Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Agree with Otto that Liverpool look much better this year. I can't understand why they let Meireles go though. I thought that he was just finding his feet at the end of last season. I can't see Bellamy playing a major part but he enhances the squad options.


Given Gerrard has still to return I'd expect Liverpool to be better than Arsenal and Spurs this season. They may even be better than Chelsea who haven't convinced me of their worth yet. United look like they will be better to watch this year than last but a top midfielder would have been good to get. Who knows with City? They wont be allowed wear those scarfs around their necks this Winter.

Although Arsenal have lost a bit of quality and cofidence, it seems Arsene has improved the team in the right areas. Namely defense and attack. Looking forward to see Wilshire play along with Frimpong. The midfield duo offers more potential than Fabregas & Nasri. A team that plays as a unit tend to play better than a team of individuals.

Given Barcelona's latest 'total-football' experiment playing 9 midfielders one defender and a gk is that the way for the top premiership (or all) clubs to go? And shouldn't the England team (bearing in mind the disastrous showings at recent tournaments) be picked and coached to this end also?


If so are out-and-out strikers (especially those who don't track back or tackle) and defenders, who can only put themselves in the way and hoof it upfield, outdated?

The problems with the England world cup team were as follows


1) their midfield couldn't string a few passes together


2) lack of pace in midfield


3) lack of quality central defenders and goalkeeper


4) leadership


I'm convinced that within the next four years we will be seeing some really good young technical English footballers coming through the ranks and playing football in the right way.

I wonder how the England fans will react this time to an England team full of Utd players?... hopefully not the booing we had with Beckham et al...Jones is the pick of the bunch, fantastic presence and leadership qualities for a 19yo, definitly a future England captain, Bobby Charlton paid him the ultimate compliment recently, likening him to Duncan Edwards.

mockney piers Wrote:

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

> I thought beckham was booed because of his idiotic

> sending off, not for being utd.

> Or was it the penchant for skirts ;)


I don't disagree that there was booing of Beckham after his WC sending off, it was to be expected, any scapegoat will do...it's worth noting a couple of seasons later he quickly became a national hero after his last minute free kick against Greece in a WC qualifer, which just proves how fickle the press and football fans are.


I agree Neville was also booed, but along with Beckham, this individual booing happened at domestic matches, a bit like what Terry, Rooney etc get on their travels now.


I'm afraid what I was referring to in my earlier post went deeper than a bit of pantomime villian booing Mockers.

A large number of England fans at the old Wembley would sing anti-Utd songs, the main one being 'Stand up if you hate Man U', as well as booing every touch by a Utd player (Beckham, the Nevilles, Butt and Scholes).

Common concensus was that these were fans from London based clubs...you have to remember this was a period when Utd were very dominant domestically, so it was probably pure envy/jealousy etc.

This collective booing of England's Utd players only ceased when Wembley was demolished and England games were played around the country, with most big games being played at Old Trafford.


Because of this, a section of Utd fans, particularly the away supporters, turned their back on supporting England, and would wind up the London based clubs fans with anti-England chants, the''Argentina!'' chant being the main one...remember this was before Tevez signed for Utd. To this day some still won't support England.


I'm just wondering now that England are back at the new Wembley, what reaction the London based England fans will have if, as it looks likely, England will have another strong contingent of Utd players...Rooney, Young, Welbeck, Cleverley, Jones, Smalling, maybe even Rio. It is also a dilemma for the anti-England Utd fans, do they start supporting England again?


Personally, I've always thought and believed club allegiances should be put aside when England played, but that episode did leave a sour taste in the mouth of a lot of Utd fans...nevermind, C'mon England!..0-1 at time of writing..Cahill :)-D

red devil Wrote:


>

> I don't disagree that there was booing of Beckham

> after his WC sending off, it was to be expected,

> any scapegoat will do...it's worth noting a couple

> of seasons later he quickly became a national hero

> after his last minute free kick against Greece in

> a WC qualifer, which just proves how fickle the

> press and football fans are.

>


I have to quibble a little with this - it's the kind of thing commentators/journos are always saying but is, I believe, inaccurate.


If a player does well/tries hard - cheers. If the opposite is true - jeers. That is not fickle it is being a supporter. Fans are not simply cheerleaders they are the ones who pay the players' wages and if a player is thought to be taking the piss or letting the team down he deserves some verbals.


Beckham's rehabilitation was was down to hard work, dedication and not moaning all the time - he grew up from the little whiner who needed Roy Keane to protect him on the field to the man he became in that Greece game (when his whole performance that night - not just the goal - was inspirational)

maxxi Wrote:

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


> Fans are not simply

> cheerleaders they are the ones who pay the

> players' wages...


In the olden days this probably held true, but with mass sponsorship and television money, fans now only contribute a percentage to the players wages, would be interesting to know what that percentage is...

TV money is only there because market is there - market is the armchair fan who may not be heard but - on evidence witnessed in pubs during sky games - is just as likely to scream at screen as a fan is at a game and it is him/her the sponsorship is aimed at too so they do still pay the wages. If the fans walk away there'd be no money.


I just hate all this "They should get behind the lads" crap from the likes of Terry and Lampard and Rooney when they are booed off after a pathetic international performance.


You said it yourself - the performance against Greece made Beckham a hero and was the base for Brand Beckham. He played through the boos and earned fans respect - he didn't act as though it was something he deserved by right (something I think Rooney is also learning).

Bluerevolution Wrote:

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

> And Hi all, I'm back !


I was at Wembley for the Community Shield; BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! No wonder you went into hiding.


Blue Moon,

Your team played like a buffoon,

They scored 2 goals way too soon,

And ended up a cartoon.


Blue Moon,

la la la la la la la...

maxxi Wrote:

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

> TV money is only there because market is there -

> market is the armchair fan who may not be heard

> but - on evidence witnessed in pubs during sky

> games - is just as likely to scream at screen as a

> fan is at a game and it is him/her the sponsorship

> is aimed at too so they do still pay the wages. If

> the fans walk away there'd be no money.


I thought your statement they are the ones who pay the players' wages was too simplistic to be applied to the modern game.

Fans don't pay a large proportion of the wages as they used to, as I said before it comes down to percentages, and how you derive that is no doubt very complicated.

Taking your example of the pub armchir fan...how much of what they spend watching a game in a pub goes back into the game and how much into the pockets of the breweries? I would argue that the majority of Sky football viewers are pub armchair fans and don't hand over any money directly to Sky. Sky's main source of revenue come's from the advertisers not Sky subscribers. Does every Ford car owner watch Sky?, no, but they are indirectly contributing to the players wages, even those who don't follow football.


Re. booing, we'll have to agree to disagree on that one, personally I'd never boo a Utd player or the team for putting in a bad performance. Maybe I'm spoilt in that, on the whole, bad performances by Utd are thankfully rare, but when they do underperform I trust Fergie to kick some arses into gear. I'd love to know what were the Arsenal fans thinking when they booed off their team off after a pre-season friendly this summer. What were they hoping to achieve?..it's little wonder the team's morale has been so low. Their players appreciated the great vocal support they got at OT last week...it's a romantic old fashioned ideal, especially in the world of spoilt brat millionaire footballers, but I do believe the role of the fans is to get behind the team and not kick them when they are down.


Going back to Beckham, I stand by my statement that fans and the press are fickle...in the Colombia game before the Argentina sending off, he scored with a great free kick = hero...then the sending off = zero...you can't get any more fickle than that. His subsequent redemption took about 3 years I think. It was Utd as a club, the fans, players, managemant, and of course Beckham himself that got him through that period. The reaction to his sending off was unwarrented, and I think it was down to who he was, not what he had done.

Alan Medic Wrote:

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

> >

> Apart from the 4 at United, who is there out there

> that fits the bill?

>

> ETA Wilshere


The up and coming players are:


1. Jack Rodwell (can either play at centre back, attacking/defensive midfielder)

2. Ross Barkley (attacking midfield, comfortable in possession and excellent passer with either foot)

3. Emmanuel Frimpong (defensive midfielder)

4. Henri Lansbury (centre midfielder)

5. Raheem Sterling (winger - has that ability where he can dribble either side of a defender.

6. Josh Macceachran (centre midfielder - wonderful passing ability and comfortable in possession)

7. Kyle Bartley (central defender but can play in central midfield as well)

8. Martin Kelly (Right back)

A Liverpool Fan, a Man u fan and a Man City fan are climbing a mountain and arguing about who loves their team the most..

The Liverpool fan insists that he is the most loyal and he yells ?this is for The Reds ?and jumps off the mountain..

Not to be out done, the Man City fan next professes his love for his team.

He screams, ?this is for City !!? and pushes the Man U fan off the mountain..

Bluerevolution Wrote:

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

> A Liverpool Fan, a Man u fan and a Man City fan

> are climbing a mountain and arguing about who

> loves their team the most..

> The Liverpool fan insists that he is the most

> loyal and he yells ?this is for The Reds ?and

> jumps off the mountain..

> Not to be out done, the Man City fan

> professes his love for his team

>and buys the mountain, pushing everybody into oblivion.



Fixed that for you!

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

    • 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.
    • You can get a card at the till, though, to get the discount. You don't have to carry it with you (or load it onto your phone), you can just get a different card each time. Not sure what happens if they notice 🤣
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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