Cynical fouls...

[DubaiSpur]

All the same reasons why I support the same club. With regards to accumulating cash and having large profits year on year, I can honestly say from reading the accounts that this is not what we are doing. Yes last year showed a large profit, but all of this profit (and then some) has been ploughed back into the stadium. You can see this from the assets under construction. The anomalies of accounting will mean that these don't appear on our profit or loss until they are complete and then they will be depreciated over the life of that asset. Believe me, I would not be happy if I felt that the owners of the club were hoarding cash and not reinvesting. This is why I am content bubbling around 5th or 6th, because this is as good as we are going to get until we can financially compete with the big boys. Then we will see some epic signings, and see us really challenge.

Perhaps, but we've also made a 56 million pound profit in transfers over the last five years. That's possibly been ploughed into the stadium as well...but our chairman promised us that wouldn't happen, and that the transfer funds (whatever funds were available, anyway) would be ring-fenced from the stadium development.

It isn't the greatest sin in the world, but I'd like the more determined supporters of our chairman on the forum to at least admit that he does lie or otherwise misinform the fans occasionally on matters like this. Clearly we've been funding our stadium in part through our transfers, when it should (if the plan had been followed) have been funded by the naming rights deal, loans and 'outside investors' (the chairman's words here).

 

[Gazzasrightboot]

Perhaps, but we've also made a 56 million pound profit in transfers over the last five years. That's possibly been ploughed into the stadium as well...but our chairman promised us that wouldn't happen, and that the transfer funds (whatever funds were available, anyway) would be ring-fenced from the stadium development.

It isn't the greatest sin in the world, but I'd like the more determined supporters of our chairman on the forum to at least admit that he does lie or otherwise misinform the fans occasionally on matters like this. Clearly we've been funding our stadium in part through our transfers, when it should (if the plan had been followed) have been funded by the naming rights deal, loans and 'outside investors' (the chairman's words here).

My take on his pledge was that we wouldn't let it affect our position in the league and from improving the team, hence why the majority of Bale's transfer fee was reinvested in players. We are going off topic, so I will keep it brief, but a look at our cash flow would be a better indicator of where we are spending our money rather than profit. We've largely been breaking even here i.e. spending as much as we are getting in. Spending more would require borrowing money.

I don't think that it is right for us to ask people that own a club to spend more of their own money to improve the club. It's their money, they can do with it as they please. They've made considerable investment in our club to the tune of hundreds of millions. They're not asset stripping us, and their only exit strategy imho is to sell the club for more than they bought it for. They're not taking dividends, and not creaming us. What we're making, we are keeping and that is very different to the Glazers and the other American investors that have come here.

 

[DubaiSpur]

Suffice it to say, I took his words far more literally, i.e, we won't make a profit on transfers ust to fund the stadium. But we are going off-topic, and we're still discussing this in the Berahino thread. So...tackles! Fouls! Reducers! Lee Cattermole! Discuss!

 

[Baleforce]

Perhaps, but we've also made a 56 million pound profit in transfers over the last five years. That's possibly been ploughed into the stadium as well...but our chairman promised us that wouldn't happen, and that the transfer funds (whatever funds were available, anyway) would be ring-fenced from the stadium development.

It isn't the greatest sin in the world, but I'd like the more determined supporters of our chairman on the forum to at least admit that he does lie or otherwise misinform the fans occasionally on matters like this. Clearly we've been funding our stadium in part through our transfers, when it should (if the plan had been followed) have been funded by the naming rights deal, loans and 'outside investors' (the chairman's words here).

my feeling, as a pro enic person, is that he doesn't have to explain himself to me, they privately own the club and can do what they like with it

bearing in mind they purchased the 14th best team in the pl and in a decade turned it into the fifth best without mortgaging the clubs future (as far as we know) and heavily improving the clubs infrastructure (which we can see by the training ground and underway stadium work) I'm happily along for the ride

 

[Baleforce]

Suffice it to say, I took his words far more literally, i.e, we won't make a profit on transfers ust to fund the stadium. But we are going off-topic, and we're still discussing this in the Berahino thread. So...tackles! Fouls! Reducers! Lee Cattermole! Discuss!

it's only cheating if you get caught, if we want to compete on the same level we have to play to the same (lack of enforced) rules

"just win baby!"

 

[DubaiSpur]

my feeling, as a pro enic person, is that he doesn't have to explain himself to me, they privately own the club and can do what they like with it

bearing in mind they purchased the 14th best team in the pl and in a decade turned it into the fifth best without mortgaging the clubs future (as far as we know) and heavily improving the clubs infrastructure (which we can see by the training ground and underway stadium work) I'm happily along for the ride

14th best to 5th best, yes. Via charging the 2nd highest ticket prices in the league, and with the PL as a whole going from less than a billion in overall value to somewhere north of 6.5 - 7 billion (taking into account the TV deal and commercial revenue growth). While we, of course, were ever-presents. IMO, It isn't really impressive enough to warrant misleading the fans of this club, who'll be here long after he, the private joint-owner, is gone.

Still, at least you admit he lied/spread misinformation. I can respect that.

it's only cheating if you get caught, if we want to compete on the same level we have to play to the same (lack of enforced) rules

"just win baby!"

Now THIS I wholeheartedly agree with.

 

[Baleforce]

14th best to 5th best, yes. Via charging the 2nd highest ticket prices in the league, and with the PL as a whole going from less than a billion in overall value to somewhere north of 6.5 - 7 billion (taking into account the TV deal and commercial revenue growth). While we, of course, were ever-presents. IMO, It isn't really impressive enough to warrant misleading the fans of this club, who'll be here long after he, the private joint-owner, is gone.

Still, at least you admit he lied/spread misinformation. I can respect that.



Now THIS I wholeheartedly agree with.

I didn't admit he lied, I ignored that bit of the question, I honestly don't know whether he has or not, has money be used for the stadium or has it gone on annual wage increases or more staff in other departments, impossible to know, technically he could have done this and used the TV money increase for the stadium build

one complaint with that is, second highest ticket prices, look at the size of our season ticket waiting list, we should have the highest prices, for a businessman as savvy as levy I'm
surprised he's leaving such easy money on the table

 

[monkeybarry]

Making a foul isn't cheating. Its a defender acknowledging the consequences and taking explicit action within the rules of the game. There's no moral ambiguity. Cynical fouls are also good in that they are usually deliberately clumsy, so actually risk injury less than competitive challenges

Diving is far worse. It's purely deceitful.

In contravention of the rules of the game.

And it is just as bad as diving IMHO, it is deliberately flaunting the rules to gain an advantage.
The difference being, "professional fouls" have been around for ages and usually get the yellow card they deserve.
Diving does not - and should.

The foul also does not try and con the ref, whereas the dive does. So actually the dive is worse on that basis.

The foul is more "honest cheating" ( for lack of a better term!)

Its all just risk management really!

 

[DubaiSpur]

I didn't admit he lied, I ignored that bit of the question, I honestly don't know whether he has or not, has money be used for the stadium or has it gone on annual wage increases or more staff in other departments, impossible to know, technically he could have done this and used the TV money increase for the stadium build

one complaint with that is, second highest ticket prices, look at the size of our season ticket waiting list, we should have the highest prices, for a businessman as savvy as levy I'm
surprised he's leaving such easy money on the table

Sigh. As you were then, gale.

 

[Craig_J]

absolutely, we are crap at gaming the system, we don't dive enough either

Ironically though the biggest diver we had was Bale and in his last season we didn't get a single penalty, even when there were more than a few that should have been

 

[Baleforce]

Ironically though the biggest diver we had was Bale and in his last season we didn't get a single penalty, even when there were more than a few that should have been

I felt he lacked grace, his dives could be quite jerky, he's not a lot better at Madrid now imo, I'm surprised they have not improved that part of his game

 

[Yiddo]

We can talk about these fouls all day long but we have no idea if that phase of play will lead to a goal and if it doesn't and they score from the resulting freekick, everyone on here would tear the player who made the challenge apart and call it a "stupid" tackle.

 

[Finney Is Back]

True. We always seems to be scared of making those ugly challenges. In fact, felt Walker was too scared to tackle Rooney from behind, worried he might concede the penalty and ultimately scoring the own goal.

Walker would've conceded a penalty and been sent off. We then would've been 1-0 down, playing with 10 men at Old Trafford. I think Walker took the right option and was just very unlucky indeed with the way that it turned out. The time to commit a foul was before the ball had reached Rooney (yellow as opposed to red card).

 

[tynesidespur]

But that is not remotely the same as a adopting a premeditated cynical plan like United did against us at OT last season, when they systematically took out any Tottenham player that got within 50 yards of their box.

In that instance how do you suggest we should counter such a plan?

 

[Baleforce]

In that instance how do you suggest we should counter such a plan?

before the game give an interview questioning the suitability and strength of the ref to handle the sneaky violence of the opposition, then during the game dive all over the place, feign serious injury every time you go down, roll over 6 or 7 times thrashing like a salmon, wave imaginary cards, manager sends his assistants and subs to go mad at the fourth official one at a time after each infraction, complain about the ref to the PL/FA/Police after the game and request he never has one of our games again

 

[Spur of the moment]

In that instance how do you suggest we should counter such a plan?

Outplay them.

 

[Joesh]

I think having the black card rule in football would be a good step, it would deal with fouls like these that are more than a yellow but not quite a red and punish the offending team without ruining the game by having 10 v 11s. I think for diving too it would be equally effective as many attackers would take a yellow card risk if it meant getting a pen but if they thought it could mean they would have to be subbed, I think they'd think twice.

I know it was tried before but moving the ball foward for dissent was a good idea too as that is another area of dark arts by teams surrounding the ref.

As for us doing it, for me its like doping in cycling, if you don't do it you have no chance so its not really a choice.

 

[Bullet]

I think having the black card rule in football would be a good step, it would deal with fouls like these that are more than a yellow but not quite a red and punish the offending team without ruining the game by having 10 v 11s. I think for diving too it would be equally effective as many attackers would take a yellow card risk if it meant getting a pen but if they thought it could mean they would have to be subbed, I think they'd think twice.

I know it was tried before but moving the ball foward for dissent was a good idea too as that is another area of dark arts by teams surrounding the ref.

As for us doing it, for me its like doping in cycling, if you don't do it you have no chance so its not really a choice.

Is a black card from some obscure sport like ice hockey or Aussie rules? Do you mean sin bin or "has to be subbed"? The latter seems rubbish as you are just about to get subbed you might as well foul someone. I have long advocated a sin bin to say "you're not fully sent off, but go away and think about it for 10 minutes and watch your mates suffer"

 

[Gazzasrightboot]

before the game give an interview questioning the suitability and strength of the ref to handle the sneaky violence of the opposition, then during the game dive all over the place, feign serious injury every time you go down, roll over 6 or 7 times thrashing like a salmon, wave imaginary cards, manager sends his assistants and subs to go mad at the fourth official one at a time after each infraction, complain about the ref to the PL/FA/Police after the game and request he never has one of our games again

I'd rather we didn't do that and instead adopt what spur of the moment said which is just outplay them. I'd hate it if we became a cynical, diving and cheating team.

 

[Joesh]

Is a black card from some obscure sport like ice hockey or Aussie rules? Do you mean sin bin or "has to be subbed"? The latter seems rubbish as you are just about to get subbed you might as well foul someone. I have long advocated a sin bin to say "you're not fully sent off, but go away and think about it for 10 minutes and watch your mates suffer"

The black card is has to be subbed but I disagree with how you think it would be used. The idea is to give the ref tools to ensure the game is played fairly and with just yellows and reds, it makes it harder for refs to do this as you can't just book everybody or games would end in 8v8. Players obviously know this and you'll see loads of examples where a player commits a bad foul in the first 5mins and gets nothing but 10mins later would have been booked. There certainly needs to be alternative punishments at the refs discretion to deal with players, which I would completely agree should include a sin bin option.