Martin Samuels condemns Saints

Horror of horrors. Martin Samuels believes Saints will be forced to sell due to the fair play regulations. Not nice reading

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2609004/MARTIN-SAMUEL-Why-Southampton-sign-stars-like-Christian-Benteke-Robin-van-Persie-John-Terry-instead-sell-sell-sell.html

He's not really saying that's his opinion of football, but how UEFA's fair play laws are going to make sure football stays.

This quote is pertinent and correct:

"Yet suppose Southampton wanted to take advantage of this ‘Class of 92’ windfall? Suppose owner Katharina Liebherr was minded, or persuaded, that her football club were on the cusp of something unique. That, by keeping the young players, keeping the good older players and adding a layer of expensively acquired talent on top, Southampton could have a proper tilt at muscling their way into the top four.

Then a man in a suit from UEFA would say no. Southampton would be spending beyond their given para-meters and that isn’t financially fair, apparently.

UEFA have no problem with Southampton being plundered by the elite. Yet if a very rich woman wanted to use her money to further her club, and make the most of their resources, that would not be allowed."

He hasn't condemned Saints at all. He is positive about Saints.

He has condemned UEFA's rule.

What he says about Saints is pretty accurate apart from the signals from our Board are that we wouldnt be looking to spend massively anyway.

What he said about Shaw and Chambers is sadly true. Most likely in two years neither will be at the club which is a massive shame.

We produce excellent young players, keep them whilst they learn their trade then sell them for the bigger clubs to benefit from their talents. Sad but true.

And so far we havent even got much money for them.

You've got to worry for a guy who thinks we would sign John Terry if it weren't for Financial Fair Play regulations.

There are plenty of loopholes which any team can legitimately exploit. Therefore, unsurprisingly, Samuel has written another poorly researched article, which is factually incorrect:-(

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/financial-fair-play-policy-unfair-on-smaller-clubs-claim-chairmen-of-chelsea-and-southampton-8872161.html

It was as if “we had a broken finger and we cut off the arm,” said Bruce Buck, Chelsea's chairman. Nicola Cortese, his counterpart at Saints, added: “It is wrong to call it 'financial fair play', it is financial regulation. Though we are a club that believes a lot of things are possible to close the gap in commercial income with a club like Manchester United will be virtually impossible."

Under Cortese, Southampton have gone from bottom of League One to the upper echelons of the Premier League, a process made much easier by access to the fortune of the late Markus Liebherr. Taking the next step however, will be more difficult as they will no longer be able to significantly outspend as they speculate to accumulate.

“We have got to not feel disadvantaged,” said Cortese, “we will grow our commercial income but if we cannot close the gap commercially, which will probably be the case for all time, we have to use other aspects [such as youth development].”

He added: “We fought against the [Premier League] salary cap. We think it can lead to a situation where we make profits but cannot use those profits to retain a player on a higher salary as we are capped quite low.”

Samuels has a massive chip about Saints. I'm trying to work out what he's up to here!

Samuels has a massive chip about Saints. I'm trying to work out what he's up to here!

Did Cortese have a massive chip about Saints when he was interviewed by the Independent last year?

Its a good article, which hits the nail on the head regarding FFP. He's not saying Saints would sign John Terry or condemning saints. What he's doing is pointing out the clear impications of the rules.

The problem with FFP is you are not starting from a level playing field. Clubs like Man C and Chelsea have become elite clubs by over spending in the past, but other clubs are now denied that option. Prior to FFP if the Chinese wanted to buy into saints and add 4 world class players to our youngsters , they could. Once you qualify for champions league season in season out, you're always going to be able to outspend other clubs that dont. In the past you could bridge the gap with owners deep pockets, now you can't. The whole thing stinks.

I would have thought that Man City have the biggest fears as unlike Man U, Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal, possibly even Spurs they are not a global brand they are only really poking their heads out of the Man U shadow thanks to having had obscene amounts of money pumped into them, they are the highest paid sports team in the world, yet posted eye watering losses recently. You very rarely see Man City shirts or even car stickers around the place, their overall income must be a fraction of those other 4-5 teams despite CL participation.

I am probably missing the point or just being dense but surely they are prime targets to get stung by FFP.

I think it all rather depends on what happens with Manchester City later this week, when UEFA report on their spending. If they get slammed (esp when ridiculous sponsorship deals are excluded), then the whole situation changes, and even the likes of Man Utd might be pushed to balance the books if spending £200m.

But let's not be naive about things. There has been thoughts about a breakaway European super league for decades, with the top 14 clubs playing each other. There was never any mention of relegation/promotion so those "elite" clubs would be by themselves for ever and a day in a closed shop. This cabal hasn't gone away although obviously this has never come to fruition, although the financial rewards of the CL go some way to keep the "elite" elite. These clubs seemingly only see the PL as a way to the CL, and therefore CL in their eyes is so much more important. I find it interesting to see in the media that so many commentators think it so important that England has a strong league and clubs that can compete in the CL. That to me is all wrong. While I might be in a minority, to me it is important to have an open and competitive PL with the CL being of secondary importance. We don't have that, and I suspect never will. The PL likes to sell itself around the world, and desires that the top 6 are filled with the same teams year in year out (obviously this year being a little different). I am not sure that they could really sell a PL title decider in Thailand if it was involving us and say Swansea.

There is a risk of us older supporters (and I'm only early 40s) becoming so disenchanted with football and the uneven playing field favouring the big clubs, that we will just walk away from it all. I know quite a few who used to be season ticket holders and/or regular visitors, who have lost the passion, or had it ruined for them.

But back to Samuel's article. While he might have picked us out, he could well have picked every other team in the PL apart from the obvious usual top 6. It could have been Everton or Newcastle. He mentions that Wet Spam could have been something big but won't now. Basically the PL is pretty boring and the most interesting thing, and what I take more notice of, is who is going to be relegated. The top is the top - predictable, staid which leads it to being boring. Maybe for the newcomers who cannot remember the days pre-PL it is fun and exciting, but me, it is actually a pretty boring competition. The press know it as well, hence why they seem to be saying that all neutrals want Liverpool to win it (which isn't true as I don't want them to win it, but I guess it will be different).

But let's not be naive about things. There has been thoughts about a breakaway European super league for decades, with the top 14 clubs playing each other. There was never any mention of relegation/promotion so those "elite" clubs would be by themselves for ever and a day in a closed shop. This cabal hasn't gone away although obviously this has never come to fruition, although the financial rewards of the CL go some way to keep the "elite" elite. These clubs seemingly only see the PL as a way to the CL, and therefore CL in their eyes is so much more important. I find it interesting to see in the media that so many commentators think it so important that England has a strong league and clubs that can compete in the CL. That to me is all wrong. While I might be in a minority, to me it is important to have an open and competitive PL with the CL being of secondary importance. We don't have that, and I suspect never will. The PL likes to sell itself around the world, and desires that the top 6 are filled with the same teams year in year out (obviously this year being a little different). I am not sure that they could really sell a PL title decider in Thailand if it was involving us and say Swansea.

 

There is a risk of us older supporters (and I'm only early 40s) becoming so disenchanted with football and the uneven playing field favouring the big clubs, that we will just walk away from it all. I know quite a few who used to be season ticket holders and/or regular visitors, who have lost the passion, or had it ruined for them.

 

But back to Samuel's article. While he might have picked us out, he could well have picked every other team in the PL apart from the obvious usual top 6. It could have been Everton or Newcastle. He mentions that Wet Spam could have been something big but won't now. Basically the PL is pretty boring and the most interesting thing, and what I take more notice of, is who is going to be relegated. The top is the top - predictable, staid which leads it to being boring. Maybe for the newcomers who cannot remember the days pre-PL it is fun and exciting, but me, it is actually a pretty boring competition. The press know it as well, hence why they seem to be saying that all neutrals want Liverpool to win it (which isn't true as I don't want them to win it, but I guess it will be different).

There's a hell of a lot in your post i agree with - and remember with a fond heart - but sadly i think the game is basically dead for our generation and what comes next is something closer to American sports, or (even worse) a sports/entertainment model that focuses as much on the drama and hype as it does on simple things like going with your mates, pride in your city, a good pi.ss up and a laugh.

I'm in my mid 30s and agree with you completely about people leaving the game btw. When i started going in the mid 80s there was a large group of us that all queued to get into the milton together and now that number has been dwindled down to a handful. Obviously price rises play a part but many still do away games (for the **** up as much as anything) but i'd say the biggest thing is that we're just getting seriously disillusioned with the game now.

There's a hell of a lot in your post i agree with - and remember with a fond heart - but sadly i think the game is basically dead for our generation and what comes next is something closer to American sports, or (even worse) a sports/entertainment model that focuses as much on the drama and hype as it does on simple things like going with your mates, pride in your city, a good pi.ss up and a laugh.

 

I'm in my mid 30s and agree with you completely about people leaving the game btw. When i started going in the mid 80s there was a large group of us that all queued to get into the milton together and now that number has been dwindled down to a handful. Obviously price rises play a part but many still do away games (for the **** up as much as anything) but i'd say the biggest thing is that we're just getting seriously disillusioned with the game now.

You obviously know f**k all about American sports - if anything, there's much we can learn from them about creating more level playing fields.

Amazing that some think that is article backing an agenda against Saints. F me how gushing and fawning do you need journalists to be?

Valid concerns against FFP that will allow big clubs to remain stronger. Many others have said the same.

I been saying this for how long?

There's a hell of a lot in your post i agree with - and remember with a fond heart - but sadly i think the game is basically dead for our generation and what comes next is something closer to American sports, or (even worse) a sports/entertainment model that focuses as much on the drama and hype as it does on simple things like going with your mates, pride in your city, a good pi.ss up and a laugh.

 

I'm in my mid 30s and agree with you completely about people leaving the game btw. When i started going in the mid 80s there was a large group of us that all queued to get into the milton together and now that number has been dwindled down to a handful. Obviously price rises play a part but many still do away games (for the **** up as much as anything) but i'd say the biggest thing is that we're just getting seriously disillusioned with the game now.

I am, I think its ****e in many ways but we could learn an awful lot from those across the pond about FFP and regulation, wage caps, drafts and teams salary caps are the way to go to make it fairer, the larger clubs will always be larger than us an we need to accept that (the clappers are eventually coming round to the prospect of us and our actual size and not the one we all want the club to be but will never happen) but it could be an awful lot fairer, an actual incentive to play and keep youth talent would be a start, as it stands we are simply a nursery that gets reimbursed to do the same and function, rinse and repeat which is depressing as what do we actaully get out of it? In real terms nothing at all other than a pat on the back from the press and the larger clubs who buy from us but the small man does the labour and gets a few coin, thats not right or fair.

We also need a transparent system where we can see how much the clubs actually earns and then a % of that can only go on players and wages combined, not this ****e they have now whereby it can be worked around, a system that actually works.

More and more people are turning away from the Premiership and I for one am happy that they are questioning such a plastic "product" which only in real terms is there for teams to qualify for Europe (large cartel clubs) and the dogged relegation games at the end, the atmosphere is crap and I include Anfield this season bar a few games who the media absolutely love for their old school cauldron ********.

The quality is suffering as other cartel clubs spring up in Europe and Leagues remerged which is fine by me, this is the weakest standard I can remember for at least 15 years so we now say it may not be the best but its the most exciting.

We are being played by Scudamore and Murdoch etc etc.

Whilst those who sit and play FIFA 14 and dream of Katarina's millions going to buy in more top talent, they may have reckoned without the Finacial Fair Play ruling that Footballing authorities dreamed up a year or two ago.

Presumably aimed at trying to curb the spending sprees that caused clubs like Leeds and Pompey to amount enormous debts... and then fail to deliver ......it demands a balance between income and salaries and the amounts that clubs can spend on transfer fees. The fact that the £22 million we must pay in backdated transfer payments that are due in the summer..it's not simply a case of Katarina Liebherr writing out another cheque..... (OK ..making a bank transfer, then ) .....in order to solve the problem. That would be against the new rules that favour those clubs who deal in big finances.

Not such a big problem for clubs with a huge valuation..(and even huge debts)....like Chelsea, Man.City and Man.U whereas they can be allowed to spend tens of millions on new players, Saints would not be permitted to do so ....without creating income from selling players first......which as many headlines suggest is a step we must consider.

Saints must sell player(s) during the summer in order to satisfy the rather twisted (and some will say UNFAIR) rules that are now in place.

It may be a real challenge for the Saints Board to find away to resolve the situation without being forced to sell off some of our best players.

The quality is suffering as other cartel clubs spring up in Europe and Leagues remerged which is fine by me, this is the weakest standard I can remember for at least 15 years so we now say it may not be the best but its the most exciting.

 

We are being played by Scudamore and Murdoch etc etc.

This season has been exciting. I hate the marketing around the PL but undeniably the healthiest where a team that was 7th last season with a core of English talent are going to out perform the oligarch and sheik playthings.

Plus 11 teams in relegation battle for most of season does make the league healthy added to the fact the promoted sides have done well.

No other top European league can experience that. I am not a PL fanboy but is undeniable this season

Mods, change the thread title, for God's sake.

Not a single word of that article "condemns" Saints for anything, with the entire piece positive about Saints.

We now seem to have got to a situation where forum dinlows are wailing about how the media hate us on the back of any article about us before they've even read it.

And the fact it has happened this season when the media had been fawning over us more than at any time in our history, makes the situation even more mental.

For the love of god.

It would not be an issue if we bought well as if the players performed we could have sold them on for profit but could we do on many of our players?

Forren

Mayuka

Written off in effect, Ramirez and Osvaldo? Wanyama even? We sell our high priced assets and keep these? Is this a conspiracy from within?

This season has been exciting. I hate the marketing around the PL but undeniably the healthiest where a team that was 7th last season with a core of English talent are going to out perform the oligarch and sheik playthings.

 

Plus 11 teams in relegation battle for most of season does make the league healthy added to the fact the promoted sides have done well.

 

No other top European league can experience that. I am not a PL fanboy but is undeniable this season

The entertainment is up because the League is weaker, if you refer to Liverpool then its a media smokescreen, their spending in the pursuit of the Premier League totals over (well over) half a Billion pounds since its inception, the media love them and forget Suarez and his filth, their huge wage bill.

Its such a false model of how to do things, more tv money is given and in turn slaries and transfers go up not in anyway benefitting the club or their fans, gate receipts count for nothing now and the clubs could let the fans in for free, such is the marketing.

Its not our game, they are not even our teams, its alien nowadays and people love the charade as they have a plastic stadium and have an extra camera view of a ****e overplayed player from afar.

Sorry not really getting your point? Who are you expecting to win the league? If you strip back from all the hype it is healthy completion that maintains interest. It has that this season.

Using figures since PL inception is not the point either. If ever there was a season where the title hasn't been 'bought' then this is it and no one realistically thought Liverpool,could compete for title this year so is not a smokescreen at all.

Sorry not really getting your point? Who are you expecting to win the league? If you strip back from all the hype it is healthy completion that maintains interest. It has that this season.

Using figures since PL inception is not the point either. If ever there was a season where the title hasn't been 'bought' then this is it and no one realistically thought Liverpool,could compete for title this year so is not a smokescreen at all.

How much has Liverpools current side cost the club?

Their wage bill?

They had exceding expectations of course as their aim was top 4, with the best striker in the World currently they always had a chance, dont believe all the media.

Healthy competition? Whats healthy about the premiership? A model of unsustainable crap, the clubs love it though as its money for nothing, as long as they stay in the Premiership that is all (what is the point of that?) then they realise how they have become dependent on it and not independent in anyway at all.

I will add Liverpool spent £48 Million last transfer window strengthening their side, forget net spend yet another smokescreen thrown about, its what you spend.

For us net is a bit more relevant as we have to sell to buy and always will, a club like Liverpool have won little for a club their size for years and have been silently bankrolled, dont be fooled by the media.

Why do you keep on with 'don't be fooled by the media' line? I am not fooled. You just sound like someone railing against the PL and longing for the past.

My observation is that PL is more competitive and entertaining this season. You think that because I have this view Scudamore and Murdoch have brainwashed me.

I know a Liverpool have spent huge sums in the past but the team Rodgers has built seems more reflective of coaching and tactical nous not an assemble of superstars. The fact that they are going to score 100+ goals also adds to the entertainment.

I will add Liverpool spent £48 Million last transfer window strengthening their side, forget net spend yet another smokescreen thrown about, its what you spend.

For us net is a bit more relevant as we have to sell to buy and always will, a club like Liverpool have won little for a club their size for years and have been silently bankrolled, dont be fooled by the media.

Can you tell me where the £48 million was spent in January?

Can you tell me where the £48 million was spent in January?

In the last summer transfer window, dont be soft.

Given our commercial revenue is so pitiful then any increase in that gives us a lot of flexibility to increase the wage bill so we should be ok?

Title is wrong. Don't usually like Samuels as he dislikes Saints, but it is a good article. However, the FFP regulations aren't THAT bad. It promotes sensible spending within a financial model. Yes, we won't be allowed to spend 100m to try to upset the elite, but we know we won't be doing that anyway. And as City have shown with their insane sponsorship deals, there are ways around it if Katherina wanted to invest large amounts.

Title is wrong. Don't usually like Samuels as he dislikes Saints, but it is a good article. However, the FFP regulations aren't THAT bad. It promotes sensible spending within a financial model. Yes, we won't be allowed to spend 100m to try to upset the elite, but we know we won't be doing that anyway. And as City have shown with their insane sponsorship deals, there are ways around it if Katherina wanted to invest large amounts.

And I believe I have said many times it wont simply happen, it matters not that her company have billions, many owners of fooball clubs can make that claim, we are not loaded and never have been, money was spent to do a job and it worked but to reach the next level takes 100's of millions over a long period of time, there has never been any indication that this would happen or any real explantion of hos the Champions League place would be acheived without it being laughable.

And I believe I have said many times it wont simply happen, it matters not that her company have billions, many owners of fooball clubs can make that claim, we are not loaded and never have been, money was spent to do a job and it worked but to reach the next level takes 100's of millions over a long period of time, there has never been any indication that this would happen or any real explantion of hos the Champions League place would be acheived without it being laughable.

If you have said it I don't remember it, but that's mostly cos you post so much crap it's hard to weed out the sensible well thought out posts.

I don't think anyone thought we were going to spend 100's of millions anyway? Bit like continually saying 'we won't sign Messi'. No-one thinks we will.

In addition, it doesn't take 100's of millions to get to the Champions League, Everton have nearly done it and they haven't spent anywhere near that.

Mods, change the thread title, for God's sake.

 

Not a single word of that article "condemns" Saints for anything, with the entire piece positive about Saints.

 

We now seem to have got to a situation where forum dinlows are wailing about how the media hate us on the back of any article about us before they've even read it.

 

And the fact it has happened this season when the media had been fawning over us more than at any time in our history, makes the situation even more mental.

 

For the love of god.

2nd definition

http://www.google.com/m?hl=en-GB&ie=UTF-8&q=condemn

I think it all rather depends on what happens with Manchester City later this week, when UEFA report on their spending. If they get slammed (esp when ridiculous sponsorship deals are excluded), then the whole situation changes, and even the likes of Man Utd might be pushed to balance the books if spending £200m.

 

But let's not be naive about things. There has been thoughts about a breakaway European super league for decades, with the top 14 clubs playing each other. There was never any mention of relegation/promotion so those "elite" clubs would be by themselves for ever and a day in a closed shop. This cabal hasn't gone away although obviously this has never come to fruition, although the financial rewards of the CL go some way to keep the "elite" elite. These clubs seemingly only see the PL as a way to the CL, and therefore CL in their eyes is so much more important. I find it interesting to see in the media that so many commentators think it so important that England has a strong league and clubs that can compete in the CL. That to me is all wrong. While I might be in a minority, to me it is important to have an open and competitive PL with the CL being of secondary importance. We don't have that, and I suspect never will. The PL likes to sell itself around the world, and desires that the top 6 are filled with the same teams year in year out (obviously this year being a little different). I am not sure that they could really sell a PL title decider in Thailand if it was involving us and say Swansea.

 

There is a risk of us older supporters (and I'm only early 40s) becoming so disenchanted with football and the uneven playing field favouring the big clubs, that we will just walk away from it all. I know quite a few who used to be season ticket holders and/or regular visitors, who have lost the passion, or had it ruined for them.

 

But back to Samuel's article. While he might have picked us out, he could well have picked every other team in the PL apart from the obvious usual top 6. It could have been Everton or Newcastle. He mentions that Wet Spam could have been something big but won't now. Basically the PL is pretty boring and the most interesting thing, and what I take more notice of, is who is going to be relegated. The top is the top - predictable, staid which leads it to being boring. Maybe for the newcomers who cannot remember the days pre-PL it is fun and exciting, but me, it is actually a pretty boring competition. The press know it as well, hence why they seem to be saying that all neutrals want Liverpool to win it (which isn't true as I don't want them to win it, but I guess it will be different).

Pretty much spot on and is why I think we have now peaked under a glass ceiling. The Premiership is increasingly being devalued for the far eastern market. The rich are getting richer and football in this country has lost its way. It has been great being a Saints fan this season, bucking the trend with home grown players playing decent football but ultimately we are nothing more than a feeder club to dodgy oligarchs and dubious oil wealth conglomorates. How depressing is that?

I don't think anyone thought we were going to spend 100's of millions anyway? Bit like continually saying 'we won't sign Messi'. No-one thinks we will.

I am sure I could trawl up from October time some delusional arrogant posts about how Liverpool were a spent force, our midfield is superb and how we could seriously challenge for a European place.

It was never going to happen and the people who thought it would dont know this club and the actual size of clubs they were facing to do such a thing, it was and will laways be absolute ********, unfair as we cant achieve it yes but never the less a bull**** dream.

We are not bankrolled anywhere near the level required to even challenge for one season without European football for the upper echelons consistently, do these newer fans actually understand football and how it works and for most part always worked.

Hes a poor journalist at a poor excuse for a news outlet, oh hang on this is positive on Saints?

Hes a good journo and its a bloody good article.

Oh hang on... Hes anti Saints, no not this time, yes he is, no, yes, no, yes, lying, good, useless, great, no, yes

Ahhhhhhhhhhhh

Pretty much spot on and is why I think we have now peaked under a glass ceiling. The Premiership is increasingly being devalued for the far eastern market. The rich are getting richer and football in this country has lost its way. It has been great being a Saints fan this season, bucking the trend with home grown players playing decent football but ultimately we are nothing more than a feeder club to dodgy oligarchs and dubious oil wealth conglomorates. How depressing is that?

For saying such truthful things as that (I have since being on here) you will become an outcast, be safe in the knowledge though you are correct and have your eyes wide open.

Whilst those who sit and play FIFA 14 and dream of Katarina's millions going to buy in more top talent, they may have reckoned without the Finacial Fair Play ruling that Footballing authorities dreamed up a year or two ago.

 

Presumably aimed at trying to curb the spending sprees that caused clubs like Leeds and Pompey to amount enormous debts... and then fail to deliver ......it demands a balance between income and salaries and the amounts that clubs can spend on transfer fees. The fact that the £22 million we must pay in backdated transfer payments that are due in the summer..it's not simply a case of Katarina Liebherr writing out another cheque..... (OK ..making a bank transfer, then ) .....in order to solve the problem. That would be against the new rules that favour those clubs who deal in big finances.

 

Not such a big problem for clubs with a huge valuation..(and even huge debts)....like Chelsea, Man.City and Man.U whereas they can be allowed to spend tens of millions on new players, Saints would not be permitted to do so ....without creating income from selling players first......which as many headlines suggest is a step we must consider.

 

Saints must sell player(s) during the summer in order to satisfy the rather twisted (and some will say UNFAIR) rules that are now in place.

 

It may be a real challenge for the Saints Board to find away to resolve the situation without being forced to sell off some of our best players.

Hes a poor journalist at a poor excuse for a news outlet, oh hang on this is positive on Saints?

 

Hes a good journo and its a bloody good article.

 

Oh hang on... Hes anti Saints, no not this time, yes he is, no, yes, no, yes, lying, good, useless, great, no, yes

 

Ahhhhhhhhhhhh

I supposed after all this time Glasgow its pleasing to see people coming around.

I am sure I could trawl up from October time some delusional arrogant posts about how Liverpool were a spent force, our midfield is superb and how we could seriously challenge for a European place.

 

It was never going to happen and the people who thought it would dont know this club and the actual size of clubs they were facing to do such a thing, it was and will laways be absolute ********, unfair as we cant achieve it yes but never the less a bull**** dream.

 

We are not bankrolled anywhere near the level required to even challenge for one season without European football for the upper echelons consistently, do these newer fans actually understand football and how it works and for most part always worked.

But that's different, that's people thinking we are better than we are, not that we're going to spend 100's of millions.

Hes a poor journalist at a poor excuse for a news outlet, oh hang on this is positive on Saints?

 

Hes a good journo and its a bloody good article.

 

Oh hang on... Hes anti Saints, no not this time, yes he is, no, yes, no, yes, lying, good, useless, great, no, yes

 

Ahhhhhhhhhhhh

People have different opinions on Samuels shocker.

This works both ways Liverpool will be in trouble they cant really sign the 3-4 players they need to help there squad be good enough to compete in CL Prem and other cups, Everton will be in Europe and there need to replace there 2 attacking loan stars or buy them, which wont be cheap.

Should we keep our current squad and add some free agents loans and maybe 2 major signings one being a winger and another being a CB, costing 8-10 mill each, i can not see why we cant compete with the top 6 and have a good cup run maybe a semi final.

They club will make loads more money this season should they make the kit slightly cheaper as well 45 is more then enough 50 is a joke, with the 10% off for ST holders it makes the shirt slightly more affordable.

Its just a shame ST prices rose again ok not loads but enough making me consider can i really afford it along with the match day cost of travel and food.

But that's different, that's people thinking we are better than we are, not that we're going to spend 100's of millions.

All delusions never the less.

2nd definition

 

http://www.google.com/m?hl=en-GB&ie=UTF-8&q=condemn

Thought someone would try that. Doesn't fit that definition either does it, especially as the article is a pretty vague argument about the financial fair play rules.

Condemn in either use is a pretty definitive verb, and used in isolation as here - "Samuel condemns Saints" - makes the second definition redundant. If the thread was titled "Saints condemned to sell offs by FFP rules" you might have a point.

But would still have been an appalling word choice as the article is about maybe we might have to sell or maybe we won't buy John Terry.

Of course, we aren't "forced" to sell because of the FPP regulations. We will only have to sell players who wish to leave for the top few clubs either in England or Europe, because we have been offered stupid amounts of money for them. So Samuels concludes that we are a selling club and always will be. Just as the top clubs have had to sell players that they wished to keep too. And he must be short of a few brain cells to even mention Terry as the sort of player we might wish to buy.

Thought someone would try that. Doesn't fit that definition either does it, especially as the article is a pretty vague argument about the financial fair play rules.

 

Condemn in either use is a pretty definitive verb, and used in isolation as here - "Samuel condemns Saints" - makes the second definition redundant. If the thread was titled "Saints condemned to sell offs by FFP rules" you might have a point. But would still have been an appalling word choice.

It does, to a point. Your comment was in the context that Samuels condemns us as in he is critical which he isn't.

The article (which I think is not innacurate BTW) suggests that, owing to the fair play rules, we are condemned to our current position and would be unable to spend our way to the next level if funds were available.

ART, like Samuels, isn't wrong.

I guess we should be grateful that we aren't like Spain where clubs negotiate their own TV deals. There, we all know how unbalanced the league is, with Barca/Real so far ahead of everyone else, with the occasional interloper. I can see that happening one day here, and that then will be that. But as it is, TV revenue is fair so long as your team is televised. We are hardly ever on, when the top 6 are on every week. That of course is more natural, but it is taken to extremis. I am not sure Stoke v West Ham is that enticing, but even so, Sky/BT coverage holds little interest for me. Maybe I old fashioned, but I have little interest in watching other clubs playing if it doesn't involve Saints.

I don't want Liverpool to win, because I would prefer the established order to be maintained just to highlight the imbalance of it all. When we were 3rd, a lot of people were saying it would be good to see another club like us be in the mix. Everyone knows it is a busted competition, but few voice it as they are blinded by the money. I believe Mick Channon never earned more than £750 a week. Compare that to today.

But all is not lost. FFP may mean no big money signings, but there are plenty of good players available. Lovren is an example, and I imagine his value might have doubled. There are others on Bosmans and at the end of contracts. Clubs in CL can only have a certain size squad. As it is, I don't want Saints to go out and sign £30m players. I never wanted Osvaldo, but would have preferred another JRod. It might not mean success but at least it would be more honest (although this may well not make much sense).

For saying such truthful things as that (I have since being on here) you will become an outcast, be safe in the knowledge though you are correct and have your eyes wide open.

He expressed an opinion and even qualified it by the caveat "I think". You happen to agree with him, but just because the two of you think along the same lines, doesn't make him correct, does it?

The Martin Samuels article made a lot of assertions but never really explained why Saints must sell our best players. I think the thrust was probably sympathetic but it was so badly written it was difficult to judge whether its central point was valid. I don't think anybody believes that Man City sustain themselves purely on matchday and replica kit income so I'm not sure why we'd be hit if our owners decided not to cash in on Shaw and Lallana.

It does, to a point. Your comment was in the context that Samuels condemns us as in he is critical which he isn't.

 

The article (which I think is not innacurate BTW) suggests that, owing to the fair play rules, we are condemned to our current position and would be unable to spend our way to the next level if funds were available.

 

ART, like Samuels, isn't wrong.

If you think that is something you can be actually be "condemned" to, then fine.

Appalling word choice, I'd say.

By the way, I have just had my breakfast and was condemned to having Lemon Curd on my toast as we'd run out of marmalade.

A lot is going to depend on the shirt sponsor next season, we have probably the worst shirt sponsorship deal in the PL at the moment, but have a chance to increase that significantly now the aap3 is due to finish. Ralph and his team have to step up to the plate and get a decent deal, I think a £200m deal with Leibherr construction would be a great sponsorship deal over 3 years ?