Hookowl Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 20 minutes ago, ka58 said: no there’s no need to do that. you've confused “communicating with the fan base” with “divulging arguments to opposition prior to a hearing” there. How can the club feasibly "communicate with the fan base" what their intentions are regarding countering the EFL's claims without also communicating this to the general public? The only realistic option is to release the statement they already have done. Oh by the way I've just had a daft thought............................DC sends a private message to all fans saying what he intends to do.................ending with................promise you won't tell anyone 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiJ Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 38 minutes ago, billyblack said: You cant blame the EFL for clubs over spending or not increasing revenue streams. I can blame them for implementing a set of rules which are impractical and not fit for purpose. There are of those on here trying to form some sort of balanced view. Then there is you, who has already made his mind up and seems to be almost salivating at the thought of some punishment. A punishment that you have already decided we deserve. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiJ Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 9 minutes ago, Bulgaria said: Didn't those clubs just spend money they didn't have, or as in our case break the rules? No sympathy if that's the case. They spent money they didn't have. Our crime has been spending money we did have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyblack Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 4 minutes ago, BARMYARMY2010 said: But 30 minutes ago you disagreed with this "There is no "we",its Mr Chairman and his money,of which he has always said he has plenty but can't spend it,there are no indications at all that "he" doesn't or can't afford to bankroll SWFC for the forseeable future." Make ya mind up fella. No i didnt. The point im making is the club is an entity including the current chairman. Its not just the name and chairmans pockets. The club must be able to pay for itself to a large extent. Its not just the chairmans wallet and frig the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyblack Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 1 minute ago, SiJ said: They spent money they didn't have. Our crime has been spending money we did have. We spent the chairmans money, not the clubs money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyblack Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 3 minutes ago, SiJ said: I can blame them for implementing a set of rules which are impractical and not fit for purpose. There are of those on here trying to form some sort of balanced view. Then there is you, who has already made his mind up and seems to be almost salivating at the thought of some punishment. A punishment that you have already decided we deserve. If we broke the rules we do deserve it. If we didnt great, we move on. If you cant afford it dont buy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Down South Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 Looks like I’m one of the few who quite likes the fact that rules are in place that (in theory) encourage clubs to operate on a sensible basis rather than rely on wealthy owners who will come and go. With a decent fan base that should work in our favour compared to at least half the division. I guess the difficulty comes in competing against clubs with parachute payments, although a number of teams relegated from Premier League in recent seasons are still in the Championship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiJ Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 1 minute ago, billyblack said: We spent the chairmans money, not the clubs money. Here he is again. Whose money do Man City spend? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BARMYARMY2010 Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 1 minute ago, billyblack said: No i didnt. The point im making is the club is an entity including the current chairman. Its not just the name and chairmans pockets. The club must be able to pay for itself to a large extent. Its not just the chairmans wallet and frig the rest. billyblack Sheffield Wednesday First Team Sheffield Wednesday Fan 1,355 3,679 posts Posted 37 minutes ago 40 minutes ago, BARMYARMY2010 said: There is no "we",its Mr Chairman and his money,of which he has always said he has plenty but can't spend it,there are no indications at all that "he" doesn't or can't afford to bankroll SWFC for the forseeable future. Disagree totally............................................BUT YA DID Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyblack Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 10 minutes ago, TommyCraig said: Again I'd say there needs to be a cap in place if there is also a cap on players wages, otherwise I'd argue for no cap. That's just my opinion. I agree with you. Doesnt FFP try to cap it in some respect just in another way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiJ Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 1 minute ago, billyblack said: If we broke the rules we do deserve it. If we didnt great, we move on. If you cant afford it dont buy it. I'm not saying we don't deserve punishment. My point was about the rules and how the EFL having been running things. Stop conflating things for the sake of having another pop at the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyblack Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 Just now, BARMYARMY2010 said: billyblack Sheffield Wednesday First Team Sheffield Wednesday Fan 1,355 3,679 posts Posted 37 minutes ago 40 minutes ago, BARMYARMY2010 said: There is no "we",its Mr Chairman and his money,of which he has always said he has plenty but can't spend it,there are no indications at all that "he" doesn't or can't afford to bankroll SWFC for the forseeable future. Disagree totally............................................BUT YA DID Because you were saying its all about the chairman and his pockets. I disgareed with it as its not all about the chairman as explained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyCraig Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 1 minute ago, 2roland2 said: i disagree, players can earn any amount but the only thing stopping crazy owners paying players like almen abdi 200k per week is the ffp, even though they have it so flipping wrong it still puts a cap on the amount of wages a club can spend. People moaning about rhodes being signed, lets see what would happen if we didnt have any rules and chansiri went and spunked 40 million on a averag estriker on 100k per week and 50 mill on a midfielder from portugal on 150k per week. not the best idea is it? chances are we woudl fail even if he spent becasue 87% of clubs will fail over three years. so we than have a club now an extra 90 mill in debt with players on 350k per week that is unsustainable and a owner who at some point will say fizz this im not losing any more money. If the majority of clubs fail then so be it. It will at last make a mockery of the current system. The 13% wouldn't survive either then would they? I'm no expert at all but to me, if wages are such a huge part of a clubs outlay and there is no restriction on what wages can be demanded then surely there can be no restriction on what clubs can spend to meet those wages. Especially when these restrictions only, in the main, apply to a club of lower standing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyblack Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 Just now, SiJ said: I'm not saying we don't deserve punishment. My point was about the rules and how the EFL having been running things. Stop conflating things for the sake of having another pop at the club. Why? Not allowed to have a pop because i believe its been run like a joke? Does it upset you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
room0035 Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Steve Down South said: Looks like I’m one of the few who quite likes the fact that rules are in place that (in theory) encourage clubs to operate on a sensible basis rather than rely on wealthy owners who will come and go. With a decent fan base that should work in our favour compared to at least half the division. I guess the difficulty comes in competing against clubs with parachute payments, although a number of teams relegated from Premier League in recent seasons are still in the Championship. What the parachute payments are for, is not what they are used for. The parachute payments for the club getting them should be excluded from the calculations when working out the £13m limit that is the only way to make the system fairer other than scrapping them all together. There would however be about another 10 teams in our division that would now be under sanctions. Edited November 15, 2019 by room0035 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyCraig Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 3 minutes ago, billyblack said: I agree with you. Doesnt FFP try to cap it in some respect just in another way? I think your right but we all know teams will strive for betterment and that involves risk and the EFL know this too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casbahowl Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 1 hour ago, WalthamOwl said: Of course it does, I have a different opinion to you just as many do on here. You obviously don’t think much of this forum so why continue to come on it? You’re so angry casbah, I dread to think what your blood pressure is like. You’re right on one point ........ suffering fools gladly isn’t my strongest suit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BARMYARMY2010 Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 (edited) 8 minutes ago, billyblack said: Because you were saying its all about the chairman and his pockets. I disgareed with it as its not all about the chairman as explained. On the contrary,i said in reply to one of your posts,there is no "we" here,its Mr Chairman's money that has been spent,he's the one Millions of pounds in to this,he's the one keeping the club going,has always said he has the money to do so...................................you disagreed with that. I'm not saying its right,just saying that's how it is. Edited November 15, 2019 by BARMYARMY2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyCraig Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 Just now, 2roland2 said: You have totally lost me now mate, if we jus say its a free for all then the games gone. close the doors its over now. the 9 clubs that have success over the 3 years may or may not make money that would depend on how they did in the prem and what happened to the business model on expenditure. the fact is what you are saying is if clubs go bust so be it, thats life jsut let it be a free for all. that is possibly the maddest thing i have heard on solutions to this problem yet. its like a game of russian roulette You said 87% would fail. I'm basically saying this would ruin football as it stands currently and then we'd have to change. I go back to my point of unrestricted wages/unrestricted spending. Or capped wages and capped spending. I can't see how it can be fair any other way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiJ Posted November 15, 2019 Share Posted November 15, 2019 5 minutes ago, billyblack said: Why? Not allowed to have a pop because i believe its been run like a joke? Does it upset you? Your contributions have been to level accusations of fraud among other things. It is hard to take someone seriously when they are so blinkered. I think most recognise that we are in trouble and that a large part of that rests on the shoulders of the chairman. You, consistently, go well beyond that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now