retired_kris10nicole

To take that analogy further, the problem currently is how would you react if you were working just as hard and well as the people in each of the three rungs of the ladder above you, but none of them were going to leave and you weren't able to either? So there was little or no chance of advancement however hard you worked.

I agree that the original ideas were nonsense, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a problem to some degree.

retired_kpr

A problem? It's not their fault that teams like Newcastle and Spurs can pish away similar amounts of money and get little out of it due to being run by simpletons.

It's a competition. Blaming the better sides for being a better a little barking. </BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, those clubs have managed themselves really well in the last decade or so but it feels now that there's not really any way in for another team. It's most likely that the top four will be ahead of everyone else by some distance this season, and next season, and for the foreseeable future. And that's really boring. What's happened in the past and who's managed themselves well/badly is a bit irrelevant, now it looks it's too late for someone to break into it.

</BLOCKQUOTE>

how is it irrelevant? success and continued success is an incentive for hard work, progress, long term planning, if you could finish top one year then bottom the next there'd be a lot less teams striving to finish in the top 4 because the incentives aren't worth it.

That's how life works, if you work harder today then life is easier tomorrow, if you went to work and knew that no matter how hard you worked today it wouldn't benefit you in the future then you wouldn't bother working hard. However if you had the opportunity to do tomorrow's work today and thus have a day off tomorrow then you'd probably do it.

Or maybe you think the fat slob who sits in the corner scratching his arse and picking his nose should start from the same position as you the next day despite having done less work the day before?

I'd love to see how you'd react if at the end of every year all your promotions/pay rises were taken off you and you had to start back from the beginning, equal with all the new employees, as well as the weaker ones, and the lazier ones. </BLOCKQUOTE>

You can't just look at football totally from a business perspective like that though, it's a sport, it's supposed to be entertaining. Sport is not just about capitalism and money, it's important that it's kept competitive, even if that means interfering with it and not just leaving it to market forces. Public and media have every right to moan about this.

retired_kpr

That's just rubbish I don't think any of those teams have finished in the top four since Newcastle or Leeds did in about 2001 or 2002.

retired_jessicadon

Looks too late for someone to break into it when Spurs were on the verge and, through very recent bad management, f**ked it up and Everton did a few years back?

I don't disagree that it's hard but why should it be made easier?And I may be an Arsenal fan, but i think we'd be the least affected by any financial restrictions in the short term tbh.

Probably less than the likes of Newcastle and Spurs too.

retired_kris10nicole

That's just rubbish I don't think any of those teams have finished in the top four since Newcastle or Leeds did in about 2001 or 2002. </BLOCKQUOTE>

And even if any of them managed it once, that's clearly not "cementing" your place.

retired_nini59

To take that analogy further, the problem currently is how would you react if you were working just as hard and well as the people in each of the three rungs of the ladder above you, but none of them were going to leave and you weren't able to either? So there was little or no chance of advancement however hard you worked.

I agree that the original ideas were nonsense, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a problem to some degree. </BLOCKQUOTE>

that's how life is, it's tough, if someone else got there first then you've got to either work harder to catch up, or accept your place. That's capitalism, the cream rises to the top, with ofc many exceptions. But in this case United are where they are through good management, yes they have money and support, but they had that before they were successful. Clubs like Newcastle, Spurs, Villa, City, Everton, and maybe others certainly have the support that if they were to achieve success in the future they could maintain it, and build up their support base too.

But it's a fact of life that this will get harder as time goes on, people in positions of power will do all they can to hold onto them and you've got to work harder than them and wait for them to make a mistake before you can overtake them.

I wouldn't go to the managing director of my company and say "I could do my supervisor's job just as well as him, even though he's doing his job quite well, so I think you should switch our roles for a bit".

retired_kpr

Everton was a one-off, their players weren't anywhere near as good as the top four's and their current squad's nowhere near as good either.

My opinion's changed on this, a couple of years ago I thought that everyone was over-reacting and was convinced that someone like Bolton or Blackburn would surprise everyone and finish second or something, but it seems inconceivable now. Already in December the same clubs are occupying the top four spots and it's disappointing when you think how unlikely it is that someone will overhaul them.

You top four fans should stop trying to deny that it's happening, the top four of the Premiership is quite clearly a closed shop now. Your arguments about whether there's anything inherently wrong with that, and that those clubs have every right to be rewarded for their expertise, are much more interesting and difficult to counter.

retired_kpr

To take that analogy further, the problem currently is how would you react if you were working just as hard and well as the people in each of the three rungs of the ladder above you, but none of them were going to leave and you weren't able to either? So there was little or no chance of advancement however hard you worked.

I agree that the original ideas were nonsense, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a problem to some degree. </BLOCKQUOTE>

that's how life is, it's tough, if someone else got there first then you've got to either work harder to catch up, or accept your place. That's capitalism, the cream rises to the top, with ofc many exceptions. But in this case United are where they are through good management, yes they have money and support, but they had that before they were successful. Clubs like Newcastle, Spurs, Villa, City, Everton, and maybe others certainly have the support that if they were to achieve success in the future they could maintain it, and build up their support base too.

But it's a fact of life that this will get harder as time goes on, people in positions of power will do all they can to hold onto them and you've got to work harder than them and wait for them to make a mistake before you can overtake them.

I wouldn't go to the managing director of my company and say "I could do my supervisor's job just as well as him, even though he's doing his job quite well, so I think you should switch our roles for a bit". </BLOCKQUOTE>

Football really shouldn't be dominated by capitalism though?

retired_kris10nicole

I'd agree Spurs ****ed it up through bad management, but they'd also had to spend an awful lot to even get close, and even then didn't make it. Everton scraped in one season, i wouldn't say there was particulary bad management that they didn't stay there, more that they had overachieved a little to make top 4 for that season.

My argument would be that some portion of the reason it's been made hard for the rest has been down to decision by governing bodies in terms of proportions and amounts of cash that are doled out, in terms of CL, TV money and prize money. There's at least an argument that some tweaking of those proportions would improve the competition as a whole.

retired_Pantora

The problem is the sides clibming up the league aren't rhrough good managment, financial planning and long term success, it's mainly foriegn owners coming in who want some fun and willing to splash the cash on players (Man City the main example)

Football isn't rewarding decent chairman/board with long term plans and won't while sky and co continue to glorify the big 4 with "OMG SUPER SUNDAY" (hmmmmm strange that happens most years, surley the fixtures won't be set to benifit big TV deals...) and thats how a vast majoirty of young kids first see football and when deciding who to support and they want to be seen as "cool" by supporting the side everyone else does and where you can get the replica shirt in the high street.

Untill sky and co change their scheduling to stop benifiting the armchair fan who wants to watch the teams that are winning every week then it won't change, united etc fans base keeps growing and it can get to the stage where united can **** off season ticket holders with their cup match scheme knowing fully well that if the season ticket holder doesn't want to to so doesn't renenw that seat they will be some mug thats willing to pay whatever price top clubs charge

Football made it's mistake by pricing the working ckass on the whole out of football and due to players wage deamnds following top players and growing over time lower clubs have to keep ticket prices up and can't afford to give out free tickets to get people in the doors. Even for a family of 4 to go to a league one match your looking at over £50 just in tickets and most families can't afford this, there's less and less younger people at football because of this I'm fidning, the next generation of football fans on the whole is more than happy to sit on their backside and watch whatever sky serves up