Burnley to sue Premier league

[tangerinedream]

Thats why I'm saying the problem with the premierships distribution of money ! The top 4 do fucking well out of finishing where they do .

Exactly - and to me, that is just as corrupt as the Tevez stuff. Maybe not quite as cloak and dagger but far more insidious and damaging to the game. Cos this is how the big teams wanted things to be and how it is. This fucking up of competition was deliberate.

 

[tangerinedream]

iirc Blackpool have one of the biggest supporters clubs in London/South East

We also had one year the best away support in the whole country as a percentage of our home gate. (according to 90 minutes* magazine!)

*it was a while back

 

[JTG]

We also had one year the best away support in the whole country as a percentage of our home gate. (according to 90 minutes* magazine!)

*it was a while back

yep, 'cos Pool had so many supporters down south who maybe couldn't get to Bloomfield Road every other week but could get to Fulham, Wycombe, Orient etc etc

Add this to a decent away following at Blackpool's innumerable north western opponents in them days (I remember years when we seemed to be going to Lancashire or Cheshire every fortnight) and you've got a decent following at every away game.

 

[JTG]

Exactly - and to me, that is just as corrupt as the Tevez stuff. Maybe not quite as cloak and dagger but far more insidious and damaging to the game. Cos this is how the big teams wanted things to be and how it is. This fucking up of competition was deliberate.

true. It wasn't like Manchester United, Arsenal and co woke up one day and said 'oh look, now we've got all the money to ourselves it looks like we can't possibly ever be relegated and are dead certs for Europe every year! bollocks, where did it all go wrong?'

 

[bigbry]

Oh fuck off and ring Alan Green or something.

It always gives me a warm glow when a potentially interesting discussion on U75 reaches these cerebral heights - it must have taken a lot of deep thinking to come up with that little nugget.

 

[JTG]

It always gives me a warm glow when a potentially interesting discussion on U75 reaches these cerebral heights - it must have taken a lot of deep thinking to come up with that little nugget.

there wasn't a tremendous amount of deep thinking in the post he was replying to to be honest

 

[tangerinedream]

It always gives me a warm glow when a potentially interesting discussion on U75 reaches these cerebral heights - it must have taken a lot of deep thinking to come up with that little nugget.

It did. I feel the depth of my response matched the deep thinking of the post to which I replied.

Thinking about this site, you must be glowing a lot. When a thread turns into a real 'bun fight' as I believe the term is, do you have to look away for fear of spontanious combustion?

 

[CyberRose]

Sorry? Small fanbase? Was it me or did we take 30,000+ to Wembley and similar three visits to the millenium? Did we used to regularly average 20,000+ in the 50's when we were were one of the best teams in the country? Does the Fylde Coast not have a population of nearly half a million? If Burnley can pull 10,000 + of a population of 90,000 then we can do much better with a fair wind and a decent team. And we havn't got Blackburn down the road either.

And what Termite Man says is absolutely correct. If you give everyone more money for 'the costs' - the costs will go up. So you might as well not give them any. Simple enough really.

Big deal anyone can sell out at Wembley or the Millennium Stadium. And in the 50s 20,000 was a crap attendance!

 

[tangerinedream]

Big deal anyone can sell out at Wembley or the Millennium Stadium. And in the 50s 20,000 was a crap attendance!

Er - no, not exactly - why is it we've alway taken far more fans than whoever we've played? I'd be interested to see your attendance after 29 yrs out of the top two divisions. Anyway, what's so great about Sheffield? Sean Bean and a few scissors, hardly the recipe for the greatest place on earth is it?

 

[CyberRose]

Er - no, not exactly - why is it we've alway taken far more fans than whoever we've played? I'd be interested to see your attendance after 29 yrs out of the top two divisions.

Because the teams you've played are even smaller than Blackpool? I'm not trying to be nasty or anything, but Blackpool is a small club with a small fan base (one off matches at Wembley don't count, it's whether you can sustain that level of fans throughout a season - look at Wigan etc, they can't and they're in the Premiership). My point is, if, as you suggest, all teams in the football league get the same amount, so that a club in the bottom league gets as much to spend as a club in the top flight, the smaller clubs won't be able to compete as their other sources of income will be much lower than the big clubs. The better players will play in the top league and they will command higher wages and cost more money - but you need them to survive. At the bottom, the players will be cheaper and on less money, hence a top flight club will need to spend more than a club in the bottom league and hence why the top teams should get a bigger slice of the cake (altho not as big as they do now)

 

[stupid kid]

My point is, if, as you suggest, all teams in the football league get the same amount, so that a club in the bottom league gets as much to spend as a club in the top flight, the smaller clubs won't be able to compete as their other sources of income will be much lower than the big clubs. The better players will play in the top league and they will command higher wages and cost more money - but you need them to survive. At the bottom, the players will be cheaper and on less money, hence a top flight club will need to spend more than a club in the bottom league and hence why the top teams should get a bigger slice of the cake (altho not as big as they do now)

And then what would happen is the top flight club which was spending shit loads of money would be forced to give up some of it's best players, and the clubs with lots of money left over would be able to pick them up, leading to a more open league and far fewer games being won before a ball is kicked.

Gosh wouldn't that be fucking terrible compared to the fun of knowing who the top 4 are going to be at the start of the season.

 

[tangerinedream]

Because the teams you've played are even smaller than Blackpool? I'm not trying to be nasty or anything, but Blackpool is a small club with a small fan base (one off matches at Wembley don't count, it's whether you can sustain that level of fans throughout a season - look at Wigan etc, they can't and they're in the Premiership). My point is, if, as you suggest, all teams in the football league get the same amount, so that a club in the bottom league gets as much to spend as a club in the top flight, the smaller clubs won't be able to compete as their other sources of income will be much lower than the big clubs. The better players will play in the top league and they will command higher wages and cost more money - but you need them to survive. At the bottom, the players will be cheaper and on less money, hence a top flight club will need to spend more than a club in the bottom league and hence why the top teams should get a bigger slice of the cake (altho not as big as they do now)

But we aren't a small club with a small fan base - You just think we are cos in your life, you have been bigger. We are much bigger than Wigan who you cite - much bigger. In the same division with comparable results we got about twice the fans. Last time we played wigan in (I think) 2002 we had as many fans at the JJB as they did - we were 15th or something and they were top. It's decades and decades of mediocrity and shit that have chizeled away the support. We dropped out of were we've just got back to right at the time the game was going through it's lowest ebb and the club nearly went to the wall - we've never even looked like going back up till now. No wonder our crowds dwindled.

You citing Wigan to compare with us is daft - you are comparing a millionaires plaything who compete with probably the biggest rugby team in the world to a side with little or no competition and one of the richest histories in the game. If Blackburn and Bolton can survive and prosper in the Prem and Preston and Burley thrive in the Championship, so can we. We are as big as any of them on a level playing field.

but that little rant aside. I do see your point. I think I am guilty of not considering the lifting of the maximum wage to be honest.

 

[JTG]

It's like lots of other sides - Hull for example or Swansea (spit). Teams who with a fair wind behind them and decent management etc could make a bit of headway.

Even we could if we weren't run by incompetent fools

 

[tangerinedream]

Exactly.

Mind you, we have only got two sides of a ground and and any game bigger than a youth team cup match causes a major ticketing chaos so I'm not overly looking forward to some of the fun and games this year trying to get into the ground.

 

[CyberRose]

We play Blackpool away on a Tuesday night

What are the odds of that?!

 

[aylee]

I think it's important not to get two issues mixed up: the distribution of money within the game as a whole, and the much narrower issue of the fairness of parachute payments.

I wouldn't dispute that the distribution of money between the Premiership and the Football League (and, for that matter, within the Premiership itself) is grossly unfair. However, a good argument can be made for saying that the existence of parachute payments actually prevents the distribution being more inequitable than it actually is. Take a team like Watford with a moderate-sized fanbase and a squad which is clearly only of Championship standard. They win promotion to the Premiership through the play-offs, punching above their weight largely thanks to a clever manager. They know they're going to struggle and that they might well go straight back down again, and they therefore have a dilemma: buy Premiership-standard players who will demand higher wages and long-term contracts which will put the club in financial jeopardy if relegation becomes a reality, or keep the same squad in the knowledge that it is highly unlikely to be capable of competing, but which won't endanger the club if it is relegated. Parachute payments go some way towards redressing the balance by giving a club some security even if it's relegated, giving it a bit of leeway to build a Premiership-standard squad and have some hope of survival.

 

[Sunray]

Oh fuck off and ring Alan Green or something.

Nope.

 

[tangerinedream]

Nope.

Fair enough. - Is Chris Kamara more your cup of tea?