Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'd be suprised if he went to Chelsea but I am suprised he doesn't want to stay at United so I'm not sure what his motivations are. That's what I meant about the Drogba thing, if he wants more starts then he's going to have to go to a team where he'll be first choice striker and although I think he's good I don't think he'd start ahead of Drogba, so I guess you are right, City would be a logical choice, but if I were him I'd go abroad.

Do you think that maybe there is some truth in the story that his feelings were hurt that he didn't get offered a contract earlier, and that he felt the likes of Rooney and Ronaldo would never have been made to wait? That is what his agent / owner is saying... Could be true, as he seems a bit of an emotional type, which I think is not a bad thing.


What happened to the local rivalry between Man U and City though? Surely if he won't join Liverpool, he should be hesitant to join City...


Shame Everton can't afford him, as I think he'd suit them well.

In other news, Hull have apparently shown an interest in signing Owen on a free. Surely he wouldn't go there, how the mighty have fallen!


Villa also mentioned, and that would seem a better choice for him. Or ... Everton? He was a Liverpool player, but lets not forget he was a blue as a boy, and available on a free, so they could make an offer. Surely he's going to have to take a substantial pay cut wherever he goes!


I still think he has something to offer if he stays fit. Don't think it's fair to judge him on Newcastle's last season, when he couldn't get a touch of the ball!

I'd take Owen back to Anfield - use him as an impact player from the bench. Free transfer, got to be worth a punt.


I think one of the other factors with Tevez is that they're aren't many, if any?, Spanish speakers at Old Trafford as based on his poor English he probably did feel marginalised.


The fact Liverpool bid ?25.5m for Tevez suggests they've budgetted for a major new striker, but who I don't know..


More importantly what is going to happen to Steve McManaman next season with no Premiership on Setanta? He'd be an asset to Sky or BBC... but I suspect he'll end up on ITV with Teddy, Robbie and Andy if he can withstand the waffle.

I think he'll struggle to stay fit now. I don't think he'll ever be back to his best. It's a real shame, that goal he scored against Argentina in the World Cup was one of my all time faves.


As for Tevez, I think there's a lot of underestimation going on in Manchester of just where City could be if they get their buying tactics right in the next few seasons. We still see them as the poorer rival to United and I think they could take a lot of teams by suprise. It worked for Chlesea after all and that's not a jibe about buying the title as I think any team in their positions would have done the same. Tevez might have had his nose put out of joint by the contract stuff but I'm not sure that is true, Fergie isn't stupid and he's sees these guys day in, day out. I'm sure he would have realised that he needed to reassure him if there were signs of him being annoyed. I think it just comes down to starting games and he didn't start enough.

I'd take Owen back to Anfield - use him as an impact player from the bench. Free transfer, got to be worth a punt.


I'd love to see him back, sentimental or not, I think he still has something, even if he never quite gets his best form back, which SP is probably right in saying he won't.


It is a shame though, would have loved to have seen him carry on for England, and still think he's better than some of the deadwood in the squad, at international level!

Owen is still a fox in the box - lacks the pace and fitness but knows how to put the ball in the net better than any current English player. It is bizarre and a massive question mark against Capello that Owen is not in that England squad. If England want to win the World Cup it ain't gonna be done by a half chance falling to Carlton Cole or Peter Crouch!


Another point about Capello is why is David James still England Number 1? James is technically perfect but he has a long history of clangers when the pressure is really on ... that will never change ... it's inevitable what will happen in a tight World Cup knockout match if he is in goal.

Owen - hasn't been able to prove his at Newcastle. Any club taking him on at present know that it would be a risk - hence Hull's (alleged) appearance/goals based offer. And Capello is right not to pick him for England at present.


As for James, sure he's faulted but just shows that the other contenders aren't good enough and probably never will be at the highest level.

Oh dear the excuses are rolling out for Egypt being stuffed 3-0 by the Yanks in the Confederations Cup - apparently Egypt players were robbed by a bunch of hookers they brought back to their hotel rooms after the beat Italy few days back. Absolutely shameful behaviour from so called professional footballers - picking up prostitures on the high street in Jo'burg, one of the AIDS capitals of the world.


http://www.goal.com/en/news/1863/world-cup-2010confederations-cup/2009/06/21/1338394/south-african-media-egypt-players-were-robbed-by-prostitutes-not

ESPN wins rights to the 2 packages for next season taken from Setanta - ESPN will have 46 games for the Monday night and Saturday evening slots. Games will available via Sky platform. How much this is going to cost is yet to be determined but hopefully they'll have the games in HD otherwise I won't be signing up.


No details on how much they paid for the rights but it must have been a good chunk as Sky were believed to have bid for the Monday night football package.

Hmmm I don't think Liverpool have been bought, otherwise why would George Gillett have agreed to sell his beloved Montreal Canadians for ?330m this weekend. I think that Arab money is for 60% in another Club unless you're talking a different deal from that reported in papers today. I could be wrong but I think these forum rumours are bull.


Why are Liverpool spending money - well they've made the GJ and Tevez bids (amounting to approx ?43m) a few weeks ago and I don't think with business the way it is the Yanks would have sanctioned Rafa spending that kind of money if it was dependant on a takeover being finalised. The other reason I don't think it's true is why would the Yanks announce to great fanfare that we have a new Managing Director.

Annasfield Wrote:

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

> Errr, yes I think thats what I said.

>

> I wonder......

>

> http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11661_53951

> 06,00.html



You said "we" have been sold - no mention of any club by name - just wanted to confirm this was Liverpool...I know you probably take it for granted that "we" means Liverpool in your world Anna. ;-)

Freddie Sears [West Ham - Crystal Palace] season-long loan

Are we mad he hardly has a huge wage bill and a great player what is he going to learn at CP.. Maybe gets a few more games but still



Roque Santa Cruz [blackburn - Man City] ?17.5m finally

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...