roverandout Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 who else is annoyed with all these sugar daddy owners coming into football? especially these Russians and sheiks, Chelsea started it off with abramovich now we have the likes of man city, Malaga and paris st germain, the latest one is Monaco, a club with no real structure or history, throwing money around like confetti at the likes of falcao, who lets be honest has only gone to Monaco for the cash. Now they are offering john terry 150,000 grand tax free, its sickening, what happened to football clubs with proper structuring? are these Russians even legit with their ill-gotten gains? what can fifa or uefa even do to stop this as its making a mockery of what was once an even, fair game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
Ricky Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Ummmm, I don't think we're really good ones to talk about this are we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 We are one of the few clubs in this country with no real right to complain... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roverandout Posted June 5, 2013 Author Share Posted June 5, 2013 sure but that was different, jack was local, it was his club but these billionaires are coming into football like its some sort of game (I know it is) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donnermeat Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 I suppose the only good thing about it is they are putting new money into football? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majiball Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Falco is apparently on 500K a week, tax free. I'll wager Perez regrets saying he'd make Ronnie the best paid player on the planet now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 They could have got Messi for that!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim mk2 Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 We had Jack Walker, a local man made good (helped by tax evasion) who chose to spend his money in the last years of his life on his beloved football club. He is completely different to the likes of the oligarchs financing Chlesea, Man City and Monaco none of whom have any affinity or connection to the clubs they have bought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman. Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 who else is annoyed with all these sugar daddy owners coming into football? especially these Russians and sheiks, Chelsea started it off with abramovich now we have the likes of man city, Malaga and paris st germain, the latest one is Monaco, a club with no real structure or history, throwing money around like confetti at the likes of falcao, who lets be honest has only gone to Monaco for the cash. Now they are offering john terry 150,000 grand tax free, its sickening, what happened to football clubs with proper structuring? are these Russians even legit with their ill-gotten gains? what can fifa or uefa even do to stop this as its making a mockery of what was once an even, fair game. Short memory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roverandout Posted June 5, 2013 Author Share Posted June 5, 2013 yes but as jim has already pointed out, theres a big difference between a local man who has the club at heart than some billionaire playboy's plaything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggy Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 We had Jack Walker, a local man made good (helped by tax evasion) who chose to spend his money in the last years of his life on his beloved football club. He is completely different to the likes of the oligarchs financing Chlesea, Man City and Monaco none of whom have any affinity or connection to the clubs they have bought. I presume ( and hope) you are getting confused and meant to write tax avoidance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim mk2 Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 I meant what I wrote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amo Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Rival fans will be p!ssing themselves laughing at this thread. I take it the OP would've been right cheesed off if the Qataris had bought us out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman. Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 yes but as jim has already pointed out, theres a big difference between a local man who has the club at heart than some billionaire playboy's plaything Get off your high horse. These are football fans from countries who don't have important competitions and want to be part of the big leagues. I can promise after one week the club will be massively in their hearts. Are you telling me that Roman, after a decade, isn't incredibly passionate about Chelsea? We had a sugar daddy. Just because he was from Blackburn doesn't alter this. Dave Whelan took WIgan from nowhere to the top flight. I suppose it's different for him just because he's not foreign? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim mk2 Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Get off your high horse. These are football fans from countries who don't have important competitions and want to be part of the big leagues. I can promise after one week the club will be massively in their hearts. Are you telling me that Roman, after a decade, isn't incredibly passionate about Chelsea? We had a sugar daddy. Just because he was from Blackburn doesn't alter this. Dave Whelan took WIgan from nowhere to the top flight. I suppose it's different for him just because he's not foreign? Whelan is a Wiganer so is the same as Walker in that he is a self-made local man. The likes of Abramovich are here only because they can avoid tax. If it suited his purpose he would sell Chelsea and buy a club elsewhere. To compare him to Walker and Whelan is an insult to two football-loving Lancastrians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salgado Is A Hero Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Whelan is a Wiganer so is the same as Walker in that he is a self-made local man. The likes of Abramovich are here only because they can avoid tax. If it suited his purpose he would sell Chelsea and buy a club elsewhere. To compare him to Walker and Whelan is an insult to two football-loving Lancastrians. Whereas Jack Walker lived in Jersey because..... The OP of this thread was ridiculously hypocritical. There is not enough difference between Walker/Whelan and Abramovich etc to chastise the latter. Rival fans would find it laughable. Some of us do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Yorks Rover Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Whereas Jack Walker lived in Jersey because..... The OP of this thread was ridiculously hypocritical. There is not enough difference between Walker/Whelan and Abramovich etc to chastise the latter. Rival fans would find it laughable. Some of us do. I suppose the big difference between the 2 lancastrians and a Russian oligarch is that they did'nt/don't have to live their lives in fear and have half a dozen bodyguards with them everywhere they go. But yes rival fans would find it very hypocritical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim mk2 Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Whereas Jack Walker lived in Jersey because..... The OP of this thread was ridiculously hypocritical. There is not enough difference between Walker/Whelan and Abramovich etc to chastise the latter. Rival fans would find it laughable. Some of us do. As I pointed out earlier. That's the second OP reference you have made: can't you do better than that ? There is a world of difference between Walker and Abramovich, one a local man putting something back into his community and the other using the club as a rich man's toy. There's nothing hypocritical about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majiball Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 There shouldn't be any issue with rich people getting involved in football, but it shouldn't be about who's the richest team and who can pay the most wages. A middle ground needs to be found as football has lost its soul, it's a sport first and foremost and this is being eroded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amo Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 As I pointed out earlier. That's the second OP reference you have made: can't you do better than that ?Do you even know what OP means? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majiball Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Old Person? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amo Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 'Original Poster'. That's some chip Jim's got on his shoulder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Yorks Rover Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 'Original Poster'. That's some chip Jim's got on his shoulder. To be fair to Jim, I wrongly presumed it was an ageist comment too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salgado Is A Hero Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 OP stands for Original Poster or Original Post. In this context, I meant the 2nd one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamDingle Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 The OP is my favourite ever post on here. I'm going to ignore the voices of reason which follow, because that spoils the deliciousness of the irony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.