[Archived] This Will Stop Jordans Plan

[tony gale's mic]

Even if that did happen, it would presumably in comparative terms go a long way towards helping us strengthen our squad.

5m means a lot more to us than to Man Ure for example.

we have been very, very lucky in the transfer market in the last few years. sparky is brilliant at spotting talent but even by those standards to have got samba, bentley, benni (for what he did last season obviously) and santa for a combined total of less than £10 million is a rarity. by the time this happens we wont have hughes on board and even if our wage bills don't go up whatsoever, that £5 million may be spent on two £2.5 million players. what does that get you these days if you arent lucky enough to get a santa or a benni (which face it most of the time you're not)...a good championship player? someone from eastern europe maybe who we dont know much about? a cast off from another team who we hope can suddenly find his form?

but with the wage inflation that happens every time more money comes into the game, even that's not a realistic scenario. a lot of that money will be spent on simply maintaining our current squad, offering improved contracts to our first team as every team will have more money and we wouldnt want them to be tempted by an offer from somewhere else.

[RevidgeBlue]

Of course you are better off taken in isolation as in your example, but if you and the bloke next door are competing for survival in the same market place, are you still betteroff? Yes you are for a very short while i.e. until you and the bloke next door both want to purchase the same football player, then who is better off?

Point taken Fife but we're still better off as long as the 5m has made us comparatively better off in comparison to other clubs worldwide outside of the Prem and there are enough decent players to go round in Europe and the rest of the world.

[RevidgeBlue]

Yes, pre-season with no points at stake. Good for them.

O.K. - So if that happens, what should we do, sit back and do nothing?

[tony gale's mic]

Point taken Fife but we're still better off as long as the 5m has made us comparatively better off in comparison to other clubs worldwide outside of the Prem and there are enough decent players to go round in Europe and the rest of the world.

..so everyone in the premiership can get these multitude of decent players around in europe and the rest of the world with the extra money, granted the standard of play in the league may improve slightly but we're right back where we started

and as i've said, a lot of that money will go on wage increases to maintain our current squad simply to keep up with wage inflation.

[AggyBlue]

O.K. - So if that happens, what should we do, sit back and do nothing?

Premier League teams have travelled far and wide during pre season tours for years. We just don't need this mid season farce to showcase the premiership.

[broadsword]

Chaos, mayhem, disaster, my work here is done - I am off to the shops.

[Fife Rover]

personally whatever happens, i'm a football fan aswell as a rovers fan. and like enough of us have said this hypothetical 5 million will just trickle down into the pockets of the footballers and agents as that's whats always happened when there's been an influx of money into the game. we're not going to be relatively any financially stronger really because of it in comparison to the other premier league teams, and there'll be the very real threat of rovers entering a relegation battle.

now we have a great manager and a squad who can keep us out of that mess, but hughes will leave, santa, bentley and samba will too. and it won't even take a poor manager to take us into a relegation scrap, hell look at all the quite good managers who have spent vast multiples of what we have in recent years to just be on the same level as us. we'll still be a relatively very poor team in comparison to the rest of the league. and if we do get dragged into a relegation scrap and go down, then what will everyone think of this cash cow? fair or unfair?

unlike many on this board my rovers obsession doesnt encompass an unhealthy obsession with our six fingered neighbours. theyre funny to sing about, laugh at, but in these considerations whether burnley go ahead of us or not is an absolute side issue. and to be honest as a football fan aswell as a rovers fan, i'd rather we went down to the championship and participated in a competition with some integrity left, than be part of a travelling circus which stretches the rights and pockets of fans further and further. not that thats even a major consideration here, because as i said this extra money really wouldnt benefit us that much.

You have nicely captured the very essence of what I was TRYING to say way back at the beggining of this thread, but you have made a far better job of it than I did. I too am a football fan and although I love the Rovers more than any other club on Earth, I am not prepared to be taken for a fool and exploited financially by any club; not even my beloved Rovers. Although I do appreciate that they are where they are, and they have to go along with the rest of the EPL or else resign. I on the other hand do not, and I can make my own personal choice; as can you all.

Another reason for me personally in taking this stance is that I am quite simply not interested in seeing any kind of Global Football League type of setup, not even on TV which it would have to be for the vast majority of us. My reasons are partly finacial which we have all discussed at great length, but leaving that aside I am quite happy to watch the once a year pre-season friendly against Barca, or Real Madrid or whoever, but I am not interested in being in the same league as them and hundreds of other top teams from around the world plus all the new "brands" that the Global Football Inc would create in The USA and China, India etc. I am absolutely NOT INTERESTED even if it were free!

I don't have any problem in supporting either Rovers in a lower league (I have done it for long enough) or if necessary finding another team to support. I have already done that here in Scotland. I would much rather see the good old English game played the proper way without all the hype and cheating that goes on today. And if you don't understand that it is probably because you are too young to remember when it was different. Players did not "go to ground easily" and commentators did not remark on Player X "winning a free kick" that is one of the most sickening and offputting aspects of today's game, but nobody except those of my generation seem to even notice. THAT is the saddest part of all.

[Paul]

I just can't believe the furore all this has caused. It made me think back to that home UEFA Cup tie we played at 6p.m. to accomodate foreign TV. so we could pocket the relatively measly sum (in comparison) of 600k.

Then the majority view was that although it would seriously inconvenience a minority of regular supporters who wouldn't be able to attend, that was just hard luck on them because we had to take the money.

I think this is a very fair point RB and as the extra game doesn't deprive fans of something they already have it's hard to argue with.

My concerns are two-fold. The first being the effect of seeding teams and playing a top side three times. This does have real potential to skew the outcome of the league. 9 times out of 10 we'd be happy with a draw and philosphical about losing to Arsenal, Man Utd etc but what happens if teams we are competing with for UEFA or relegation spots get easier ties? Say we are competing with VIlla for the UEFA cup spot, Rovers play Arsenal and get stuffed, Villa get a mid-table team and win? It's unfair.

My second and much bigger concern is this being the thin end of the wedge. I cannot imagine for one moment this is the end of the matter. One game will not be enough. After a short period the major fixtures will be played overseas. How would you feel if denied a home fixture against Utd or Arsenal because it was our trun to play in Asia? A promoter makes millions on one game. How much extra will he offer to get a second?

The PL will not stop at one match. Over 50% of the clubs are owned by people who have no direct affiliation to this country or the sport itself. They will take the game where the $$$ are. Look at Berni Ecclestone and the British and French grand prixs. Did he care?

When there is something unpalatable to say the hardest thing is to get it said. Once it's in the open and the furore has died down the opportunity is created to slowly but surely gain acceptance with a quiet word here, a decent dinner there.

10 years time there will be more than one match played outside of England.

The real sadness is there are not enough "live" fans to make a difference. If we stop going it won't hurt the clubs.

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

but so would all the clubs we'd be competing with, thus rendering it of little use. the vast majority of it would go straight back into the players' pocket and just serve to increase wage bills.

and i still think as regards foreign fans, the other clubs we currently compete with would pretty much all have more of a chance of both shifting tickets and for merchandising.

Would you complain if some of the money went into further making ticket prices at Ewood cheaper?

[Fife Rover]

I think this is a very fair point RB and as the extra game doesn't deprive fans of something they already have it's hard to argue with.

My concerns are two-fold. The first being the effect of seeding teams and playing a top side three times. This does have real potential to skew the outcome of the league. 9 times out of 10 we'd be happy with a draw and philosphical about losing to Arsenal, Man Utd etc but what happens if teams we are competing with for UEFA or relegation spots get easier ties? Say we are competing with VIlla for the UEFA cup spot, Rovers play Arsenal and get stuffed, Villa get a mid-table team and win? It's unfair.

My second and much bigger concern is this being the thin end of the wedge. I cannot imagine for one moment this is the end of the matter. One game will not be enough. After a short period the major fixtures will be played overseas. How would you feel if denied a home fixture against Utd or Arsenal because it was our trun to play in Asia? A promoter makes millions on one game. How much extra will he offer to get a second?

The PL will not stop at one match. Over 50% of the clubs are owned by people who have no direct affiliation to this country or the sport itself. They will take the game where the $$$ are. Look at Berni Ecclestone and the British and French grand prixs. Did he care?

When there is something unpalatable to say the hardest thing is to get it said. Once it's in the open and the furore has died down the opportunity is created to slowly but surely gain acceptance with a quiet word here, a decent dinner there.

10 years time there will be more than one match played outside of England.

The real sadness is there are not enough "live" fans to make a difference. If we stop going it won't hurt the clubs.

Yes you are right there Paul, but the point of all this testing the water is to get everyone gently brought round to accepting the idea of Global Football then to introduce a completely new League setup featuring the invited clubs from around the World; certainly not all the EPL or all of La Liga, Serie A, the MSL etc, etc. Maybe if, and when, the whole thing takes off "Big Time" in their parlance, we will see more and more clubs invited in and the "Global Football Leagues" extended. No prizes for guessing which clubs from the EPL will be in the "last draft".

But the main intention is obviously to go for World Wide TV coverage by subscription to one or more TV channels (and they wont be cheap) so live fans will be regarded by the owners of the game as just TV extras to make it look good. Who knows if they cant get enough of them to suit the cameras they may even actually pay people to get their bums on seats; all costs recoverable of course from the unfortunate TV viewer.

[AggyBlue]

Would you complain if some of the money went into further making ticket prices at Ewood cheaper?

People are opposed to this idea because it's unfair, not because of any money related issues.

It's unfair, produces an uneven playing field that for the losers, no amount of money can compensate for, ask any Sheff Utd supporter.

[tony gale's mic]

Would you complain if some of the money went into further making ticket prices at Ewood cheaper?

cheaper ticket prices would be nice. but then if everyone is spending their extra money on bringing in new players and keeping their best players and we're spending it on subsidising cheaper tickets then we'll fall further behind anyway. it wouldn't be a prudent move, put it that way.

[philipl]

Scudamore's latest comments.

Yes they would consider more than one round.

Yes it is a way of spreading EPL attraction across all 20 clubs.

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

Would we be opposed to 1 or 2 EXTRA matches played abroad(screened live for your entertainment) if your still getting your 19 home games with a possible cheaper season ticket?

Would the say no brigade not even consider a trial season?

[RibbleValleyRover]

You need to take into account that the top five clubs will not play each other if this proposal goes ahead. This is going to have major ramifications in terms of both final league placings and relegation. It simply won't be a fair system.

If it was a case where we were relegated because we simply were unfortunate to play a Man United or an Arsenal 3 times during the season meanwhile the team that stayed up got a favourable draw and didn't play one of the top teams, I would be infuriated. It’s not right that this game may have a huge impact on a clubs season.

I disagree on many levels with this proposal but this is certainly one of the biggest reasons for my opposition to it.

[tony gale's mic]

Would we be opposed to 1 or 2 EXTRA matches played abroad(screened live for your entertainment) if your still getting your 19 home games with a possible cheaper season ticket?

Would the say no brigade not even consider a trial season?

absolutely. it would still upset the balance of the league, and as for the cheaper season ticket, it's not too much of an issue. we already have one of the cheapest season tickets in the league, and if everyone got more money and we spend whatevers left after wage inflation into subsidising cheaper season tickets, we'll run greater risk at falling behind the pack.

and no, not even a trial season.

[Claytons Left Boot]

You need to take into account that the top five clubs will not play each other if this proposal goes ahead. This is going to have major ramifications in terms of both final league placings and relegation. It simply won't be a fair system.

Quite agree. The fairest way to do it would be not to have a draw or any seeded teams at all. Take the standings at the time of the January break and then have the team in first play the team in second, third play fourth, fifth play sixth and so on. Then, each 'tie' would be as close as it could be. No one could then complain about having to face any of the top four and it going some way to relegate them come the end of the season. Watch the sweat drip off the foreheads of the big four if this were suggested though.

[Montfort]

I am OK with the basic principle of playing 1 real game outside of England. I dont see many away games anyway so it doesn't bother me if the away game is in London or Singapore.

Practically everyone who wants to see Rovers in the Blackburn area does so now and it is difficult / impossible to improve our gates. It would be nice if a load of Scandanavia's or Korean's learned to love Rovers. But I don't want any cheating to favour the big clubs so they can drop all of this seeding rubbish. I agree that they should pick one week of the fixtures to play abroad or 1 week per team to play abroad

[Anti Euro Smiths Fan]

Fifteen years ago this month Bobby Moore died. I remember how shocked I was when I heard that he'd passed away, aged just 51. I remember hearing the news first on the radio in February 1993 and feeling very saddened that this great man, who played an iconic role in our footballing history, was no longer with us.

Bobby stayed loyal to West Ham for sixteen years from 1958 to 1974, until a move to Fulham. Not for him such naked displays of greed as we've seen in recent years from selfish brats like Ashley Cole, who said that he "nearly crashed his car" when he found out from his agent that he was only being offered £55,000 a week at Arsenal.

In his later years, Bobby wasn't treated terribly well by others. He was never given an ambassadorial role by the FA, never offered a knighthood despite the impact he had in 1966. These days knighthoods are dished out like confetti - you can get one for being part of an Olympic bobsleigh team. How sad that Bobby was never fully recognised before he passed away.

I remember Harry Redknapp telling the story of how he saw Bobby Moore sitting in the stands of Grimsby's Blundell Park in the pouring rain, eating fish and chips from a paper bag and earning 150 quid as a co-commentator for the match on a local radio station. It turned out to be a dreadful goalless draw between Grimsby and West Ham in the League Cup, and afterwards Redknapp said: "I felt sorry for Bobby sitting up there. What a way to treat one of our greatest national heroes."

These days even mediocre Premiership players never have to work again when they hang up their boots for the last time. With greedy agents constantly asking for more, Premiership players are set up for life. Bobby Moore wasn't so fortunate.

Anyway, after a typically verbose introduction, this leads me on shortly to the points I'm going to make relating to this actual thread. Before he died, Bobby stated that he felt the problems within English football were two-fold. (Bobby was speaking after England's disastrous Euro '92 tournament under Graham Taylor). Moore said that the first problem was that too many teams in the top division were playing long-ball football, with players encouraged to hoof it up the pitch instead of being aware of the importance of keeping possession. The second problem that Moore identified was teams in England playing too many fixtures. He said that the top division needed to be cut to a maximum of 20. (A few years later the top division was indeed cut from 22 teams to 20.)

Bobby said that too many games were hindering England's prospects at international level and the number of fixtures had to be cut to allow England to compete with our European opponents. I could see the logic in the points that Bobby was making. With regard to long-ball football, I've always loathed it. Long-ball style football is for neanderthals like the old Wimbledon team and it never succeeds at either European or International level.

By keeping hold of the ball, passing and moving it with accuracy, you encourage the opponents to chase all over the pitch, you wear down their stamina, allowing you to control the pace of the match. The opponents hopefully get frustrated and draw out players from their starting positions, making space for final killer through-balls which win matches.

The second point that Bobby Moore made, relating to the number of fixtures we play, is of course more relevant to this thread. And it sickens me the hypocrisy of certain managers like Arsene Wenger and Alex Ferguson, who have both argued in the past for a winter break - and whose clubs Arsenal and Man United are now licking their lips at the prospect of another fixture in Dubai, Beijing, Sydney or wherever. Anything that promotes their precious "global branding". It is pure selfish unadulterated greed.

"Global branding" is what counts for these clubs. Sod the history of English football. Sod the tradition of two home and away fixtures on which our game has been based for over a hundred years. This proposal is all about greed.

And while some of you may think that this greed will benefit Rovers, I'm afraid that if Mark Hughes leaves us in the next year or two and we are subsequently relegated under a less astute manager, then God help us. Because it would be damn difficult to get back on board the gravy train.

I can provide a clear example of Man United's hypocrisy. In the link HERE, Alex Ferguson calls for a mid-season winter break.

A few years later and Fergie is buggering off to Saudi Arabia with his team to play a fixture for a million quid. This is a man who has claimed that his team plays too many games, but is then happy to go on a 6,000 mile round trip to play a fixture in the Middle East. "Global branding" again. There are shirts to sell in Asia and the Middle East and more profits to be made for one of the world's richest clubs.

I have another more recent link HERE for you - where David Moyes last month called for a winter break.

"I think it's ridiculous that someone has to fly halfway around the world at this stage of the season," said Moyes. But I suspect that the directors in charge at Everton would be all in favour of the team flying halfway round the world to another country if they can earn more money for a game over there.

For the "benefit" of short-term greed, this plan to play Premiership games abroad could do enormous damage to the history, traditions and integrity of English football. If it went ahead it wouldn't just stop with one game a season. It would be a slippery slope to more games in the future being played in different cities - and the tradition of English football in this country would be lost.

I'm completely and implacably opposed to this charade of a proposal from the Premier League and I hope very much that it doesn't go ahead.

I have a feeling that Bobby Moore wouldn't have been in favour of such greed either.....

For those who share my views please write to:

John Williams,

Ewood Park,

Blackburn,

BB2 4JF.

Please explain to Mr Williams that you are not in favour of the history and tradition of English football being lost. Unfortunately I think a lot of chairmen have got blinkers on regarding this. The more letters that Mr Williams receives the better.

[Claytons Left Boot]

......... It would be nice if a load of Scandanavia's or Korean's learned to love Rovers......

We have a supporters' club in Norway with currently 990 signed up to their discussion forum and a membership, I think, around the 300 mark. There is also a Swedish supporters' club. They come over several times each season. What the PL is trying to do won't necessarily entice any more Scandinavians into the fold but it will generate an interest (and money in to our coffers) in the far east and America via TV bidding and spin offs from merchandising etc..

[stuwilky]

They are exhibition games to an extent Stuwilky, one off games played abroad.

Not renew season tickets? go and watch Chorley? all because the club plays ONE game abroad and earns itself a % million..... I am astonished by the knee jerk reactions from some on here.

Its is not an exhibition game though is it.

it is a LEAGUE FIXTURE.

To be fair, I avoid Chorley at the best of times......

[LeChuck]

if you'd actually bothered to read what i wrote in my post, this would almost certainly not be particularly financially helpful to rovers if we want to compete at the level we're at now, and could well send us further behind the likes of everton, villa etc.

Interesting.

Could you elaborate? I'm intrigued to know how we wouldn't benefit financially if the money was spread equally across the 20 teams.

For the record, I was against this idea until I read Richard Scuadmore's comments. He said the big clubs will go off and do this themselves if they have to (but obviously not for league points). This would mean they'd get more money and the gap would get even bigger.

[broadsword]

That's blackmail by Scudamore.

And in any case, how can Man Utd, Liverpool etc decide to play league games abroad without the approval of the other clubs.

This whole crazy thing will just grow and grown until the clubs run out of money-grasping opportunities. In the meantime, no traditiona or rite associated with football in this country will be sancrosanct, becaus ethe only thing that matters is increasing income, and the only reason for that is to further feather the nests of players.

I absolutely cannot believe this idea is getting any backing from fans. Can we no longer differentiate between the truth and satire?

[philipl]

substitutes

multiple substitutes

coloured players

no back passes

goal keepers' steps

banning donkey kicks

offside law interpretation changes

formalised injury time

penalty shoot outs

extra time

golden goals (came and went)

short shorts

long shorts

plastic footballs

red and yellow cards

three up three down

play-offs

three points for a win

points penalty for administration

adverts on shirts

badges on shirts

players' names on shirts

squad numbers

all seater stadiums

premiership

champions league

intertoto

end of the cup winners cup

full members cup

all that change has happened in my time following the Rovers

[broadsword]

What am I meant to take from that, change is good? A lot has changed, but I don't sense much improvement.

Let's ban teams of men from competing, clubs must now field teams of naked women. It's progress, the natural evolution of the game. MJore subscribers to Sky means more money for Blackburn Rovers, and that is the essential litmus test by which we judge a proposed change in football.