I'd rather not have the asset and laugh at someone else...
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
No we can do both. Have the asset and laugh at them… maybe they will put a dog track back into it like they used to have
Wasn’t a dog track it was stock car racingNo we can do both. Have the asset and laugh at them… maybe they will put a dog track back into it like they used to have
Bumped into him on Wembley Way (during our stint there while building the new stadium), I can report he is like that off-camera!! Seemed a nice fella though.
I think teams can bottle a game by not competing or showing up but I do hate the use of it when aimed at any team who lost a final (in this actual game I thought Chavs were marginally the better team across the whole game which ebbed a& flowed, so even worse use of the term IMO), how should he describe the other teams that didn't make it to the final? Why hasn't he used this term to describe Utd?
He is one of top 5 most influential people in the game (I really wish that wasn't the case but the way Football is now debated 24/7 across TV/Radio/Print/Online he basically dominates in every aspect, he's literally never off our screens, ears and eyes, everyday Neville dictates the agenda). It is an abuse of power and there should be some pressure put on him by having Ofcom at least run some guidelines over his influence and the impact of his words.
I'm particularly sensitive when it's him (there are others too) because for years now he's abused his influence with how he's talked about our players and managers for the best part of a decade in what basically amounts to tapping them up. His pursuit of Poch to get him at Utd was blatant and even Utd supporters thought he was taking the piss.
Do not get me wrong, it's fucking fantastic that this label has been slapped on the West London Nazi's, this is going to stick.
But Neville (and the others) need to be taken down a peg for the good of the game.
Last edited:
I like it. They sing about us in their walkout anthem, and they mention us as much as their own Club. I know for a fact that their hardcore hate it because of this and they've tried to stop it, there was even some kind of campaign a couple of years back to get their fans to stop it and only use it for when we play them.
There is the very real possibility they will be signing this in the Championship, having had all their trophies taken from them it will be their only remaining link they have left to playing in the Premier League!
It seems like the maximum fine for failing FFP is always going to be -6 points, which they will already be getting, so I don't think it makes any difference whether they sack him or not.
I think it is too early to say that.
The independent panel apparently decided at the Everton hearing that no punishment for a simple breach FFP should logically be harsher than that for going into administration - which is set in the PL rules as -9 points.
They might get another punishment for the financial irregularities that occurred under the previous owners, but that has nothing to do with FFP.
Fine is unlimited on top of points deduction though...
I honestly don't think Chelsea would care about a financial fine - they'd supposedly put £100m aside to pay FFP fines already
Derby were deducted 12.
Other clubs have faced higher accumulative deductions for non FFP offenses too.
(EFL not EPL, granted)
Transfer embargos too as a punishment I think. There is a list somewhere on here, probably in the man city thread.
Are they not looking at multiple seperate breeches though. Not as many as Man cities 115 admittedly.
The historical Chelsea (possible) charges and City's aren't breeches of FFP rules
100% they factored in a fine as a cost of business regarding breaking FFP.
A point deduction however is a completely new dimension and one that has caused them, and many other clubs, to shit the bed. It's been clumsily administered by the PL regarding Everton but now a president has been set which makes it very hard to appeal against and win from now on.
Especially Neville, who was an average to OK player IMO, who happened to be playing in a dominant team managed by one of the best managers in football history.
Both he and his brother were coattail riders of the highest order IMO.
They are.
It's been so long regarding the City charges I need to remind myself what they were, but the most serious ones relate to falsified financial reporting over a 14yr period, principally around the value and means in which they received money from related Group business. The other(s) are around deliberately obstructing the PL in their investigations (something they were found guilty of and fined for when UEFA charged them), this aspect isn't a breach of FFP but the accounting ones are.
The Chav "possible" charges are more wide-reaching but amount to breaching FFP by false accounting (criminal offence too) over a 9y(?) period + and including paying fees to managers, players and agents via offshore companies related to Roman the gangster. Whilst one can't be done without the other here false accounting is breaking FFP regs that the clubs sign up to.
Last edited:
I never had a problem with Neville when he first broke onto the scene and I think he along with Carragher has pushed on the quality of analysis that preceded them (I still think it has a long, long way to go). He is a smart bloke and on the whole, gets his points over well (even if we might disagree with them) and Carragher can be a good foil as he frequently disagrees with him and equally presents his side well.
FWIW Carragher's analysis is far superior to that of Neville's to the point where nowadays I don't think he's got a good handle at all on tactics, I'm now thinking that he has someone who does it for him and runs through the talking points of a team. His analysts nowadays always seem prejudged, thought about before the game begins, his in-game commentary is delivered as such, almost pre-scripted way and he has failed to adapt the script to what is happening on the pitch, which then feeds into his post-match comments. (this I think is evidenced in his "bottling" comments, while I'm delighted this label has been pinned on them, they didn't bottle that game, that's not what bottling is. I think he had this line prepared before a ball was kicked and because they lost he felt it could be wheeled out).
But as you say both he and his brother have been woeful in the real-life environment of football management and ownership.