Premier League owners ranked

Unsurprisingly, Man City's owner is ranked as the best:

https://talksport.com/football/393641/premier-league-owners-ranked/

Unsurprisingly, Man City's owner is ranked as the best:

 

https://talksport.com/football/393641/premier-league-owners-ranked/

Pointless c rap and no doubt you would not have put up the link if we were higher in the talksh ite rankings # clubbashing

Billy Hawkins, blokes a melt.

Seems about right

Seems a bit unfair on Ashley.

Anyway as if Gao had any say in any of those decisions, he is probably unaware who Mark Hughess was or is.

'Long term manager planning' just doesnt exist anymore in the top leagues.

So, looking at the criticisms.....

Lost their best player - this sort of "short term" reporting (I hate to use the word journalism) fails to address how we could keep him. Leave him in the stands until he readjusts his attitude? Is that what we should have done? Hold out for more than £70/75m? What?

Sacked a manager - one that he didn't appoint in the first place. The criticism should have been that unlike Palace who got shot of theirs after 5 games, we hung on far too long.

Keeping Huges reeks of desperation. This is curious. He had a poor season at Stoke last year, but left them 4 places higher than where they finished. He had a bad season and a half at QPR, but they were a complete and utter basket case (and maybe finishing 17th was actually quite a decent achievement). Apart from that, he has a pretty decent managerial record. I can't quite see why it is either desperation or short-termism. If short-termism is a criticism then save for Man City, Burnley and maybe Liverpool, who else escapes criticism?

But the key line to the whole bit about us is "rather than suggesting there is an in-depth plan for the club's future." That means that the author has no idea about the plans for the future and written a piece of ballocks based on his opinion. What would have been better and actually of interest, is if he had actually done some journalism and contacted the owners to find out what the plans were. But no, that would be like too much hard work.

A very poor opinion piece.

So, looking at the criticisms.....

 

Lost their best player - this sort of "short term" reporting (I hate to use the word journalism) fails to address how we could keep him. Leave him in the stands until he readjusts his attitude? Is that what we should have done? Hold out for more than £70/75m? What?

 

Sacked a manager - one that he didn't appoint in the first place. The criticism should have been that unlike Palace who got shot of theirs after 5 games, we hung on far too long.

 

Keeping Huges reeks of desperation. This is curious. He had a poor season at Stoke last year, but left them 4 places higher than where they finished. He had a bad season and a half at QPR, but they were a complete and utter basket case (and maybe finishing 17th was actually quite a decent achievement). Apart from that, he has a pretty decent managerial record. I can't quite see why it is either desperation or short-termism. If short-termism is a criticism then save for Man City, Burnley and maybe Liverpool, who else escapes criticism?

 

But the key line to the whole bit about us is "rather than suggesting there is an in-depth plan for the club's future." That means that the author has no idea about the plans for the future and written a piece of ballocks based on his opinion. What would have been better and actually of interest, is if he had actually done some journalism and contacted the owners to find out what the plans were. But no, that would be like too much hard work.

 

A very poor opinion piece.

Agreed. Besides, there are too many variables and unknown factors to allow for a meaningful comparison. It's just space-filler.

So, looking at the criticisms.....

 

Lost their best player - this sort of "short term" reporting (I hate to use the word journalism) fails to address how we could keep him. Leave him in the stands until he readjusts his attitude? Is that what we should have done? Hold out for more than £70/75m? What?

 

Sacked a manager - one that he didn't appoint in the first place. The criticism should have been that unlike Palace who got shot of theirs after 5 games, we hung on far too long.

 

Keeping Huges reeks of desperation. This is curious. He had a poor season at Stoke last year, but left them 4 places higher than where they finished. He had a bad season and a half at QPR, but they were a complete and utter basket case (and maybe finishing 17th was actually quite a decent achievement). Apart from that, he has a pretty decent managerial record. I can't quite see why it is either desperation or short-termism. If short-termism is a criticism then save for Man City, Burnley and maybe Liverpool, who else escapes criticism?

 

But the key line to the whole bit about us is "rather than suggesting there is an in-depth plan for the club's future." That means that the author has no idea about the plans for the future and written a piece of ballocks based on his opinion. What would have been better and actually of interest, is if he had actually done some journalism and contacted the owners to find out what the plans were. But no, that would be like too much hard work.

 

A very poor opinion piece.

Spot on!

I was gonna check it out but saw it was a talk sport link.

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

Talksh1te being melts again. Although I don't feel Gao has given the fans any confidence about future plans for the club, those point are utter tosh.

Can someone post the list here?

A nonsense pre season article.