Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Well it's been coming for some time. I'd like to hear from those with a case for it. A good case, rather than it is just getting return on your investment. I'll be with many here and be watching Peckham Town when the fans are allowed back in. The word of the day is ?ingordigiousness?: extreme greed; an insatiable desire for wealth at any cost.


My case for it is below:

There is no case for it. It's a travesty, and the available sanctions should be used against clubs and players who participate.

The Premier League would be diminished greatly without those clubs, so hopefully they will see sense, but the game is bigger than any one club (or even six).

ESL organisers have said that the teams involved would still be part of their domestic leagues. Obviously the reason against the ESL relates to how seriously would our six teams take PL games on Saturday if they were playing a top European team on the following Wednesday? The PL would also be forced to make major re-scheduling arrangements.

This is terrible.

It?s a US coup manufactured by the US owners and their vulture partner JP Morgan that rides roughshod over European football culture and supporters. I haven?t spoken to any supporter of the so called big 6 who even vaguely supports this, they are as horrified as the rest of us. Premiership should grow a pair and immediately expel all 6 in my opinion.

Annoyingly it's knocked Jose being sacked off the agenda - I always enjoy this time of year


But yeah - the whole thing is a massive pile of shite and only underlines why many people I know have been drifting away from the game in recent years anyway. Even if whole thing collapses tomorrow, it leaves a great big cloud and has sucked any joy out of "supporting" a team.

This is supposed to be about the case for. Here is the case for:


1. Football is now sold as a lifestyle, in particular for those with money to spend

2. It will be a further boost for on line betting

3. It's a global business, and will follow the money

4. Many in this country will still buy into it, come what may


Not that I am happy but always good to have a balanced argument.


On a similar subject strong arguments were put forward when test match cricket was taken off the list of crown jewels, ie home tests on terrestrial. I thought the opposite, wrote to government, and was proved correct.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I have been using Andy for many years for decorating and general handyman duties. He always does a great job, is very friendly and his prices are competitive. Highly recommend.
    • Money has to be raised in order to slow the almost terminal decline of public services bought on through years of neglect under the last government. There is no way to raise taxes that does not have some negative impacts / trade offs. But if we want public services and infrastructure that work then raise taxes we must.  Personally I'm glad that she is has gone some way to narrowing the inheritance loop hole which was being used by rich individuals (who are not farmers) to avoid tax. She's slightly rebalanced the burden away from the young, putting it more on wealthier pensioners (who let's face it, have been disproportionately protected for many, many years). And the NICs increase, whilst undoubtedly inflationary, won't be directly passed on (some will, some will likely be absorbed by companies); it's better than raising it on employees, which would have done more to depress growth. Overall, I think she's sailed a prudent course through very choppy waters. The electorate needs to get serious... you can't have European style services and US levels of tax. Borrowing for tax cuts, Truss style, it is is not. Of course the elephant in the room (growing ever larger now Trump is in office and threatening tariffs) is our relationship with the EU. If we want better growth, we need a closer relationship with our nearest and largest trading block. We will at some point have to review tax on transport more radically (as we see greater up take of electric vehicles). The most economically rational system would be one of dynamic road pricing. But politically, very difficult to do
    • Labour was right not to increase fuel duty - it's not just motorists it affects, but goods transport. Fuel goes up, inflation goes up. Inflation will go up now anyway, and growth will stagnate, because businesses will pass the employee NIC hikes onto customers.  I think farms should be exempt from the 20% IHT. I don't know any rich famers, only ones who work their fingers to the bone. But it's in their blood and taking that, often multi-generation, legacy out of the family is heart-breaking. Many work to such low yields, and yet they'll often still bring a lamb to the vet, even if the fees are more than the lamb's life (or death) is worth. Food security should be made a top priority in this country. And, even tho the tax is only for farms over £1m, that's probably not much when you add it all up. I think every incentive should be given to young people who want to take up the mantle. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...