Official Premier League Thread 2012/2013

you mal? Suarez lost his chance after taking a bite outta Ivano

No, on footballing merit, Suarez and RVP were definitely better... But yes, he lost his opportunity on humanitarian grounds (as if that is some sort of paradigm that footballers live by...)
 
you mal? Suarez lost his chance after taking a bite outta Ivano

The voting was closed way before that happened.

Suarez and RvP were the best all season, most goals (Suarez was leading golden goal for quite awhile) and Bale just turned up after Christmas for a few good games.
 
Oh look another gem:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/pfa-awards-dinner-comedian-reginald-1859058

Guests at one of football’s biggest galas were stunned last night when black comedian Reginald D Hunter repeatedly said “n*****”.

Hunter, 44, warned PFA Player of the Year Dinner attendees including FA boss David Bernstein he would be using the word “liberally” during his 10-minute turn.

The Have I Got News For You regular opened with a joke about Liverpool FC’s Luis Suarez, who was banned for racially abusing Man United’s Patrice Evra last season.

Now if you will recall what David Bernstein said about the whole Suarez incident:

The use of discriminatory language is unacceptable regardless of context

It's just a complete farce.
 
What's a complete farce? The dude is black, he's American, and he's a comedian.

Are you suggesting that the FA ban him? Or that they shouldn't have banned Suarez?

Eh, I was being dumb.It's actually a non-issue.
 
The dangers of spending above your means in the Premier League.

5 years after winning the FA Cup, Portsmouth will now be plying their trade in the lowest division of the Football League following their relegation to League Two. In that time they have entered administration twice and only managed to survive the 2012/13 season thanks to their supporter's trust. They no longer own the stadium they play in, the training ground they practice on or the academy their youth players train at.

QPR best hope Tony Fernandes is willing to hang about as they put themselves in a horrible financial position and the likes of Southampton, Portsmouth and Leeds United are proof of what can happen when you spend above your means.

Wolves are another ex-Premier League club staring down a dark road. They are all but confined to League One for the 2013/14 season, sitting 23rd and 3 points adrift of safety with one game to go. Currently they have a squad loaded with players with Premiership experience and that includes Premiership wages. If they are relegated they will become the 12th club to suffer two successive demotions and the financial implications of such a sequence of events are unsettling.
 
The dangers of spending above your means in the Premier League.

5 years after winning the FA Cup, Portsmouth will now be plying their trade in the lowest division of the Football League following their relegation to League Two. In that time they have entered administration twice and only managed to survive the 2012/13 season thanks to their supporter's trust. They no longer own the stadium they play in, the training ground they practice on or the academy their youth players train at.

QPR best hope Tony Fernandes is willing to hang about as they put themselves in a horrible financial position and the likes of Southampton, Portsmouth and Leeds United are proof of what can happen when you spend above your means.

Wolves are another ex-Premier League club staring down a dark road. They are all but confined to League One for the 2013/14 season, sitting 23rd and 3 points adrift of safety with one game to go. Currently they have a squad loaded with players with Premiership experience and that includes Premiership wages. If they are relegated they will become the 12th club to suffer two successive demotions and the financial implications of such a sequence of events are unsettling.

You would think that some of these clubs would have learnt by now...

Spend, yes, but don't be ridiculous about it...
 
The voting was closed way before that happened.

Suarez and RvP were the best all season, most goals (Suarez was leading golden goal for quite awhile) and Bale just turned up after Christmas for a few good games.

I don't think so... The chairman of the PFA, whatshisface, he mentioned last week that the voting needs to consider the human aspect of the game, and that it would be a disgrace is Suarez won it...
 
You would think that some of these clubs would have learnt by now...

Spend, yes, but don't be ridiculous about it...

Well, I read an article about Aston Villa's fall from grace and simply put; you can thank the Champions League and the lure of Premiership TV money for the way clubs spend. Randy Lerner - Villa's owner - allowed Martin O'Neill to spend 120 million pounds in 4 years in pursuit of Champions League football, with a net loss of 82 million pounds on transfers. Fortunately for Villa, Lerner realised that their inability to reach the gold-lined pitches of the Champions League would spell financial disaster and he swiftly began to institute austerity measures, hence the youthful Villa team we have seen take a fair few beatings this season. The same could not be said of Leeds United and Portsmouth who continued to spend even when it was clear they could no longer support it.

At the other end of the table, and even before the new TV deal comes into effect, Premiership status is worth as much as 45 million pounds in TV revenue alone for the average team. The Championship play-off final has long been touted as the single most lucrative game in club football thanks to the winner receiving 30 million plus while the loser will continue to receive the roughly 1 million pounds in TV revenue that the average Championship side is awarded .

Essentially these clubs are spending money to make money and when it fails the results are spectacular. Granted some have managed it while being smart; David Moyes, while having failed to win a trophy or secure European football, has kept Everton competitive on a shoe-string and the the likes of Stoke City and West Brown have kept their Premiership status secure without having to break the bank. But then again, if either of those three ever wanted to push on to greater heights then they'd have to spend. And big.
 
Last edited:
What's a complete farce? The dude is black, he's American, and he's a comedian.

Are you suggesting that the FA ban him? Or that they shouldn't have banned Suarez?

The FA is making a mockery of the game and then hiring a black dude to make black jokes. faking ****ers. they might as well have asked Evra for his racist version instead of that dude.
 
and the the likes of Stoke City and West Brown have kept their Premiership status secure without having to break the bank. But then again, if either of those three ever wanted to push on to greater heights then they'd have to spend. And big.

You mean West Brom, not West Brown.

Also, Stoke City's net spend over the last five years is around 80m, only City and Chelsea are higher.
 
Do you know which of the current EPL sides has spent the least amount of money since 2006?

Well, only 10 of the current clubs have been there since 2006/07. I've compiled a list of all 33 Premier League clubs that have been in the league since 2006/07 and their spending. The current 10 EPL clubs are in bold. The figures in brackets are the amount of seasons they have spent in the top flight since 2006/07. Figures are also in millions and pounds.

1 - Man City - 641.9 (7)
2 - Chelsea - 494.2 (7)
3 - Liverpool - 423.7 (7)
4 - Spurs - 393.3 (7)
5 - Man United - 322.4 (7)
6 - Arsenal - 211.1 (7)
7 - Sunderland - 210.4 (6)
8 - Aston Villa - 209 (7)
9 - West Ham - 172.5 (6)
10 - Newcastle - 154.7 (6)
11 - Everton - 118.4 (7)
12 – Fulham – 117.5 (7)
13 – Stoke – 114 (5)
14 – Wigan – 108 (7)

15 – Portsmouth – 93.3(4)
16 – Bolton – 84.7 (6)
17 – QPR – 67.4 (2)
18 – Birmingham – 65.9 (3)
19 – Middlesbrough – 65.5 (3)
20 - Blackburn – 63.5 (6)
21 – Wolves – 45.4 (3)
22 – West Brom – 42.7 (4)
23 – Southampton – 37.6 (1)
24 – Swansea – 29.3 (2)

25 – Hull – 28.9 (2)
26 – Reading 27.9 (3)
27 – Norwich 22.9 (2)

28 – Charlton 21.5 (1)
29 – Derby 20 (1)
30 – Sheffield United 15.9 (1)
31 – Burnley 11.9 (1)
32 – Watford 9.2 (1)
33 – Blackpool 5 (1)

If we look at the amount of seasons in the Premier League vs total spending then Wigan would be the thriftiest club in the league. 108 million over 7 seasons equates to a mere 15.4 million pounds per season on transfers. On the other hand Newcastle & West Ham have spent massive amounts of money and still managed to get relegated in recent years. Blackburn had been equally thrifty too, having spent on average 10.6 million in the 6 seasons before they were relegated.
 
Well, I read an article about Aston Villa's fall from grace and simply put; you can thank the Champions League and the lure of Premiership TV money for the way clubs spend. Randy Lerner - Villa's owner - allowed Martin O'Neill to spend 120 million pounds in 4 years in pursuit of Champions League football, with a net loss of 82 million pounds on transfers. Fortunately for Villa, Lerner realised that their inability to reach the gold-lined pitches of the Champions League would spell financial disaster and he swiftly began to institute austerity measures, hence the youthful Villa team we have seen take a fair few beatings this season. The same could not be said of Leeds United and Portsmouth who continued to spend even when it was clear they could no longer support it.

At the other end of the table, and even before the new TV deal comes into effect, Premiership status is worth as much as 45 million pounds in TV revenue alone for the average team. The Championship play-off final has long been touted as the single most lucrative game in club football thanks to the winner receiving 30 million plus while the loser will continue to receive the roughly 1 million pounds in TV revenue that the average Championship side is awarded .

Essentially these clubs are spending money to make money and when it fails the results are spectacular. Granted some have managed it while being smart; David Moyes, while having failed to win a trophy or secure European football, has kept Everton competitive on a shoe-string and the the likes of Stoke City and West Brown have kept their Premiership status secure without having to break the bank. But then again, if either of those three ever wanted to push on to greater heights then they'd have to spend. And big.

Agreed. It's a vicious cycle. One that will cause the league to fall over at some point.

The Bundesliga did it right.
 
You mean West Brom, not West Brown.

Also, Stoke City's net spend over the last five years is around 80m, only City and Chelsea are higher.

True. Their seasonal average spend is not that bad though. Of the current clubs only Everton, Fulham, Wigan, West Brom, Swansea, Reading and Norwich have spent less per season.

Then again, how much longer can they sustain spending 22 million per season before they get caught with their pants down? Wigan, Everton & Fulham spent at similar levels until 3/4 seasons ago before they slowed down.
 
Last edited:
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X