Financial fair play will never work. Teams will always find a way around it. For example, if I own a football club, I could simply transfer 100 million to my brother's account, "family reasons", could anyone stop that? Then my brother's company sponsors my football team for 100 million, I don't think there are any rules that stops family members from investing? If there is, it can be considered as discrimination. There are many other ways around FFP, which is good in prnciple but can never be implemented. Just like the speed limit in highway, people will slow down at areas where they know there is a speed check, in other areas they can still speed like hell. Some rules just can't be 100% be implemented. A better rule would be to implement salary cap or transfer fees cap, that way no matter how rich a club is they still can only spend a limited amount of trasnfer fees and also wages. That wil create a more level playing field, and is much harder to find a way around it, if not impossible.

Also I don't understand why Rodgers is getting so much stick here, a good manager is manager who believes in his own philosophy. Or would you say the likes of Pep Guardiola is not a good manager? Cause I'm pretty sure he woldn't set up his team in any other way but short passing and quick movement. Every manager who comes in will want to stamp their mark, Kenny did it too. Remember when Kenny first came in, he played pass and move as well, for 6 months where our form was like a title contender. Then came the summer where Kenny sold the likes of Meireles, sideline the likes of Kuyt and Maxi and bought in players like Downing, Adam and Henderson. Basically what Kenny was trying to do was to switch from the pass and move to a more rigid 4-4-2 with crosses from the wing where Carroll was supposed to thrive. Needless to say, things didn't turn out as planned.

Rodgers is not wrong imo to sell players who doesn't fit his style, the fault lies in the owners not backing him to get the players he needs. Look at Barcelona, do you think that their youth academy plays direct football cause they don't have Messi? No, pass and move is the ethos there in Barcelona, all the way through, from the youngsters to the coaching staff, so much so that Guardiola can leave and be replaced without any problem by Villanova, cause there is a philosophy there which is instilled all the way through the club. I'm not saying that Rodgers will be successful like that, but all I'm saying is that he is trying to do that and I for one am all for it. FSG talks about building for the future, so I'll say it can be considered as similar, playing direct football with Carroll may be seen as a short term fix but not long term, cause in the long term Rodgers aim is to play pass and move, the Spanish football style. So we must try to play pass and move, cause the only way to become better at it is to play it.

This post has been edited by dragontongue88: Sep 6 2012, 11:11 AM

I will be the first to admit I didn't read it either. Using benchmark is ok if the sponsorship was being inflated, for example if a 50 mil sponsorship is portrayed as 100 mil. But what if the sponsorship itself is genuinely worth 100 mil but is obtained through other means? For example an owner of a football club decides to sponsor Company A for 100 mil in a non football related sponsorship, and then Company A sponsors the football club with 100 mil. We can obviously see that they are just exchanging money but in terms of the law, I'm guessing that the sponsorship are still considered lawful. FIFA won't be able to take action cause the sponsorship to Company A is non football related. There are ways to bypass it, so long as the owners are cunning enough.




I wouldn't call it communism, but I would agree with Petre to some extent. With FFP, the bigger clubs will get richer while the smaller clubs will get poorer. Basically clubs in the CL right now gets more money, therefore can invest more money and sign better players, which in turn ensure that they are favourites to qualify for CL again. Smaller clubs buy cheaper and probably less talented players and maybe it will be harder for them to get into CL. It will sort of create a status quo where more popular clubs will get more profit, and hence will be more successful, which makes them even more popular... chicken and egg effect.

I can see where you are coming from, but I do believe in football it is easier to change employees than say in ordinary business management. That is due to the availability of a proper scouting systems and of a proper transfer market where players more or less have certain market values. It is easier to replace players, so long as the money to do so is there. Sadly our scouting systems have not been that excellent and our owners are not that willing to release trasnfer funds.

Actually I agree with the bolded part, but I think our difference of opinion lies in who is to blame for that. In my opinion, the reason why we cannot get a replacement is because of the owners were too tight with their purse strings. I do believe that Rodgers can get a replacement in, that is why he let Carroll go, but it was the owners who stopped him from getting the replacement in because they don't think the deal for Dempsey was worth it. I suppose Rodgers was also a little naive to think that he would certainly get Dempsey, he might have waited until the replacement come in first before allowing Carroll to go, that would have been safer. Though one can argue that his naivety is due to his trust that the owners would back him, which they didn't when they saw Fulham's asking price.



Erm.. I'm not sure I get what you mean. So that means if for example we legitimately get a shirt sponsor deal that is worth twice that of most other clubs, that deal will not be allowed under FFP? Because it is not comparable with other clubs? If that is true, I think that is a major flaw. It doesn't really promote marketing competition imo, every club will have almost similar sponsorship.



Well it wouldn't benefit clubs like Man City or Chelsea, with oil rich owners. They will have to downsize as you say. What I mean is that it will benefit clubs like Man Utd, which is very popular and capable of making the most profit. They are already on top now. FFP will ensure they stay on top cause they generate the most profit, therefore can outspend the rest, and cherry pick the best players. So status quo will soon develop, where clubs like Man Utd will dominate, just because they are popular and marketable. Of course Man City and Chelsea's spending is unfair, but this can be considered as unfair as well. I think this can be related to Ian Ayre's proposal for the TV deal breakaway if you remember... A breakaway will ensure bigger clubs earn more money, but that can be seen as unfair to the smaller clubs as well.

This post has been edited by dragontongue88: Sep 6 2012, 06:47 PM

Agree. I dont think it is so much about debts, think Man Utd have more debts than Chelsea or City. Correct me if I'm wrong, Chelsea or City are spending their owner's money, not the club's money. However, I don't believe they are saddling their clubs with debts. IMO FFP is mainly to stop clubs like Chelsea, City and PSG from spending so much. That is not bad thing, but one of the consequences of FFP could be Man Utd end up dominating, that is assuming that they can service their debts properly.

Yesil's first goal looks good. Would have been nice to see the build up to that goal, he looks skillful. Would like to see Rodgers fast tracking him into the first team, if Sterling can do it, I think Yesil can as well. The challenge is that in the premier league, he will have less time and space to take his shot. I think he'll play in the league cup.

I absolutely love it but I also think that is the beginning of his end at Liverpool. Maybe it is just a coincidence, but the team's form dropped off after that...

Agree with the part on Utd building their way up in the past. I do think it is fair that they are on top, they earn their way up there. I supposed it is the biasness in me due to being a Liverpool supporter, so much so I would be reluctant to see a rule that will benefit them most. I do think however that certain incentives should be allowed for smaller teams to invest and to catch up with teams with big revenues such as Utd and Arsenal. If not, I think it will be hard for them to catch up with the larger teams.

Whenever sporting disasters happen, more often than not, it was caused by negligence. The people in charge of that fateful match, those who could have prevented the Hillsborough incident are responsible, they should be punished. And those that could have been saved were left to die after 3.15 pm cutoff, just like that, really? What's even worst is that the authorities covered it all up and blamed the dead. It was absolutely disgraceful. How could they sleep at night, I wonder? All those policemen, all those involve, how could they have stayed silence for 23 years without an ounce of guilt? Are they even human? I'm glad the truth is out now. Apologies are all good, but what are words worth? They can't take away the pain of the familiies of the 96 who suffered and fought for 23 years. The Sun can take their apologies and stick it where the sun don't shine. I for one will never forgive them for printing those lies, I don't believe that Kelvin MacKenzie is even sincere in his apology. What I want to see is justice, people who are involved in the cover up and spreading of the lies must be prosecuted. They must be punished. JFT 96. YNWA.

Really impressed with Wisdom and Suso, especially Wisdom. Considering how good Wisdom is, and also Coates, I personally think Carra's presence in the team is holding back the progress of our younger lads a bit. I would prefer to see Carra as a coach and give more opportunities to Coates, Wisdom and Sama. I think they all have great potential. Suso looks really comfortable on the ball, and very skillful, this is another player with a bright future. I thought both Sahin and Henderson did quite well too, Assaidi showed flashes of his ability, but still look a touch unfit imo. I would like to see him running more, pressing more a bit, then I think he can be as good and as effective as Sterling. Pacheco had a very quiet game, just don't think he is good playing that centre forward role, he plays better on the left imo.

The biggest worry of course is our defensive organization and the form of Enrique. It might have something to do with Steve Clarke leaving, I don't know what is the cause, but our defensive organization is very poor, whether it is the first team or the second choice team. Enrique is the biggest worry, he was very good when he first came, but he has been going downhill ever since. The curse of the left back spot, we never had a good natural left back ever since John Arne Riise left. Aurelio was good, but too injury prone. Enrique was good, then he lost his form and had struggled to get back to his best imo. On the opposite side though, we don't seem to lack a good right back. Johnson, Kelly, Flanagan and now Wisdom...

What else could one say after a game like this? We absolutely played them off the park when we had 11 men, even with ten men we were still the better team. And we lost because of one reason, the bloody idiot Mark Halsey. Shelvey's tackle shouldn't be a red, he went in one footed(how on earth someone can say that is two footed is beyond me), he uses his right foot to go for the ball, left foot firmly planted on the ground. The definition of two footed is when you have both feet off the ground, which is what Evans did. To me that should have been a yellow for both, a red for Evans also a possibility, but of course the biased referee do the impossible and sent off Shelvey. Tbh I think Shelvey was an accident waiting to happen, he had been lunging in challenges like that since the start of the season. But that particular challenge to me is never a red card.

Suarez should have got a penalty, but of course referee thinks he is a diver so no penalty given. Valencia on the other hand was already falling before the contact from Johnson, but of course Halsey had to give the penalty cause if not, how can MU win right? Referees like Webb and Halsey had been regularly giving 50-50 decisions to MU. No surprises there, not the first time.

I was however very impressed with our work rate, our desire and our passion. I thought we were fantastic. And Suso was impressive as well, looks like we got a lot of promising youngsters coming through. The future is bright, and I think Rodgers is the right man for the job. I couldn't think of anyone bold enough to drop Downing for Suso in a game as big as this, not Kenny, not Roy, and not Rafa. He is the right man for the job, and he has my full backing.

As for the vile chants of Utd supporters, I'll say that those who sings about Hillsborough and Munich are a disgrace. We, as classy supporters shouldn't lower ourselves to their standard, those people should be banned for life from entering the stadium ever.

Not sure how you are intepreting it but the way I see it, Shelvey went in the challenge with his right leg, his left leg was firmly planted on the ground DURING the challenge itself (far away from Evans and the ball). After the contact with the ball (Shelvey won the ball btw), his momentum sent his whole body forward, he had to move his left leg or his leg will break. His left leg left the ground AFTER the challenge. Compare that to Evans whose both leg left the ground DURING the challenge, and both leg going towards the ball.

Edit: Anyway why are MU fans inside a thread called 'Kop Talk'? This thread is for fellow Reds to discuss la... Uninvited guest...

This post has been edited by dragontongue88: Sep 24 2012, 04:35 PM

Fair enough, I think that is where our opinions differ. To me that is a clumsy challenge, not a dangerous challenge. To me a dangerous challenge is when your studs are high or you are going for the player rather than the ball. Shelvey is, in my opinion, clearly going for the ball, you can see from the way his foot is bent, he was actually sidefooting the ball.

U mean after the ball moved away and Shelvey's foot hit Evans' thigh? If he was being sent off for that, I think that is a bit harsh, he was hardly aiming for Evans leg, it was his momentum taking him forward that caused that. But fair enough, I could see how that is dangerous for Evans.

Discussion is okay, but I only see baiting and flaming... my opinion of course...