competing on supposedly a level playing field have different voting rights? I'd argue more than no clubs should have any voting rights, that their opinions should be just that and no more. But if there must be voting rights, how can they possibly be made unequal and still have a level playing field? How can it still be a sport?
I see exactly where Man Utd and Liverpool are coming from with regard to voting rights, but it isn't about making a good and competitive sport. It is as it has been expressed thousands of times now across the game: A power grab. Two clubs who, granted, are bigger than anyone else, but are trying to make a claim for also being better and deserving more. For our own respect and enjoyment as fans, that must never be the case.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry but football is a business, whether we like it or not these are businesses.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It doesn’t really change the arguments if we say that football is just a business. Businesses are regulated to ensure a level playing field. This power grab was an unsubtle attempt to create a cartel.
The regulatory framework also has to take into account the peculiarities of the given business. Would we let the Russians run our water companies or the Chinese run our nuclear industry. In this case we’re protecting the cultural institutions of a sport, which began in this country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. Stop comparing the provisions of necessities like water and power to sport.
Sport is a product which is sold by businesses, nothing more nothing less. I appreciate there should be some level of regulation however this isn't finance, energy, water, health etc. It's essentially a luxury.
posted on 16/10/20
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
comment by Jobyfox (U4183)
posted 17 hours, 56 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
But football is not any other business. Football is a sport. And the success of a sport isn't like in business, where it's measurable by financial gains. Success in football is based on glory. You don't see open top bus parades for making the most profit.
And with any sport, you have to have a level playing field. Leeds are part of the English football hierarchy which, as Greg Clarke reminded people, is the FA's decision. They have met the same level as achievement as Man Utd in being in the Premier League. And both clubs are simply members of that league. I'd exactly reverse the question: Why should two clubs in the same league, who start with the same points total each season and competing on supposedly a level playing field have different voting rights? I'd argue more than no clubs should have any voting rights, that their opinions should be just that and no more. But if there must be voting rights, how can they possibly be made unequal and still have a level playing field? How can it still be a sport?
I see exactly where Man Utd and Liverpool are coming from with regard to voting rights, but it isn't about making a good and competitive sport. It is as it has been expressed thousands of times now across the game: A power grab. Two clubs who, granted, are bigger than anyone else, but are trying to make a claim for also being better and deserving more. For our own respect and enjoyment as fans, that must never be the case.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry but football is a business, whether we like it or not these are businesses.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It doesn’t really change the arguments if we say that football is just a business. Businesses are regulated to ensure a level playing field. This power grab was an unsubtle attempt to create a cartel.
The regulatory framework also has to take into account the peculiarities of the given business. Would we let the Russians run our water companies or the Chinese run our nuclear industry. In this case we’re protecting the cultural institutions of a sport, which began in this country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. Stop comparing the provisions of necessities like water and power to sport.
Sport is a product which is sold by businesses, nothing more nothing less. I appreciate there should be some level of regulation however this isn't finance, energy, water, health etc. It's essentially a luxury.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You seemed to imply that sport is a business and should just be treated as such. My point was that if this IS just a business then every business has to operate within some sort of framework, regulatory or otherwise, that ensures a level playing field in terms of competition. Not create a cartel in which only six can thrive.
Now you’re saying that sport is different from other businesses, which aligns with what Dunge was stating in his original post.
I’m saying that either way it doesn’t deflect from the main point that this is a shameless power grab by the richest clubs to restrict any future challenge to their status. Business or Sport the future integrity of football would have been damaged if this had gone through.
posted on 16/10/20
comment by Jobyfox (U4183)
posted 27 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
comment by Jobyfox (U4183)
posted 17 hours, 56 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
But football is not any other business. Football is a sport. And the success of a sport isn't like in business, where it's measurable by financial gains. Success in football is based on glory. You don't see open top bus parades for making the most profit.
And with any sport, you have to have a level playing field. Leeds are part of the English football hierarchy which, as Greg Clarke reminded people, is the FA's decision. They have met the same level as achievement as Man Utd in being in the Premier League. And both clubs are simply members of that league. I'd exactly reverse the question: Why should two clubs in the same league, who start with the same points total each season and competing on supposedly a level playing field have different voting rights? I'd argue more than no clubs should have any voting rights, that their opinions should be just that and no more. But if there must be voting rights, how can they possibly be made unequal and still have a level playing field? How can it still be a sport?
I see exactly where Man Utd and Liverpool are coming from with regard to voting rights, but it isn't about making a good and competitive sport. It is as it has been expressed thousands of times now across the game: A power grab. Two clubs who, granted, are bigger than anyone else, but are trying to make a claim for also being better and deserving more. For our own respect and enjoyment as fans, that must never be the case.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry but football is a business, whether we like it or not these are businesses.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It doesn’t really change the arguments if we say that football is just a business. Businesses are regulated to ensure a level playing field. This power grab was an unsubtle attempt to create a cartel.
The regulatory framework also has to take into account the peculiarities of the given business. Would we let the Russians run our water companies or the Chinese run our nuclear industry. In this case we’re protecting the cultural institutions of a sport, which began in this country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. Stop comparing the provisions of necessities like water and power to sport.
Sport is a product which is sold by businesses, nothing more nothing less. I appreciate there should be some level of regulation however this isn't finance, energy, water, health etc. It's essentially a luxury.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You seemed to imply that sport is a business and should just be treated as such. My point was that if this IS just a business then every business has to operate within some sort of framework, regulatory or otherwise, that ensures a level playing field in terms of competition. Not create a cartel in which only six can thrive.
Now you’re saying that sport is different from other businesses, which aligns with what Dunge was stating in his original post.
I’m saying that either way it doesn’t deflect from the main point that this is a shameless power grab by the richest clubs to restrict any future challenge to their status. Business or Sport the future integrity of football would have been damaged if this had gone through.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I'm saying that amenities like water and power are different from other businesses, football isn't. It's just another industry.
posted on 16/10/20
All industries are regulated to create fair competition Mahomes. Well, in this country anyway.
You seem to be missing this point.
Ever heard of the competition and markets authority? They prevent large organisations coming together to prevent fair competition.
It’s just the same as any business in that regard.