Jump to content

Recommended Posts

>>And let us not forget the great Brian Deane!! <<


How could I have overlooked him?! three times a blade!


Now then..."Colin"....rearrange the letters of "Neil Warnock" into another two word name, the forename of which is Colin?? As there are (reputedly? B)) ladies who read this thread then a nod should be as good as a wa- wink right?


The nickname was first coined by his enemies but was then taken over by his fans and even the Great Man himself!

Big win for Bristol City, just got a call from my friend who had come up to London for it, saying "mate are there any pubs with beer gardens in Victoria?" I told him I don't really know the area very well, only for him to say "what do you mean, it's London!" >:D<


Surprise surprise, Warnock is blaming the ref... He did a bit of a Wengeresque victim complex thing too, saying that a Bristol player should have been sent off (I haven't seen it, so maybe he should have been), but that if it was one of his players, they would have been sent off... I agree he might be good for a laugh in the Prem, but I really hope they get slaughtered in the second leg!


Come on City!

Now, I don't know if I can post without getting flamed by my new gooner friend, but I've just heard that Riisse (spelling) is also done deal to PFC alongside Crouch - the pair for ?17m - this is from a pretty damn reliable source.


Also, Eiuder Gudjonsen has signed for Pompey at ?3m (not so reliable source as this one also told me that Egurt Magnunsson was buying pompey at ?170m


Anyway - though LFC fans may be a little interested.

Apparently John Arne Riise threw his toys out of the pram when Rafa told him to find a new club. He's been a good player for us, but I don't think he'll be the one to take us to the next level.


Sad to see Crouch go though, but he's just not getting enough games. Remember how everyone slated Rafa for buying him?


I heard that a certain D Villa might be heading our way though. Fingers crossed......

Jeez, I know. Was at the Spurs, Liverpool game and couldn't believe it every time the score line came up. At one point all the Kopites (I was sat with the home lot) went nuts and started singing about Heskey. Someone must have told them that Wigan had equalised. No such luck. :(


Quite enjoyed the lane. Torres almost scored in the second half and I was ready to leap out of my seat, forgetting where I was. That's the first time I've been relieved that a Liverpool shot was saved. :-$

Now watched it all on MOTD - the Torres goal was just sublime...oozed pure class. I fear for Man City next season though under their new owner....and Fulham again pull off a great escape. Who knew having Hugh Grant in the crowd could be so inspirational? :))


*Sulk Mode* 38 points would have got Sheffield United 15th place this season *end sulk mode* :))

Jah Lush Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Actually, I think Fulham will stay up...just. But

> you're wrong about Saddam.


I called it back in early April...hurrah! Well done Roy Hodgson and Fulham.

Man Utd have been the best team this season by a mile and played the best football so well done to them for winning the Premiership.

Good to see the high level of consistency in refereeing continued yesterday at Wigan. Scholes managing to stay on the pitch and (shock horror) Man Ure not having a penalty awarded against them when Ferdinand clearly moved his body and arm towards the ball and made contact with said ball. As for Man Ures shout for a pen, well ginger shouldn't have been on the pitch anyway, so maybe mr Bennett thought he'd even things up.


Fulham was the best performance yesterday and I'm mightily pleased for them. I won't miss Brum in the slightest. Was this divine retribution for what one of their cart horses, passing for a journeyman player, did to poor old Eduardo. What goes around.........;-)

I think both those decisions would have been a bit harsh but it wouldn't have been suprising to see either given. Scholes knows he can't tackle (so does everyone else) but it would have been a harsh sending off. Rio hit the ball with his shoulder, that's not handball but I'm sure you will disagree. Who do you think you'll get in the qualifying rounds of the Champs League next season?

Sandperson Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think both those decisions would have been a bit

> harsh but it wouldn't have been suprising to see

> either given. Scholes knows he can't tackle (so

> does everyone else) but it would have been a harsh

> sending off.


Come on now, we all now the second offence was a cynical and blatant block, for which he should have walked. As for not being able to tackle, that isn't an excuse. If he can't tackle, he shouldn't bother trying. As for who we'll get in the CMPL I'm not fussed. I think we are more than capable of beating anybody, and I'm confident we'll improve on the season that's just ended. The best goals of the day were at Boro, there were at least 4 crackers.

Yeah, sorry, I wasn't meaning that he can't tackle was an excuse just that even I wince when he goes into a challenge and ask 'Why?'. It may have been cynical (not much in the game isn't these days!) but not sure if it would have been fair for him to be sent off. Let's hope that next year all the teams are as good as they were this season and it's close again. Except Liverpool ;-)

I find it somewhat irksome that so many so-called experts on TV & in the Press have gone on about what a super, exciting competition the Premier League is. It isn't. It is a depressing 4 horse race (like the Scottish PL has been for years with the 2 Glasgow giants slugging it out), plus a competition for 5th, plus another for the next few places. We all know the four teams who will finish in next season's top four already...


And did anyone notice Avram Grant's ludicrous claim that the top 2 should play off for the Premier Championship if they finished level on points as to decide the champions by goal difference would be "tragic"?! :)) This is almost as good as Ferguson's "rule" his team are allowed to handle the ball in the area when playing against any one of the 16 clubs who are there simply to make up the numbers...


Spot the difference: Manchester United & The Harlem Globetrotters :))

I largely agree with you there Simon and I think Kevin Keegan was right in what he said last week that you would have to spend ?150 million to get yourself into the top four. Spurs have been tipped to get there over the past few seasons and probably will be again if we spend big this year but I can't see it myself. The best I can hope for next season is finishing 5th and winning the UEFA Cup and maybe a domestic trophy like the Carling Cup again or the FA Cup.

Jah Lush Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Jah Lush Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> Man Utd have been the best team this season by a

> mile and played the best football.


By a mile, that'll be two points more than Chavski and 4 more than us, and they lost 5 games whereas Chavski and The Arsenal only lost 3. Country mile? Hardly. Best footbal? Again, hardly especially over the last 4 weeks in the league. Given the amount they have spent, which is something many Man Ure fans accuse us of steering clear of, I'd expect a lot better.


Going off at a tangent here a little, but I see the so called experts and Chavski players and management claim that the number of injuries have effected their chances this season. Really? What about us? Van persie, Adebayor, Rosicky, Almunia, Flamini, Eduardo, Sagna, Eboue, Hleb, Cesc, all have been out for periods during the season, admittedly some longer than others but talk about missing the bleedin' obvious!!!

Jah Lush Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I largely agree with you there Simon and I think

> Kevin Keegan was right in what he said last week

> that you would have to spend ?150 million to get

> yourself into the top four. Spurs have been tipped

> to get there over the past few seasons and

> probably will be again if we spend big this year

> but I can't see it myself. The best I can hope for

> next season is finishing 5th and winning the UEFA

> Cup and maybe a domestic trophy like the Carling

> Cup again or the FA Cup.



We've not spent ?150 million and Arsenal haven't even got close to that figure. Agreed that you have to spend to be competitive, but the money that United and Chelsea throw at players is ridiculous.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...