Weekend Football Thread. *spoilers* 3-5

Tummy said:
Typical, you get all snooty and annoyed and decide to cheer on Derby? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Not snooty or annoyed to be honest, I just find it bizarre that you care about Bolton. I have no reason to cheer on Derby, as you should have no reason to cheer on Bolton.

I'm sorry, Spurs are a wonderful side, best squad in the league. Come on you Spurs?

Feel better?
Click to expand...

:p
 
Stag said:
Not snooty or annoyed to be honest, I just find it bizarre that you care about Bolton. I have no reason to cheer on Derby, as you should have no reason to cheer on Bolton.
Click to expand...

I've also cheers on Wolves and Donny? going to get all ****ing ***** about that as well?
 
2-2 FT. Spurs usually get sod all from Bolton away, so a point is a decent result.

As alluded to by drunkenspammer, I do wonder had Defoe had started if the scoreline may have been more in our favour.
 
Upset to have shipped 3 goals away at Derby.

We had chances to bring to game level, but it got away from us in the end :(
Slipped down to number 16 in the table :(

Nice to see Portsmouth win, it had to happen sooner or later, and nice to see Plymouth win! Big fan of the little Paul Sturrock.
 
What I can't for the life of me understand is, Pompie have people coming to games, I assume they are paying more than £5 each, they've got a team of mostly crap players, most of the big name players have gone meaning most of the high wages people should be gone. They raked in 80mil, afaik, before the new guy really took over. How did they need to get a 5million loan just to pay last months wages?

Did the previous owners sell the players, pocket the cash and run, did it all go on debt?

Not sure what the capacity is at Pompie but considering they have what would be classed as very low end premiership players, shouldn't they be able to turn a profit(even if they are losing and eventually go down), shouldn't ticket sales be covering the basically fairly low wages they should be paying?

If not, I'm pointing the finger at Harry, who gets players to come and massive squads by offering silly money to everyone.

West Ham, Southampton, Pompie, doesn't every club he manages run into terrible financial issues and normally relegation shortly after he's spent them to death and left?
 
Man Utd: Foster, O'Shea, Vidic, Jonathan Evans, Evra, Nani, Fletcher, Scholes, Welbeck, Rooney, Berbatov.
Subs: Kuszczak, Ferdinand, Brown, Anderson, Carrick, Fabio Da Silva, Valencia.

Sunderland: Gordon, Bardsley, Turner, Ferdinand, Richardson, Malbranque, Cana, Cattermole, Reid, Bent, Jones.
Subs: Fulop, McCartney, Nosworthy, Campbell, Henderson, Da Silva, Healy.

Why is Welbeck playing :confused:
 
drunkenmaster said:
Not sure what the capacity is at Pompie but considering they have what would be classed as very low end premiership players, shouldn't they be able to turn a profit(even if they are losing and eventually go down), shouldn't ticket sales be covering the basically fairly low wages they should be paying?
Click to expand...
You'd think that, but when a team like Hull City, who have probably got the same level of players as Portsmouth, can only supposedly post a £2m profit for last season, I think you have to realise the enormity of wage demands for even some of the more average players in the Premiership.
 
Weebull said:
You'd think that, but when a team like Hull City, who have probably got the same level of players as Portsmouth, can only supposedly post a £2m profit for last season, I think you have to realise the enormity of wage demands for even some of the more average players in the Premiership.
Click to expand...

To be honest I assumed that Pompie had a higher capacity, but also, being a premiership club more or less, rather than a first time club, they'd likely have a fairly decent difference in ticket price, which obviously would raise the difference.

I think the club has been utterly raped by wages, a seemingly huge squad(as lets be honest they put out a full team and subs bench, with a few players spare, and shipped off almost all the first team in the summer. Also you've got the hidden costs of transfer, signing on fee's, extra fee's to agents, which add up, they owe two the best part of 3 million, and the number of transfers Harry gets through, they add up.

But even after all that, once you sell 80mil of players(maybe 100 with Diarra), you should at least, with the players they have now, be like Hull, basically breaking even. It just doesn't add up at all.

Either way, I reckon Spurs, after 3-4 years of 20 transfers a year, will start to have money issues, its just how Harry operates.
 
Tummy said:
Bent!

Why didn't he figure at Spurs?

The man just scores :o
Click to expand...

Stupid managers, including Redknapp, yes Defoe/Bent are similar, but frankly, as you could see today, Defoe's more than capable of being involved in build up play and creating chances, so is Bent. I wouldn't in a million years have swapped Crouch for Bent, Bent is a far far better player who no manager at Spurs ever just gave a real run of games.
 
I agree with that DM :)

Bent is a good player, and I don't understand why you'd sell him and bring in Crouch. Maybe it's because with Crouch you have the "route one" style play.
 
Pigeon_Killer said:
This. He offers them a plan B and allows the team to play a completely different way.
Click to expand...

I imagine that's so, having the "big man" up top so that you can just hoof the ball up top when you need an option or when you can't pass. Crouch is awful in the air though, Bents a better player.

I like Bent, I think he's a good player, and I honestly don't know why he spent so much time on the bench at Spurs. Did he fall out with someone?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom