Barclays Premier League 2014/15

So we're at a stage where stamping on someone's leg, intentionally trying to injure them (and if it was not on a football pitch, would be classed as assault), carries half the suspension as spitting?

Imagine if this was outside of sport. Imagine someone getting a longer sentence for spitting at someone than stamping on their leg.

You meant half rather than double

Would you?

I imagine you'd get around the same.

Nonetheless - I think spitting should carry a longer sentence than a deliberate stamp as long as it doesn't cause injury.

Again though - I'm unsure why the player that admitted he'd done wrong got the same amount of ban as the player who tried to lie his way out of it? Some players have no shame. Evans and Skrtel have came out of a bad situation looking awfully, whilst Cisse and Gerrard managed to recover a bit of respect.

Hold on, why is there a debate on spitting v stamping? I'd pick being spat on any day.

Granted I've never been spat on but it sure as hell won't cause excruciating pain or injury.

I honestly have no idea, its one of the weirdest things I've ever heard.

Neither should happen, tbf.

Doesn't feckin' matter what you'd rather either, it's all about what the makers of the game don't want happening at all.

Worst Beatles tribute ever.

Sturridge out for a month again, I can see his career declining tbf

Premier League May Dump Sponsorship
The Premier League is considering abandoning its long-running title sponsorship‎ arrangements when Barclays' 15-year association with English football's top flight ends next year.

Sky News has learnt that the Premier League is in talks with its shareholders, the 20 clubs, about moving to a 'partnership model' which would involve alliances with a handful of brands in different industries.

The idea, which is at an early stage, would signal an evolution of one of the ‎most lucrative commercial deals in British sport
.
http://news.sky.com/story/1454101/premier-league-may-dump-sponsorship

£££

I wonder at what stage the cash cow can produce no more.

Journalists are visibly upset that Newcastle's profits are a lot lower than expected.

There may be a hit at some point if large numbers of people move away from watching television.

There are now genuine conspiracy theories floating around now.

And people are genuinely annoyed that Ashley hasn't taken any loan repayments ..... for some reason.

This 'balance sheet Champions' crack would be great, if Newcastle were anywhere near the top (and if profit went on the balance sheet) But yeah, why let facts get in the way of having a moan?

Yes, that's the entire point in sponsorship.



They won't.

American sports teams have routinely been accused of creating phony expenses to make it seem like they're making less money than they actually are. It's not something out of the question.

Still, it is worth asking how costs went up by £30million in a season with less home games, or at least not by using it to pay back some of the Ashley loan. It's one thing that people don't trust a thing the fuckers running the joint say, not least given they have a certain reputation still for past sins, but there is something worth wondering aloud. Will you tell us why you don't see something suspicious?

Wouldn't it be tax evasion? And people might go to jail?

I don't know how costs went up that much - apparently full accounts aren't out until the end of the week. - Just for comparison Sunderland's expenses went up by £26m. Remy + LDJ's loan fees, + wages, plus a full year of MYM, Gouffran, Sissoko, Haidara & Debuchy's wages (minus Ba's). Will take a chunk.

Isn't it just the College non-profits sides who do that? Where they literally waste millions because they have to?

It'll take a chunk but half of those expenses will have already been noted in the 2012/13 accounts, and even by doubling them, I highly doubt they equate to a significant chunk of £25million a year. Not least given Perch, Simpson, Harper and half a season of Cabaye's are also stricken off. £3.3million was the loan costs of LDJ and Remy, but I also doubt they added that much to wages, plus that's about £10million less than transfer fees spent in 2012-13. Not only less transfers but also theoretically less expenditure on home games as we played four less home games last season, and apparently matchday revenue decreased too.

The problem is of course the missing costs side of the account, yet with revenue rising by £33million and wages barely rising if at all, there is still money unaccounted for. Naturally there's accounting tricks and traps, mind. Nevertheless these are partial accounts and don't account for player trading and wages, so who knows how much of it there is on show.

While that's one argument, some have said Ashley's refusal to put in more than his share means the club is heavily reliant on TV money and player trading, which maybe an equally valid issue, not least given how commercial income has decreased since Ashley swanned in. Apparently Wonga are bailing as sponsors as well.

Yeah that's NCAA teams. Although I'm pretty sure NFL teams are happy to waste fuckloads of cash as well, even if they're not non-profits.

Purchasing players doesn't actually affect accounts too much - Players are amortised over the length of a contact - ie a £20m buy with a five year deal, will be a £4m expense, rather than £20m leaving the books immediately.

Now that most PL clubs are profitable, I doubt there will be too much external funding anyway for the time being - especially with FFP coming in. Only stuff like Short giving more short term loans.

Pardew was on Goals on Sunday talking about how the lack of investment in the North East is giving Newcastle a massive disadvantage over some other clubs.

Some people have said player amoratisation allowed the club to appear like it had made a profit in 2012-13 when it had actually made a loss.

In any case this is a summary, not a full account listing. As the deadline for putting those out is this week, we'll probably get full verdicts and arguments later on down the line.

I have to say blaming the government for Newcastle's lack of success is a novel excuse. But its really odd that even after he's left he's making ridiculous excuses for why Pardew's Newcastle reign hit the bricks near the end.

Nice to see Sterling being a cunt

I don't understand why he would want to leave Liverpool. He should stay.

Cos he wants to win trophies, like he said. Why would he want to stay at Liverpool?

He's only 20 years old, he's getting first team football, he's loved by the fans and he's having a team built around him.

On top of that he isn't good enough to go to a major club just yet, he does have amazing potential however.

And he could tear his ACL and MCL tomorrow and never play football professionally again.

He's been playing right wing back, that's not 'having a team built around him'. He can be loved by the fans anywhere.

Well its more than he'd get if he joined any other club at this stage of his career, he'd be silly to leave at this stage

I'm sure he'd take less pay and maybe a little less football in exchange for a little less game time, actually playing his proper position, and a greater chance of winning something.

I'd take him at Chelsea for the right price. He'd offer us goals which we currently lack from the wider areas, Hazard aside.

Makes sense for Sterling to move really.