Arsenal, Spurs, United and Liverpool attack big-spenders

In a letter headed by Arsenal FC and signed by Spurs, United and Liverpool - a call has been made for stricter financial regulations to be brought into place in the Premier League. These would make it such that clubs have to break even over a three year period, and Platini would be put in charge of our FFP.





I'm not sure I like the idea of Platini being anywhere near English football, but it would be a good move for the league and it's just a shame it hasn't come sooner, and that we can't just relegate them .

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that this can surely not be the same Man United that spent years and years and years spending more money than anyone else in England could possibly even dream about spending, and whenever someone suggested a wage cap just laughed and said that the other clubs should aspire to be as good as Man U - well, this is what happens when clubs succeed - Man U spits dummy out. A complete joke.

The (i thought) obvious difference is United spent their own money, money they had generated just like all the other clubs that signed this letter.

The issue of the letter isnt how much clubs spend but how they get that money, limitless millions of oil money being pumped in with no return is the issue.

Clubs should be rewarded for being as financially succesful as the likes of Man, Arsenal, and Spurs. They should be able to spend that money they earn even when it is vastly more than other clubs get to spend. The 'God mode' financial approach of City and Chelsea is just plain financial doping in my opinion.

That is the point of FFP, not making clubs spend the same amount but making them spend within their means.

I think you already know this though, you just want to sucker someone in to replying to your deliberately misguided post so you can have another rant about money spent vs success or something, i tune out.

You can think Man U's way is better if you want, I don't think it is, and I'm bored with this tennis match discussion between you and me. Your final paragraph is a false accusation - a lie, in fact. What I want to do is to be allowed to state my opinion - is that okay with you - good.

This is a joke, right? All these billionaires and millionaires will run scared, stop giving a crap about their clubs and the League will be back to a 2 horse race.

My own club is an example, money doesn't solve your problems. We spent £££'s and haven't improved, Newcastle are now failing and they had a tidy sum. Sunderland haven't spent wise either.

It all balances itself out.

Excuse me, but Newcastle have hardly spent any money, and I'm immensely proud of our 5th place last season because of that. This season we are closer to where you'd expect us to be given our small outlay, but the season is far from over.

By the way this is the really laughable part of the letter...

"...putting so much pressure on clubs across the league..."

So it doesn't matter when clubs are told that unless you pay 50,000 a week on players you don't have a chance to win the league, as the case was in 2002-03 (in fact clubs should rather be grateful that they could aspire to paying that kind of money and being as good as Man U), but as soon as it goes to 200,000 a week, then there is too much pressure.

And across the league??? Hello! What difference does it make to Norwich, Reading and Newcastle that it's Man C winning the league and not Man U??? The only club that is suddenly under pressure is Man U, and hence this ridiculous letter to the teacher, whingeing about the fact that they have fallen in the hierarchy. Utterly pathetic.

Cabaye, Ba, Cisse, these 3 were signed using the money from the Carroll sale.

I was using Liverpool as the example, Sunderland and Newcastle had a decent amount of cash and neither 3 clubs have really improved from our overspending.

But those three together cost less than half of the Carroll sale.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using all the money you have generated as a club to pay for players. If a club has built a loyal flowing because of the football they play ,and those fans are willing to pay what they do to make them the richest club that is what football is all about . My issue with United is that they spent a load of money on players whilst they were in debt.
My issue with the likes of Man city and chelsea is that you have foreign owners using the world wide popularity of pour league as their personal monopoly game. Those clubs don't generate money to pay for their current squads and to me that is morally bankrupt. What is even more troubling is that many English people are so caught up in the instant success culture of today that they will go along with it.
These two teams have distorted the league to such a degree ,that we are now more impotent in European football! It needs to stop and balance needs to be returned to this league because it' is currently on a spiral downwards.

I agree - but I also think there's nothing wrong with spending money that the club owner gives the club.
And, in my opinion, Man U signing a letter which complains of the pressure put on other clubs, stinks of sour grapes.

Manchester United wasn't in debt per se, their owners went into debt to buy them. It is a distinction that changes a lot.

I agree - but I also think there's nothing wrong with spending money that the club owner gives the club.
And, in my opinion, Man U signing a letter which complains of the pressure put on other clubs, stinks of sour grapes.[/quote]

Then that says more about your moral integrity!

As far as i'm concerned if 'the "CLUB" don't have the money they shouldn't borrow to spend! MAn u's debt was club related debtor ,the "CLUB" chose to go into debt to get a deal done so they are just the same in my eyes.
MAn city and CHelsea could never pay for those squads under the same business model as the rest of the league and to me that is cheating.If you are fine with heating then that is your choice ,but i prefer a club building itself into a rich club by creating a legacy as is what Wenger is trying to do with Arsenal. It doesn't happen over night it takes years and years of a certain level of play ,that is the ONLY WAY the fans can any real pride ,because you have helped create and mold that team over years.

specnur,
I find it a bit childish that you attack my moral integrity, and say things like 'if you are fine with cheating, then that is your choice', just because I don't agree with you. But never mind. And there are plenty of clubs around the league that spend money that their owners give them, so the rest of the league is not all using one business model. You can think of Chelsea's and Man C's business plans as cheating, but I disagree with you. What you are doing is a bit like saying "but I'm right and you're wrong, so nah"

What other teams are using the same level of money as CHelsea and man city ? Are you talking about Porstmouth? yes they did and it was wrong and they are paying for it dearly,but that was on a completely different level as what is going on at the two premier teams .
Abromovich has spent about 1 BILLION EUROS since taking over in 2003 ,the Sheik has spent roughly 1 BILLION pounds since taking over at City only a fool would imply any club on earth has come even close to that amount of money .We are living in a world of extremes and It is absolutely obscene what those two owners are doing.

I disagree with you but i accept your opinion based on what you morally feel comfortable with ,why do you have a problem with me believing you have the right to your opinion?

In answer to those questions, I never said anything about levels of money. I was talking about how money was obtained.
And no, I'm not talking about Portsmouth - they used money they didn't have, and cheated.
And finally, the last question, I've never commented on your believeing that I have the right to my opinion - I've commented on your attack on my moral integrity because I disagree with you about how Chelsea and Man City are operating. I also commented on your wording 'if you are fine with cheating' when I think it's pretty obvious that it's not a question of being fine with cheating, but simply disagreeing about a business model.

The last thing we need is for Michel Platini to have anything more to do with English football and he should stick to running UEFA.

In the 1980s Watford got promoted because of Elton John's riches - in other words, some clubs were denied promotion because of Elton John's riches - that's fine by me - you can't allow for buying players, and then complain when the money comes as a perfectly legal present from the owner, in my humble opinion.

In answer to those questions, I never said anything about levels of money. I was talking about how money was obtained.
And no, I'm not talking about Portsmouth - they used money they didn't have, and cheated.
And finally, the last question, I've never commented on your believeing that I have the right to my opinion - I've commented on your attack on my moral integrity because I disagree with you about how Chelsea and Man City are operating. I also commented on your wording 'if you are fine with cheating' when I think it's pretty obvious that it's not a question of being fine with cheating, but simply disagreeing about a business model.[/quote]

BUt in your world you don;t believe it is cheating ,so why are you concerned with what i believe in my world in terms of perception of morality? I think the difference between the two of us is that you have an opinion that you put across and you look for others to slap you on the back in agreement,i put forth an opinion and i don't give a crap what anyone else thinks it's just my opinion. You should worry less about my opinion of your moral integrity and present an decent argument for why you believe what you do in relation to the majority of footballing world.

.[/quote]
Well, I think it's exactly the opposite. And my argument for that is that you attacked my moral integrity only because I disagreed with you. Now, perhaps you can tell me what your argument is for saying that I expect people to agree with me.

Well, I think it's exactly the opposite. And my argument for that is that you attacked my moral integrity only because I disagreed with you. Now, perhaps you can tell me what your argument is for saying that I expect people to agree with me.[/quote]

make a thread about it and i will post the answer pal.
Try and stay on topic lad will you!