• 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...

    Get involved!

Player Radu Dragusin

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

mummy said:
That's nothing. This is Skippy when he was 18 months...
sJO5JNv.png
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
 
His stint sitting on the bench during his time at Juventus is why he choose us. He doesn’t want any of that smoke again. He’s a smart lad and learns from his experiences.
 
Ionman34 said:
One thing I was ruminating over was what this does for our standing as a club in Europe. To have a highly rated player choose us over Bayern might just open the eyes of a few players out there. At the very least it would intrigue any player as to what we are about.

It wouldn't surprise me if we have a lot more players looking at us as a serious option if we were to come calling.

The more I think about it, the more I feel that his choice could have some real positive knock on effects for us when it comes to a player's choice.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't think that's going to move the needle much. What does move the needle is when players look at how well Spurs are doing in spite of the injuries coupled with - and this is the important part - playing the type of football that footballers want to play with a manager the players adore. I wouldn't be surprised if Radu picked up the phone and called his ex-teammates Kulu and/or Lolo and got the most glowing reviews from them.

These are the things that will move players, especially if they are coming to a club where they can also make some decent coin too.
 
LLB Part Deux said:
That training ground deal was dodgy as hell, but to be fair it was 20 years ago.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It wasn't really, both parties did extremely well out of it, the land where the old training ground was is worth an absolute mint. You have to question the initial deal over 100 years ago when the land for the old ground was "loaned" to RM in perpetuity rather than sold to it, but given that there was no way around that contract and the city wanted to build this new financial district on the site they had to pay top dollar.

It's been hugely profitable, and that's only with the first phase - the Four Towers - built.

Cinco-Torres-1.gif


The dodgy bit was an accounting error (or fraud if you want to go harder) whereby they recorded the new land they were given as part of the deal in their books as being a brown field site - which it was when they took possession of it, outside the city - but failed to upgrade its value as urban land in later years, when the city had begun to expand around it.

It wasn't "state aid" in any shape or form though, principally because the deal was never anything to do with the state but rather with Madrid City Council and secondly because the financial irregularity wasn't money received from the state but rather defrauded from it.
 
Bill Madrid said:
It wasn't really, both parties did extremely well out of it, the land where the old training ground was is worth an absolute mint. You have to question the initial deal over 100 years ago when the land for the old ground was "loaned" to RM in perpetuity rather than sold to it, but given that there was no way around that contract and the city wanted to build this new financial district on the site they had to pay top dollar.

It's been hugely profitable, and that's only with the first phase - the Four Towers - built.

Cinco-Torres-1.gif


The dodgy bit was an accounting error (or fraud if you want to go harder) whereby they recorded the new land they were given as part of the deal in their books as being a brown field site - which it was when they took possession of it, outside the city - but failed to upgrade its value as urban land in later years, when the city had begun to expand around it.

It wasn't "state aid" in any shape or form though, principally because the deal was never anything to do with the state but rather with Madrid City Council and secondly because the financial irregularity wasn't money received from the state but rather defrauded from it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You're clearly well versed on Madrid so I'm not in a position to argue, but did this get appealed or reversed?

www.ft.com

Real Madrid told to repay millions in illegal state support

European Commission to blow whistle on foul play by seven Spanish clubs
www.ft.com www.ft.com

www.thesun.co.uk

Spanish government found guilty of providing state aid to Real Madrid, Barcelona and five other clubs

SPAIN’S government has been found guilty of illegally funding seven football clubs – including Real Madrid and Barcelona. The European commission has ruled Spain provided state-funding …
www.thesun.co.uk www.thesun.co.uk
 
LLB Part Deux said:
You're clearly well versed on Madrid so I'm not in a position to argue, but did this get appealed or reversed?

www.ft.com

Real Madrid told to repay millions in illegal state support

European Commission to blow whistle on foul play by seven Spanish clubs
www.ft.com www.ft.com

www.thesun.co.uk

Spanish government found guilty of providing state aid to Real Madrid, Barcelona and five other clubs

SPAIN’S government has been found guilty of illegally funding seven football clubs – including Real Madrid and Barcelona. The European commission has ruled Spain provided state-funding …
www.thesun.co.uk www.thesun.co.uk
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think it was reversed, I'm not sure. Certainly appealed. It's a really complex case, much more so than The Sun piece makes out, that goes back to 1990 when the finances of most Spanish clubs were in a truly disastrous state. Only four clubs - RM, FCB, Bilbao and Osasuna - were deemed healthy enough to carry on as clubs owned by their members (not "not-for-profit" organisations as The Sun report) and therefore taxed at a lower rate than the others who were forced to become S.A.Ds - Limited Sports Companies. The Sun are also wrong that they are "registered as limited companies" - they aren't, their fiscal status remains that of Club Deportivo Básico, like tens of thousands of other very modest clubs (like my village football team) throughout the country.

You can argue (and the other clubs do) that everyone should have been treated the same but it is what it is. I guess to remove that status from the four would lead to calls that the whole category be abolished which would be both a fiscal nightmare and the death of a vast swathe of grass-roots sport in Spain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top