Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Besides we weren't at war if you recall we were just in conflict. Argentina is easily among my favourite countries in the world, wonderful, friendly, articulate educated and beautiful people.


My brother who lived out there summed them up as Italians who speak Spanish and want to be English. Pretty much spot on, and malvinas or football rivalry apart they still really like and admire this country, even occasionally our footballers.

Oops, missed a whole page of 'banter' there. As it goes flags of you're favourite players isn't that new. Many am Israeli flag at the Boleyn over the years (or west ham flags at Israeli games as it goes). I can't believe there wouldn't be the odd French flag at highbury/emirates given that arsenal have the lowest count of British players on the pitch of amy team

red devil Wrote:

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

> Atila Reincarnate Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Annasfield Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > To be fair to Atila, England weren't in the

> > Euros

> > > this year.

> >

> > The fact that you had to point this out to the

> > mancs is quite sad, but not surprising.

>

> drowning in your own hypocrisy...

>

>

>

> Remind me next time England don't qualify for a

> championship to support another country and refer

> to them as 'we'...



I'll say this slowly so even you might grasp my ancestry. I was born in London to Turkish Cypriot parents, with me so far. England weren't in the tournament we are referring to, so as I have Turkish blood in veins, not going too fast for you am I, I supported...............TURKEY. Still with me or have I left you at the starting gate, like your team last Wednesday. My observation is regarding people who support a CLUB side, keep up now, cheering for a nation which is not thier own, understand now? Jeez that's hard work just like all Man Ure supporters, touchy as fcuk.

Sorry Anna, I'd lost the will to live, and slipped several posts. Wasn't trying to have a go at scousers either, although it may have sounded that way. It's just something that's wound me up since an old friend tried to convince me his pan of scouse was somehow different to any pan of STEW found outside of Liverpool :) For my part, I'm an England fan first, and would want a United player in an England shirt to take out a Liverpool player in their country's shirt if it helped England. Think that is the way it was in general until about a decade ago.

mockney piers Wrote:

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

> Oops, missed a whole page of 'banter' there. As it

> goes flags of you're favourite players isn't that

> new. Many am Israeli flag at the Boleyn over the

> years (or west ham flags at Israeli games as it

> goes). I can't believe there wouldn't be the odd

> French flag at highbury/emirates given that

> arsenal have the lowest count of British players

> on the pitch of amy team


Why we would want to follow Man Ure's despicable example, our club is Arsenal not France, numpty.

Sandperson Wrote:

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

> Atila Reincarnate Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Annasfield Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > To be fair to Atila, England weren't in the

> > Euros

> > > this year.

> >

> > The fact that you had to point this out to the

> > mancs is quite sad, but not surprising.

>

> So it's not ok for us to chant the country of one

> of our most valued players (at a club level) but

> it is ok for you cheer on another country in a

> major competition? Personally I didn't cheer for

> anyone in the Euros because England weren't there

> and I support England. But if you think it's ok to

> swap your allegiences whenever the team you

> support don't do well enough then that's

> fine.....

>

> Having said that Arsenal haven't really performed

> in any competition for a few years now so I guess

> you have to choose someone else to support in the

> latter stages on a fairly regular basis.


Apart from taking points of your lot in the premier league on a faily regular basis eh?

Quote:

My observation is regarding people who support a CLUB side


...hypocritally yours Atila


Taken out of context which you have conveniently omitted boony lad, which says who support a CLUB side and chant the name of a nation other than their own. I have Turkish ancestry. Clearly you have been too lazy to read my post explaining this.

Atila Reincarnate Wrote:

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

> Sandperson Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Atila Reincarnate Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > Annasfield Wrote:

> > >

> >

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

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > To be fair to Atila, England weren't in the

> > > Euros

> > > > this year.

> > >

> > > The fact that you had to point this out to

> the

> > > mancs is quite sad, but not surprising.

> >

> > So it's not ok for us to chant the country of

> one

> > of our most valued players (at a club level)

> but

> > it is ok for you cheer on another country in a

> > major competition? Personally I didn't cheer

> for

> > anyone in the Euros because England weren't

> there

> > and I support England. But if you think it's ok

> to

> > swap your allegiences whenever the team you

> > support don't do well enough then that's

> > fine.....

> >

> > Having said that Arsenal haven't really

> performed

> > in any competition for a few years now so I

> guess

> > you have to choose someone else to support in

> the

> > latter stages on a fairly regular basis.

>

> Apart from taking points of your lot in the

> premier league on a faily regular basis eh?


And still not won the league for four years.

Sandperson Wrote:

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

> Atila Reincarnate Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Sandperson Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > Atila Reincarnate Wrote:

> > >

> >

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

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > Annasfield Wrote:

> > > >

> > >

> >

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

>

> >

> > >

> > > > -----

> > > > > To be fair to Atila, England weren't in

> the

> > > > Euros

> > > > > this year.

> > > >

> > > > The fact that you had to point this out to

> > the

> > > > mancs is quite sad, but not surprising.

> > >

> > > So it's not ok for us to chant the country of

> > one

> > > of our most valued players (at a club level)

> > but

> > > it is ok for you cheer on another country in

> a

> > > major competition? Personally I didn't cheer

> > for

> > > anyone in the Euros because England weren't

> > there

> > > and I support England. But if you think it's

> ok

> > to

> > > swap your allegiences whenever the team you

> > > support don't do well enough then that's

> > > fine.....

> > >

> > > Having said that Arsenal haven't really

> > performed

> > > in any competition for a few years now so I

> > guess

> > > you have to choose someone else to support in

> > the

> > > latter stages on a fairly regular basis.

> >

> > Apart from taking points of your lot in the

> > premier league on a faily regular basis eh?

>

> And still not won the league for four years.

Typical glory hunting plastic Man Ure fan.

Okay, in order to try and make a normal discussion out of all this, a serious question for those who put club before country...


In what circumstances exactly do you mean? I agree completely about pointless (and far too many) friendlies, in which players could get injured, but outside of that, do people not love the big international tournaments?


I just think there is absolutely nothing like a world cup, for atmosphere, bright colours, differnt styles, underdogs and all that. I think it's great!


With the exception of the aforementioned friendlies, I just don't see where the clash really comes in?


I mean, Atila, surely in an England Vs Netherlands final, you wouldn't want Van Persie to score? Or Anna, same for Torres if England Vs Spain?


I cheered Torres and Spain in the last Euro, but wouldn't cheer anyone against England.


Thoughts/opinions?

Keef, I think it just depends on how passionately you support your club and it's players. This is by no means saying anyone is more or a less of a fan. It's just people's take on it, I guess.


I think the England set up is a joke and after how Carra was treated I really couldn't give a toss about Internationals. Finals such as the World Cup or Euros I'll watch but it just doesn't excite me. Of course I'd rather see England beat Spain, but no to the detriment of any of Liverpool's players.

The problem is that the Big 4 clubs each pretty much have 20 internationals on duty for 2 weeks at a time on about 4 occasions each season. We get the players back from Internationals sometimes only 36 hours before a key game. Is not about not liking England, it's about not liking the Club season broken up by International football.


World Cups, European Championships are during the post-season and as you say it's great but why the hell do England, Spain, France etc have to play so many pointless matches to qualify. I'd prefer a return to smaller more competitive groups of 5 teams, 4 internationals per season which are played midweek between club fixtures. Why should England get 7 days to prepare for a game when a Club often only gets 48 hours..

I wouldn't mind seeing some statistics on this. I would hazard a guess that fans of the "big four" would say club over country, whilst the supporters of the other 88 football league clubs might say otherwise.


I agree with Keef, nothing gets to me like a World Cup or European championships.

Atila Reincarnate Wrote:

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

> Keef in answer to your question re RVP scoring

> against England, it's a tough call. I watch him

> week in & week out, so cheering him if he scored

> might just be a natural reaction.


And in one sentence you've just rendered a whole, long, boring day of petty wind-ups invalid.


I for one would see England win a World Cup or a European Championship over United winning the league or the Champions League any day of the week. It's my dream to see England win a major trophy.


As for Barry to City....good luck getting into the Champions League. Either he couldn't resist the money or they've told him that they have big plans for other signings and guarantees of number of starts for him. I like the guy and think he's a good midfielder, I think he's a bargain for ?12M but I'm not sure how much he can change that side on his own.

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...