Micky

If thier surnames are Davies (Jnr(perhaps..!)) and Shearer - they'll do nicely Sir - sign them up...!!!

Well try to understand this - the amount of money that is being paid to make this deal happen is making headlines and raising eyebrows even in the lavish world of football. Just think what somebody, who has absolutely no interest in football, is thinking with regard to the current credit crunch. Here I am staving off the bayliffs, but 10 miles down the road a guy runs around a football field and gets paid 'alf a mil a week - mind boggling. For me, the issue is not about what 1 man is getting in regards to money. It is the chasm between the 'haves' and 'have nots' that is turning our league into a 4 team affair, with a few hangers on, and at the same time prostituting itself to all the top players in the world, while sticking two fingers up to the potential home countries talent. Yes it's a good league - but there is more to life than money.

Fair play to you Tim - nothing like backing your words with actions. Now can you pull your effin' finger out, lose all these MLS kids (I'm sure your on commission...!) and get us bloody Ronaldo, before the window closes. Do that, my friend, and you will have true legend status here..!

Very much so. Of course the problem will be should they fail to win trophies. The likes of Kaka are sorted for life financially, young and hungry for trophies. If City fail to deliver on the silverware - then I don't think it will take too long for 'stars' to look elsewhere for winning teams. For this revolution to work at City they have to win trophies (big ones) and that effectley means overhauling United - no mean feat if they manage to achieve it - but I have my doubts. I can't see them managing that in just a couple of years - and how long is Kaka and the like going to hang around waiting?

I think you might have missed the boat mate. This has absolutley nothing to do with business - it is not investment, because investors expect a return - there will be no monetary return on this buy. Show me how much profit Roman Abramovich has made at Chelsea since he has been there - errr absolutely naff all. The club is a 'plaything' for a very rich man (or men), who probably have no idea of economics anyway. They have so much wealth - economics mean nothing. Nobody is suggesting that anybody bails this country out - but in the current economical climate, where many members of this country are losing their houses to unscrupulous banks and lending companies - it is evident why such lavishness might irk with more than just a few - no?

Agreed - in financial terms he will be. But one of the main factors of him going there will be to entice other 'world stars' to join City as well. So in those terms he might justify just a little of his over-inflated fee and obscene wage bill.

I would tend to agree with a lot of the points you make - but the facts remain - that we fail to nurture lots of our home grown talent because of the amount of foreign imports that we invite to the party. This has a detrimental effect at grass roots level, and in the long term does absolutely nothing to promote either the National Team or English players abroad. Name me 10 foreign players currently playing in England - easy? Name me 10 English players currently playing abroad - eerrrr not so..! I have little problem with Sky relying on the commodity that is English football and pumping lots of money into it. The problem is, the spread of that money - it does not allow the small man to compete - and as a result the Premier League is dominated by 3 - 4 teams. Even in business circles free trade is generally encouraged whilst monopolies are widely frowned upon - yet we have our very own Tesco's of the Premier League. So yes Sky - keep pumping it it - but spread it around a little eh. Just think of how the likes of Bournemouth, Luton Town and many other smaller enterprises might benefit by just a little bit of the action. And, if as you say, the smaller man will soon not be able to play the beautiful game then we are indeed f u c k e d - and perhaps it is at this point that we should call time. I hope it never happens but as you have pointed out - the man in the street is in danger of being priced out of the very industry that he supported and spent many many years building, in order to finally be turned away as the next generation of toffs showed up. When (if) it does all go 'Pete Tong' - wait and see who the clubs turn to in order to try and flog their wares again.

I think that I made that clear in the first line of my last post...! As for the dress comparison - I'm struggling - do not see the correlation at all. Asides, Princess Diana probably did more for 3rd World Children than most others celebs will ever achieve.

Sorry to hear that it has gone 'titsup'. T'was not my intention to spoil the party, was just taken by the verment argument over who people should and should not vote for - I don't think Barrack campaigned this hard to get the Presidential vote...! Perhaps after the mod has cooled off he might rethink his decision - good luck.

Calm down mate - it's an internet poll - probably being enjoyed by about 100 people - if that. It wont be the end of the world if you don't get your own way. If the BBC can make such a flamming horlicks of SCD on national television with millions of people polling, and then manage to bodge it, I'm pretty confident that the Mods can come up with some kind of arbitration in order to restore parity here. If people are 'chucking their hand' as you put it, based purely on the fact that they are not going to get their own way - then perhaps they should go visit the real world occasionally.

I kind of agree - perverse as it may seem, but I would much rather be where we are now than where City are. Yes they are in the Premier League, yes they have millions of errr whatever to spend, yes they are buying the best players - but given all of that, is this real football. They are probably one of only 3 or 4 clubs that can now compete in this country. Such has the finance taken over the game that we now have our very own mini league in which just a very few are members. All we need now is another 92 Sugar Daddies and perhaps we can all be in the 'same' league. Am I interested in how City do this/next season? Not really, much more interesting to see how Luton Town do to be honest.

Paying 100 million to bring Jermain Wright back to SMS Let's face it, if we can afford that then we must have found a Sugar Daddy and all our problems are over ;:

Like - dream on...!

I think somebody is trying to wind you up - nay not trying - succeeding. I can see you, your face is red, your eyes bulge from thier sockets, steam eminates from your ears, you're pulling your hair out, your head is about to explode....!!! The John Sergeant debacle must have driven you to distraction...!

Exactly - and he knows if he starts to sell - he aint going to get anywhere near his 200 back. When you look at the debt in the Premiership, if the bubble were to burst - we would probably be quite an attractive 'investment' (and I mean that in the proper meaning of the word) proposition.

Just imagine - what would happen to Sky TV if it lost the rights to cover premiership football. It would basically rip the heart out of the company, who subscribes to Sky for their entertainment or movies these days - not a large percentage of viewers I'm sure. Sky have to keep pumping money into football because effectively it is their 'bouancy aid' and without that - they probably sink quite quickly.

Supposedly much of the debt that is associated with Premiership clubs is deemed as 'sustainable' - i.e. there is a method for recouping the balance. Generally through TV, Advertising and Merchandising. The problem is that many of the Sugar Daddies have now actually provided 'personal loans' to clubs, Roman has 750 million owing if he leaves Chelsea, Al Fayed will be looking for 125 million to leave the Cottage. And there are many more in similar positions - so if (when) one walks the club more or less folds. The only up side that I can see is how on earth do you make back your 750 million. Let's be honest all you can do is sell lock, stock and barrel - in which case you are going to get bottom dollar because everybody knows your intention is to run. Therefore if Roman Abramovich decided to take the money and run - I think he would be looking at a massive loss on his 'loan'.

Too late - I already have - post 18.

Improbable as it might seem, that could actually be very good for our game in the long run.

They have - but the money they paid for Bridge pales into insignificance in respect to this latest deal....

This situation is the very core of the problem facing 'so called' English football. The devide between the big and the pretenders is so huge it is, in most cases, insurmountable. It is all that is wrong with our game - the playing field is tilted totally towards the 'money man' that the game is being ripped away from fans. Accepted - it is only a game - however as somebody rightly pointed out, when a 'windbag kicker' (no matter how good he be) costs more than a bloody hospital, and gets paid in a week what a nurse will never earn in a lifetime - then something is horrendously wrong. As for the FA - they probably care very little - they get their chunk of the money - the bigger to whole - the larger the slice. We have very little scrupples left in this country when it comes to money in football - you don't have to look very far to see that. For me the sooner that some authoritive body step in the better. Yes we have the best league in the world. But while other countries play largely home grown talent - we do nothing of the sort - 'our' game should be branded as the 'European Premier League'. Let's face it most of the talent is not English. How on earth do we provide both teams for the European Champions League Final but fail to qualify for the European Championships as a Nation - flooded with continental (nay, global) talent (costing mega bucks) which is slowly sucking the life blood out of English football. When last did England (or any home nation for that matter) win anything - when did we even get close? The sooner the bubble bursts - the better - we can all make a fresh start on an even playing field and bring some fans back to 'our' once great game.

I'll be well chuffed - especially when we storm back to win 4 - 2! Will make interesting debate on here for a start and hopefully fend off all the doom and gloom merchants for a while. COYR.

You wrote it but you don't seem to understand it. It is just that - your opinion. Others will have differing opinions and will vote so. Please try to understand that not everybody in the world will concur with you - and at the moment you sound like a spoiled boy in a sweetshop. In the unlikely event that Ron should venture on here - I'm sure that he will be more than flattered by the level of support that he has got. I'm also sure that if he doesn't win 'the vote' he will also take it in very good grace.

Sorry Frank - but your opening gambit coupled with your conclusional statement kinda made me chuckle...!!! Is it a solution or is it not a solution...???

Surely a vote is just that, an independant vote of confidence. People can vote for whom they wish and should not be swayed from their vote by somebody elses wishes. Anyway, I vote for John Sergeant - every time - irrespective of form. Ohhhh is this not a BBC run vote - I thought it was, based purely on the apparent chaos...!!