Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Well it's been coming for some time. I'd like to hear from those with a case for it. A good case, rather than it is just getting return on your investment. I'll be with many here and be watching Peckham Town when the fans are allowed back in. The word of the day is ?ingordigiousness?: extreme greed; an insatiable desire for wealth at any cost.


My case for it is below:

There is no case for it. It's a travesty, and the available sanctions should be used against clubs and players who participate.

The Premier League would be diminished greatly without those clubs, so hopefully they will see sense, but the game is bigger than any one club (or even six).

ESL organisers have said that the teams involved would still be part of their domestic leagues. Obviously the reason against the ESL relates to how seriously would our six teams take PL games on Saturday if they were playing a top European team on the following Wednesday? The PL would also be forced to make major re-scheduling arrangements.

This is terrible.

It?s a US coup manufactured by the US owners and their vulture partner JP Morgan that rides roughshod over European football culture and supporters. I haven?t spoken to any supporter of the so called big 6 who even vaguely supports this, they are as horrified as the rest of us. Premiership should grow a pair and immediately expel all 6 in my opinion.

Annoyingly it's knocked Jose being sacked off the agenda - I always enjoy this time of year


But yeah - the whole thing is a massive pile of shite and only underlines why many people I know have been drifting away from the game in recent years anyway. Even if whole thing collapses tomorrow, it leaves a great big cloud and has sucked any joy out of "supporting" a team.

This is supposed to be about the case for. Here is the case for:


1. Football is now sold as a lifestyle, in particular for those with money to spend

2. It will be a further boost for on line betting

3. It's a global business, and will follow the money

4. Many in this country will still buy into it, come what may


Not that I am happy but always good to have a balanced argument.


On a similar subject strong arguments were put forward when test match cricket was taken off the list of crown jewels, ie home tests on terrestrial. I thought the opposite, wrote to government, and was proved correct.

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

    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
    • Very sorry to hear this, but surely the landlord is responsible for fixing the electrics?  Surely they must be insured for things like this? I hope you get it all sorted out quickly.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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