Skytot
Well-known member
R.E Donnarumma , I said to my Utd mates exactly what you said . When City were faffing about signing him I fully expected a Utd bid coming in and signing him . Glad it didn’t though .
Swango1980
Well-known member
The sites I've looked at put him on £250,000 a week. Although, not to say they are true. And I guess he could be on all sorts of crazy bonuses to get that up towards the £500,000 mark
Don Barzini
Assistant Pro
road2ruin
Q-School Graduate
It’s probably £250k from City and then another £250k from another source!
pendodave
Tour Rookie
There's a bit of a wobble over in the NBA at the moment concerning player salaries. There's a salary cap, and they're finding out that certain teams are funneling money to players by various underhand methods.
I imagine that if the FFP regs start to bite really hard, we'll see this sort of thing over here, as well as the other balance sheet jiggery poker that is currently going on.
That being the case, why bother with any of it. Seems like it just gives tight owners the opportunity to sit on their wallets and say "not my fault gov", while those with bottomless pockets just get on with it anyway.
I imagine that if the FFP regs start to bite really hard, we'll see this sort of thing over here, as well as the other balance sheet jiggery poker that is currently going on.
That being the case, why bother with any of it. Seems like it just gives tight owners the opportunity to sit on their wallets and say "not my fault gov", while those with bottomless pockets just get on with it anyway.
Arthur Wedge
Well-known member
There does need to be some level of financial framework in place to protect the sport and also all the clubs
We don’t want to see a time where it’s all about who has the richest owner and which Middle East owner is willing to spend billions
Not all owners are “tight” there just don’t have the same level of disposable income as others where as there is a bunch of people that do have a huge level of disposable income they are ok to just throw at sport - and we have seen that in multiple sports to the detriment of those sports
Imo a wage cap should be there
And there should be a spending limit but based on the highest revenue earned by a club
So as a example Liverpool have a revenue of £700mil and their spending is based on that then all the clubs can spend that level of money - if it’s more than what that club earns then the owner can top it up but the money is not debt added to the club
That way every club can spend the same level of money
Crazyface
Tour Winner
How long would it be before a club over spends and collapses financially, chasing a dream, though?
Bunkermagnet
Journeyman Pro
I don’t think you can ever cap wages, unless it’s a World Wide cap….but we know that won’t happen.
The best way I think would be to have a player numbers cap
Bunkermagnet
Journeyman Pro
It’s been done. Arsenal we caught out paying their players through the Channel Islands so they paid much less tax.
JonnyGutteridge
Newbie
Isn’t that basically what Saracens were guilty of in Rugby Union? Skirting salary caps with creative methods of paying players…
nickjdavis
Head Pro
You can be forgiven...its easy to miss important stuff when scrolling past the Man Utd soul searching posts.
That’ll learn me to read the thread properly!
JonnyGutteridge
Newbie
Struggling to not feel incredibly frustrated by VAR, the media, and PGMOL.
Fulham’s disallowed goal against Chelsea, because of the ref giving a foul in the build up, was covered relentlessly by the media. The ref or VAR were stood down from other games that weekend. I turned the radio on a week later and it was still being discussed. PGMOL apologised, Howard Webb got involved.
And yet, a foul is subjective, and for what it’s worth I think it was a foul. I can’t see it any other way tbh, ie. I didn’t think it was particularly controversial.
Yet, Brentford’s equaliser at Chelsea was factually offside. The player was offside and attempted to play the ball. This isn’t subjective, opinion doesn’t come into it, it’s a fact.
But there’s no wall to wall media coverage, there’s no Howard Webb involvement and no PGMOL apology. I think it was orders of magnitude more controversial than the Fulham incident as the VAR ignored the rules of the game
So was the VAR influenced by the Fulham incident, worried about being stood down for giving a pro-Chelsea decision or for taking away a big moment from a small club? Hard to know.
Fulham’s disallowed goal against Chelsea, because of the ref giving a foul in the build up, was covered relentlessly by the media. The ref or VAR were stood down from other games that weekend. I turned the radio on a week later and it was still being discussed. PGMOL apologised, Howard Webb got involved.
And yet, a foul is subjective, and for what it’s worth I think it was a foul. I can’t see it any other way tbh, ie. I didn’t think it was particularly controversial.
Yet, Brentford’s equaliser at Chelsea was factually offside. The player was offside and attempted to play the ball. This isn’t subjective, opinion doesn’t come into it, it’s a fact.
But there’s no wall to wall media coverage, there’s no Howard Webb involvement and no PGMOL apology. I think it was orders of magnitude more controversial than the Fulham incident as the VAR ignored the rules of the game
So was the VAR influenced by the Fulham incident, worried about being stood down for giving a pro-Chelsea decision or for taking away a big moment from a small club? Hard to know.
road2ruin
Q-School Graduate
It's not quite so clear cut though. He was standing in an offside position, that is a fact however when he made an attempt to play the ball it was already passed him and in front of James so VAR felt that he had no impact on the goal happening which is subjective. You can always argue that simply by moving in an attempt to play the ball would be influencing the play as James might have been put off but that's where it becomes VAR's call and they left it with the onfield decision.
Arthur Wedge
Well-known member
Hence why any spending can’t be added onto the club as debt
Arthur Wedge
Well-known member
What difference would a players number cap make ?
Bdill93
Undisputed King of FOMO
How did you find the new ground? (I know, get off the bus, turn left etc, in case anyone thought of that)
Its a cracker to look at, dominated the area and the the surrounding facility is first rate.
Inside - its clear they've thought about pitch view, you wont get a bad view anywhere in the ground.
Its a bit dull to look at internally, it could have been made a bit more special if they did something like Spurs behind the goal on one side with the steep high rise stand they have there.
For away fans - toilet facilities good but bar/food awwwfullllll - two kiosks for 3500 fans is not enough and half time drinks were off the cards entirely.
Atmosphere was also pants but I think that'll come in time when your old STH's find their feet and get sat closer together again.
JonnyGutteridge
Newbie
okay I’ll accept that whether Outtara interferes is subjective, but i think it’d be hard for anyone to say he doesn’t actually interfere?
When the ball is played, he is offside, but not in between Reece and the ball.
But he moves across that line, in front of Reece, and gets very close to contacting the ball.
Offside laws:
- interfering with an opponent by:
- preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
- challenging an opponent for the ball or
- clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
- making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball
For what it’s worth, we were incredibly poor, lineup was wrong, tactics were wrong and there were some shambolic individual performances (Gittens!) so it’s not like we deserved to win… but I’m more concerned about the (lack of) media coverage and the questionable integrity of PGMOL. There isn’t a consistent push for correct decisions, instead it is based on who wins & loses from the incorrect decisions, and that will clearly influence future decisions. There is an underlying feeling from Chelsea fans that we don’t get the rub of the green from VAR, but when we do, boy is there a song and dance about it. Many fans had suggested over the international break that we might get screwed by VAR after the Fulham incident…. And here we are.
Good to hear. The half time thing makes no sense, none at all. I believe the pricing is silly as well, which is disappointing.
Some stuff inevitably takes a little time to sort. Hopefully they take note of fan feedback.
road2ruin
Q-School Graduate
I think it's always going to come down to which team you support as which side you come down on in terms of the end result, this is what I had read about it.....
Brentford 2-2 Chelsea
Possible offside: Ouattara on Carvalho goal
What happened: Brentford scored an equaliser three minutes into stoppage time when Fábio Carvalho guided the ball home after Kristoffer Ajer had flicked on Michael Kayode's long throw. As the players celebrated, the VAR, James Bell, checked for a possible offside offence within the move by Dango Ouattara.
VAR review: This went under the radar amid the drama of Brentford's late goal, and many are probably unaware there was an offside check against Ouattara.
You can't be offside from a throw-in, but when Ajer touches the ball, that creates a phase and Ouattara was just ahead of Chelsea defender Reece James. Ouattara didn't touch the ball, so it was a subjective judgement for the VAR to determine impact.
Ouattara can't commit an offence by his position alone. He's not blocking the vision of James, and doesn't run across the line of the ball. But the law does say that a player cannot be "clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent."
Ouattara stuck out a leg as the ball went through to Carvalho, so one part of the clause is satisfied. But did that impact James?
The on-field team told the VAR that they knew Ouattara was offside but that they didn't feel he did anything to trigger an offence so the goal was given.
Verdict: It will split opinion, and it depends how you weigh up one crucial aspect; the ball was past Ouattara and in front of James when the Brentford player made an attempt to touch the ball, does that create enough of an impact on the defender for VAR to intervene?
Had Ouattara tried to play the ball immediately as it went past him, thus influencing James' calculation of the flight of the ball, it's a much clearer offside offence.
As Ouattara made a late movement, it created doubt over the level of impact with James fully focused on the ball and failing to make contact.
While it might have seemed like a quick check, it did take 1 minute, 28 seconds -- a little longer than the jubilant goal celebration. When the television coverage switched to the VAR output, you could see that Bell was weighing up the timing of Ouattara's movement.
Depending on who was on VAR duty, you could get a different outcome. It's one of the overriding issues with VAR, because it's just another layer of subjective interpretation and referees won't always agree. Likewise, fans can argue about this interpretation -- and neither side would be incorrect in its view.
VAR interventions to rule out goals when the attacker isn't in contact with a defender are rare. Last season, it happened only once, in Nottingham Forest vs. Southampton, and that was logged as an error by the Premier League's Key Match Incidents (KMI) Panel. An offside Chris Wood tried to head the ball, and the VAR, Graham Scott, incorrectly advised that he had impacted the defenders.
We also have evidence of the VAR leaving such a situation alone. In January 2022, an offside Roberto Firmino, who was being marked by Tyrick Mitchell, jumped to head a cross but missed it, and the ball went to Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, who scored. The VAR determined that the Liverpool forward didn't impact upon Mitchell, as the Crystal Palace defender had no chance of playing the ball. It was a slightly different situation, but it shows how an offside player "clearly attempting to play a ball" can be deemed to have no impact.
Roberto Firmino, when offside, jumped to try to head a cross that resulted in a goal for Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain.
This is far more likely to be given on the field and upheld, even when that seems harsh -- Southampton's disallowed goal vs. Brighton last season being a perfect example.
PGMO will be content that the goal has been allowed to stand. After all, it has caused very little controversy -- and that might have been very different had the goal been chalked off.
Both outcomes are justifiable, so leaving this with the on-field call is fine.
Don Barzini
Assistant Pro
Just got mine, plus one each for my two boys. Can’t wait!
Making the most of it, could be another generation before it happens again!
