I’m sure there’s a case for playing his way and it can work if you’ve got exceptional footballers in defence and in goal. (Lots round me were getting excited on the occasions we were pressing City on Saturday but I couldn’t help think that was exactly what they wanted.) If you’ve got Southampton’s players, you are trying to get relegated because you will be giving away goals most weeks and your strikers have no chance of scoring at the rate they’d need to.
-
...or if you've got forest's players. If you've got players, on balance, better than the other team, then there is a measure of value to sucking them in and leaving the space behind to maximise opportunities, rather than having to break down a compact low block. If you are playing a team already way better than you, hammering at your low block, the space is already behind them. You might be better trying to get at that early, rather than pissing about thinking how clever you are.
-
Yes this. Same. Gets the crowd going, but I just found myself thinking that we're leaving huge holes behind them.
-
Meh a circus tent at best…
-
In all the comment I've heard about it, at no point has anyone explicitly said, "literally yesterday we were going to go bust at the end of the year if we didn't sack the dinner ladies, today we have to spend a minimum of two billion pounds over five years (might be over double that, might be ten years), to maximise revenue from tourists, and to kick out all the old normally contributing fans". I mean you have to laugh. I swear almost everyone's brains are boiled in the flabby western (ex-)democracies.
-
I'm not for a moment going to defend Man U or Ratcliffe in particular, but I feel like you're completely disregarding the difference between cash and PSR. And I know you're smart enough to know the difference between the two.
-
That's not what Ratfink said. He said that manure the business would have run out of cash by the end of the year, if he hadn't sacked the cleaners.
Nothing to do with psr.
-
Depends how many cleaners you've got.
-
He’s expecting the taxpayer to pay for the stadium in the name of “regeneration” though, so no impact on United’s numbers.
-
Right, but PSR prevents him from injecting cash as a shareholder normally might, so the only option is to reduce costs. Obviously there are other ways he could and should have gone about it, but this isn't a normal business is the point.
-
Perfect for those clowns.
-
No it doesn't. It stops them spending money on items that are considered as part of the PSR regulations, up to a limit*.
All of this is contorting whataboutery. Do you dispute that yesterday that Ratfink said that without cuts manure would be insolvent by the year end, and today he said they will spend 2 billion pounds on a new stadium?
* ...and it doesn't. A business can do whatever it wants. Under the aegis of the premier league and it's regulations, there will be sanctions levied against it, if it breaks the rules. Unless it has more money than the league. Then it probably wont for years on end.
-
Derby v Coventry. Is that El Frankico? The Lampardico?
Whatever - away win please. -
They're 1-0 up. Could be back to back wins.
-
And that's 2-0. Sheepy fuckers.
