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

    • Girls In Your City - No Selfie - Anonymous Casual Dating https://SecreLocal.com [url=https://SecreLocal.com] Girls In Your City [/url] - Anonymous Casual Dating - No Selfie New Girls [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/molly-15.html]Molly[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/cheryl-blossom-48.html]Cheryl Blossom[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/carola-conymegan-116.html]Carola Conymegan[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/pupa-41.html]Pupa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/mia-candy-43.html]Mia Candy[/url]
    • This is a remarkable interpretation of history. Wikipedia (with more footnotes and citations than you could shake a shitty stick at sez: The austerity programme was initiated in 2010 by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government. In his June 2010 budget speech, Osborne identified two goals. The first was that the structural current budget deficit would be eliminated to "achieve [a] cyclically-adjusted current balance by the end of the rolling, five-year forecast period". The second was that national debt as a percentage of GDP would fall. The government intended to achieve both of its goals through substantial reductions in public expenditure.[21] This was to be achieved by a combination of public spending cuts and tax increases amounting to £110 billion.[26] Between 2010 and 2013, the Coalition government said that it had reduced public spending by £14.3 billion compared with 2009–10.[27] Growth remained low, while unemployment rose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_government_austerity_programme From memory, last time around they were against the LTNs and competing with the Tories to pick up backlash votes - both failed. They had no counterproposals or ideas about how to manage congestion or pollution. This time around they're simply silent on the matter: https://www.southwark-libdems.org.uk/your-local-lib-dem-team/goosegreen Also, as we have seen from Mr Barber's comments on the new development on the old Jewsons yard, "leading campaigns to protect the character of East Dulwich and Goose Green" is code for "blocking new housing".
    • @Insuflo NO, please no, please don't encourage him to post more often! 😒
    • Revealing of what, exactly? I resurrected this thread, after a year, to highlight the foolishness of the OP’s op. And how posturing would be sagacity is quickly undermined by events, dear boy, events. The thread is about Mandelson. I knew he was a wrong ‘un all along, we all did; the Epstein shit just proves it. In reality, Kinnock, Blair, Brown, Starmer et all knew as well but accepted it, because they found him useful. As did a large proportion of the 2024 intake of Labour MPs who were personally vetted and approved by Mandelson.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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