nutsaboutamber
Reserve team regular
Posts: 3,901
Favourite CUFC player: Brian Greenhalgh
Favourite CUFC match: Maidstone(a) at Dartford, playoff semi final 2nd leg, 16 May 1990
|
Post by nutsaboutamber on Aug 31, 2016 15:53:25 GMT
Yes pint(s)!
|
|
andyt
Youth team star
Posts: 1,169
|
Post by andyt on Aug 31, 2016 15:59:34 GMT
Pointless post.
|
|
|
Post by Domingo in Little Oakley on Aug 31, 2016 17:15:00 GMT
Anyone moving to a foreign country should learn the local language. We, as English speakers, have had it too easy.
|
|
|
Post by Andrewlang on Sept 1, 2016 7:47:49 GMT
1.05 billion pounds spent on football transfers this window. It's an amount so large that I'm not sure it has any actual meaning...it's roughly the same cost as funding the NHS for a year though, if that helps give it some context.
21st century football is absolutely horrific.
Also, I just started two sentances with a number. I'm pretty sure that's frowned upon.
Andrew
|
|
Rico
First team regular
Posts: 7,572
|
Post by Rico on Sept 1, 2016 7:58:46 GMT
That's just in the premier league isn't it, rather than football in general? Must have been loads spent elsewhere.
Not sure £1 billion would go far in terms of the NHS funding though. Well under 1% of their annual budget which is something in the region of £120 billion.
|
|
cufcinnotts
Reserve team substitute
Posts: 2,541
Favourite CUFC player: Paul Wanless
Favourite CUFC match: Nottingham Forest 3-3 Cambridge United
|
Post by cufcinnotts on Sept 1, 2016 8:06:51 GMT
The money is sickening. I can't top the NHS stat, but in a football context with so many clubs struggling I thought this was good from Macc...
Modern day football is horrific. It's the equivalent to third world poverty, ie there's plenty for all in the world but only the privileged few share the riches. Yuck.
|
|
|
Post by Andrewlang on Sept 1, 2016 8:13:37 GMT
"Not sure £1 billion would go far in terms of the NHS funding though. Well under 1% of their annual budget which is something in the region of £120 billion"
No, you're right. I misread the NHS stat. Too many noughts.
The very thought of United being taken over by a Chinese investor and becoming a part of the problem makes me feel ill. I'd like to raise a toast to forever being rubbish <chink>
Edit - Holy flip. I just read that back to myself and it sounds awful! It was supposed to be the noise two glasses make when you clip them together. Jesus.
Andrew
|
|
Rico
First team regular
Posts: 7,572
|
Post by Rico on Sept 1, 2016 8:26:14 GMT
I'm not sure rich foreign owners are the problem. This obscene amount of money mainly comes from normal people paying through the nose for TV subscriptions.
If some of the richest 0.1% want go blow some of their money on football then that maybe a good thing (for the moment). Less so if they end up making big profits sometime down the line but at the moment they're mainly contributing to our economy rather than taking out as far as I can tell.
Shame nearly all of this transfer money is going abroad but the government must be taking in a lot of tax from the premier league players salaries.
|
|
|
Post by mike_CUFC on Sept 1, 2016 8:35:45 GMT
Shame nearly all of this transfer money is going abroad but the government must be taking in a lot of tax from the premier league players salaries. That is the only positive I can take from these obscene salaries, the PAYE and NI contributions must be huge and can at least help clear some of the national debt!
|
|
|
Post by Andrewlang on Sept 1, 2016 8:53:43 GMT
"I'm not sure rich foreign owners are the problem. This obscene amount of money mainly comes from normal people paying through the nose for TV subscriptions"
It was more a call back to last weeks rumoured take over than finger pointing at foreign owners, but yeah, I agree, Normal people happily stumping up for TV subscriptions drive the demand. Many of them merrily signing up for direct debits as they complain about how expensive it all is...they're as enthralled by whims and subtle exploitation of Rupert Murdoch as they are their own clubs - Sky and the Premier League has them by the balls.
Wealthy foreign owners are only a problem if you think your club loses it's some of it's identity and part of it's place in the community by no longer being run by people who have a history and connection to the club. We still have that. I like that. I'm satisfied with our place in the footballs hiearachy and have no desire to chase any unsustainable or unearned plastic successes. Cambridge United needs to be more than a business where an occasional game of football happens for me.
Andrew
|
|
rozza1
Reserve team regular
Posts: 3,195
|
Post by rozza1 on Sept 1, 2016 18:07:02 GMT
|
|
nutsaboutamber
Reserve team regular
Posts: 3,901
Favourite CUFC player: Brian Greenhalgh
Favourite CUFC match: Maidstone(a) at Dartford, playoff semi final 2nd leg, 16 May 1990
|
Post by nutsaboutamber on Sept 1, 2016 18:18:40 GMT
I'm not sure rich foreign owners are the problem. This obscene amount of money mainly comes from normal people paying through the nose for TV subscriptions. If some of the richest 0.1% want go blow some of their money on football then that maybe a good thing (for the moment). Less so if they end up making big profits sometime down the line but at the moment they're mainly contributing to our economy rather than taking out as far as I can tell. Shame nearly all of this transfer money is going abroad but the government must be taking in a lot of tax from the premier league players salaries. I pay £50 a month for every Sky product going so it's not me. Isn't it really about the selling of the rights to screen live Prem League games to say N Zealand for 100m sovs a deal?
|
|
Rico
First team regular
Posts: 7,572
|
Post by Rico on Sept 1, 2016 19:00:00 GMT
Global rights are a massive part of now but no one pays more for their armchair footbal than in the UK so I'm afraid it's all your fault Nuts.
You've certainly forfeited any right to complain about obscene premier league transfer fees and wages since you're paying them. You might as well set up a direct debit to help fund Rupert Murdoch's alimony payments and Wayne Rooney's kid's trust fund.
Personally I prefer to spend my money on more wholesome things like hard drugs. That way I'm only funding organised crime and international terrorism but each to their own. I hope you can sleep at night.
|
|
|
Post by Andrewlang on Sept 5, 2016 13:11:55 GMT
What am I missing with this Mark Halsey controversy? His tweet "seen an incident and been told to say I haven't seen it" seems entirely sensible to me. The rule where if a referee has seen an incident a player can't retrospectively be punished is a stupid one. If referees have to lie to get around it then I'm all for them doing so.
Unless I haven't understood it properly.
Andrew
|
|
|
Post by mike_CUFC on Sept 5, 2016 13:17:31 GMT
What am I missing with this Mark Halsey controversy? His tweet "seen an incident and been told to say I haven't seen it" seems entirely sensible to me. The rule where if a referee has seen an incident a player can't retrospectively be punished is a stupid one. If referees have to lie to get around it then I'm all for them doing so. Unless I haven't understood it properly. Andrew I think it is for that exact reason, he seemed to imply he had seen an incident but not taken any action however after the game was told it should have been a red so if he fails to mention it in his match report they can then take retrospective action. The rule does seem stupid, however if you overrule what a referee saw during the match then you are basically undermining him and they obviously want to avoid that as it can make a mockery of the referee and the rules. It's a tricky one as what you see in the heat of the moment can be very different once watching replays so not sure where I stand on the whole issue TBH.
|
|