Yeah. I think a cap on the money flowing into football would be good for the game.You've not actually answered what I asked though have you?
Yeah. I think a cap on the money flowing into football would be good for the game.
Your the one who confused 'investment' in football with what is just player wages and agent fees. Your the one who thinks Saudi Arabia is 'investing in football'.
*you're.Yeah. I think a cap on the money flowing into football would be good for the game.
Your the one who confused 'investment' in football with what is just player wages and agent fees. Your the one who thinks Saudi Arabia is 'investing in football'.
I didn't mention countries at all.
I asked if money being taken out of the game is good, or if investment into the game is good.
You seem to think that just means agent fees and wages. It really doesn't, but if the money is coming in via commercial routes and prize money, then I would prefer the players be rewarded than the owners, yes.
This is investment.
This is what happens when owners are in it for themselves.
I didn't mention countries at all.
I asked if money being taken out of the game is good, or if investment into the game is good.
You seem to think that just means agent fees and wages. It really doesn't, but if the money is coming in via commercial routes and prize money, then I would prefer the players be rewarded than the owners, yes.
This is investment.
This is what happens when owners are in it for themselves.
Its a training ground. Have you seen Liverpools AXA centre - its fantastic. As is Arsenals trianing ground.
As for Old Trafford, its an Old Ground, the San Siro is also old too. Some people prefer the old art deco house rather than the modern mcmansion.
Lets hope the Saudi's dont invest cricket. They will knock down Lords to build a bigger ground. SOmeone like you would be like 'ooohhhh investment'.
City were also part of the ESL dont forget. As for generalizing American owners, ive said it before the Kroenke's have turned into fine owners since the took ownership. Not every American owner are like Man United's.
Look what happened to Chelsea with Roman having to force the sale. Politically exposed and politically sensitive persons carry a big risk. Middle East is a very volatile region, you just dont know whose going to get the Gaddaffi treatment next
Its a training ground. All modern clubs have top training grounds. Its a one off contract to a construction firm, and thats its only benefit to society.Wow. Some levels of delusion.
And it isn't just 'a training ground'. It's the whole area. Though the training ground is certainly better than Liverpool's, though I don't know Arsenal's, I admit. Wait until the current redevelopments are done too.
This is investment. Constant improvement and not resting on laurels.
And as for your silly cricket comparison. If anyone thought Lords needed to be bigger, someone would make it bigger. That would make sense, no? Your point really is irrelevant and seems odd from an Arsenal fan - are you still pining for the Highbury days?
I think there's a lot of generalising going on here - on both sides of the argument. For me, some American owners of English clubs - often high profile clubs - are bad for the game and for those respective clubs and fans. United are the most prominent example and it's difficult to argue against that. Liverpool I'm not sure about because whatever we think of FSG, they have been an improvement on their previous owners who were also American but the underlying suspicion is that even though they've overseen some major successes on the pitch, they're in it to line their own pockets first and foremost. They were also one of the main drivers behind the ESL. Up until a few years ago, I'd have definitely included your owners too (as I'm sure 99% of Arsenal fans would) but there's been a huge shift in policy of late at Arsenal and you're actually going for it on the spending front which flies in the face of what many of us expected from Kroenke and makes the Liverpool owners look like proper dicks as you're spending far more than them on players despite posting lower revenues. Then you have the Wrexham owners who are as far removed from the Glazers as you can get. Even if it goes tits up from here, they've put the club on a much more sustainable footing by purchasing the freehold of the Racecourse Ground.Its a training ground. Have you seen Liverpools AXA centre - its fantastic. As is Arsenals trianing ground.
As for Old Trafford, its an Old Ground, the San Siro is also old too. Some people prefer the old art deco house rather than the modern mcmansion.
Lets hope the Saudi's dont invest cricket. They will knock down Lords to build a bigger ground. SOmeone like you would be like 'ooohhhh investment'.