Forest docked 4 points

I am amazed these rules were not introduced to put a stop to Ferguson's kamikaze spending between 1986 and 1993.
This is where the whole thing falls down for me,

Utd and Dippers spend their own money, organically generated from their own support! That is all we hear.

Support of plastics from all over the UK and world who latched onto one of these 2 instead of following a Club they have a natural affiliation too.

A more recent phenomenon relates to the big London Clubs and their burgeoning attendances.
Huge attendance rises driven by the wealth and population growth of the South East plus the cost of living disparity between North and South.

A top player in London will earn just as much as a top North West player but, ticket prices at the London grounds are a lot more generally than the Northern Clubs.

The whole thing is fooked and is nowhere near a level playing field.

The PL are meddling in things they have no right to, the league is a farce.
 
This is where the whole thing falls down for me,

Utd and Dippers spend their own money, organically generated from their own support! That is all we hear.

Support of plastics from all over the UK and world who latched onto one of these 2 instead of following a Club they have a natural affiliation too.

A more recent phenomenon relates to the big London Clubs and their burgeoning attendances.
Huge attendance rises driven by the wealth and population growth of the South East plus the cost of living disparity between North and South.

A top player in London will earn just as much as a top North West player but, ticket prices at the London grounds are a lot more generally than the Northern Clubs.

The whole thing is fooked and is nowhere near a level playing field.

The PL are meddling in things they have no right to, the league is a farce.

On the organic growth of the rags, how are they spending their own money when they are a billion in debt? They have been living beyond their means for nearly two decades but the Premier league instead chooses to go after clubs that are ambitious in wanting to be promoted then establish themselves in the premier league.
 
We had BBC Breakfast on earlier, and when the knob doing the sport was talking about Forest's points deduction, he said, "The elephant in the room is Manchester City".

Same old shit, with no meaningful research.
 
But it wasn’t kamikaze, as the rags were coining it left, right and centre.

Sty covered more of their games than any other team, thereby giving them more of the TV contract than others. They had the biggest crowds, so therefore the biggest match day income, as the days of sharing the attendance receipts were long gone. And their success was attracting glory hunters the world over, as the appeal of English "soccer" grew exponentially, especially in Asia.

Yes, they were outspending their closest rivals, but it wasn’t by any means kamikaze.

Dirty Leeds on the other hand…
What the experience of "the nation's team" showed in the late '80s and early 90s was that investment comes first and (if managed competently) growth and success come later. By the mid 90s United were clearly a successful team and club, at least domestically but it is surprising to look at their attendance figures until well into the 90s. City's experience was almost identical to the rags in the 90s because elimination by Galatasaray, Gothenberg etc certainly didn't stimulate the fans' interest. In the PL Old Trafford was never full (especially for their bitterest rivals .... Leeds, Blackburn or Liverpool?). So what you say is true, but there is a time lag between major investment and its result. Forest are being hammered because the cartel feel much safer when success has to precede investment. Following the "United way" is, according to GPC, "kamikaze"!
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.