If you have anything to say on any subjecty, mail us at theeditor@football365.com
Curbs: Engineered His Own Downfall
Not sure how many people heard the really interesting interview with Kia Joorabchian last night on Radio 5. It certainly put a new light on Curbishley's exit. He inferred that if he were the WHU Chairman he would have sacked Curbishley over his p***-poor acquisitions last year. Basically he said if you throw money at average players like Lucas Neill, not only are you p***ing money up that wall, but that it effects every contract negiotation thereafter as every agent uses that as a benchmark.
What was interesting is that you realise that it's ludicrous for managers to have 'total control' over all aspects of transfer policy as you're expecting managers to act as commercial lawyers, finance directors, Chief Execs etc etc. Some managers seem to be able to do this (Wenger for one, seems to recognise that selling a 30-year-old for loads of money is good business), but would you trust the barely literate, barely numerate ex-players who form the bulk of managers with your contract negotiations and financial planning.
Andrew Booth (as a Leeds fan I look on the Prem as a lover who spurned me) Oldham
(This e-mail arrived just after we had recorded this week's Podball365 - which covers the very same theme - Editor)
Bilic Link Good For England
Here's a wacky thought. Maybe Curbs' resignation from West Ham could do England a favour! (Fear not, I'm not saying he should take over the England job). Bilic is being linked left, right and centre with the post and if it takes his eye off the ball next week then great, cos I think we need all the help we can get. The press could actually prove a useful ally to them team for a change by constantly asking him questions about it!!!
Tim (that's probably a load of bollocks as Bilic is nuts and will probably just beat the crap out of anyone who asks) Collins
P.S. Hang on...The press should definitely ask him then cos a few of em could do with a right good kicking if you ask me!!!
Do These Takeovers Ever Go Well?
With all the farce surrounding Newcastle at the moment it got me thinking - there aren't actually that many clubs that have been bought out by a multi-millionaire and actually enjoyed sustained stability and success. Being a red, I might be being biased here but considering all the outcry as the Glazers were appointed at United, they seem to be the only ones who are doing a decent job. They have let the manager get on with his job without threatening the sack when they go through a rough patch, provided funds for transfer targets, and targets that the manager has identified not the owner. They generally stay out of the spotlight and let Fergie and Gill get on with the job of running the club and reaping the rewards.
Randy Lerner's doing a pretty good job at Villa from what I can see, don't usually see him swigging beer in the stands or undermining O'Neill, they've made some good signings and seem to be moving forward, but looking at the others though it's ridiculous.
Abramovich - constant meddling in team affairs, Mourinho leaves, Bessie mate Avram comes in, is under constant pressure, eventually sacked. At least it now looks as if Scolari is picking the players he wants to sign, unlike the farce of the Shevchenko move.
Hicks and Gillet - Again always meddling in team affairs, disagreeing with Parry and Benitez, not providing funds for big players as they promised they would (Torres apart), still not sorted the stadium out.
Ashley - Just seems to be a general muppet constantly seeking attention, sitting in the stands trying to be a man of the people with his Smith shirt swiftly replaced by a King Kev shirt, next week it'll be Shearer. Brings in people above Keegan's head to control transfers, disagreements with management and not providing promised funds etc etc.
I could go with the likes of EggHead Magnusson and his brief stint at West Ham. Old Square Head with his corruption and treatment of Eriksson. Carson Yeung and his failed bid affecting Birmingham with Bruce leaving etc etc etc...
There just seems to be too many fruit and nut bars buying clubs for the sake of it, and promising the fans the world but ultimately wanting to manage the club themselves when they have no idea how to.
Joe, Manchester
Geordies Should Bow Down To Ashley
I know I'm going to get slaughtered for this by Newcastle fans but at the end of the day this fact remains-Mike Ashley saved your club from administration. Newcastle FC would be doing a Leeds United right now, if Ashley hadn't come to the rescue. He may not be perfect but he's still the Geordies' saviour, whether they want to admit or not.
You may not agree with how he chooses to run the club, but I don't see any of you fans sinking 100 million plus of your own money into the black hole of debt left by the freespending Hall/Shepherd regime. Yeah I'm sure some of you will tell me you fans buy merchandise and match tickets and therefore you deserve some say in the running of their club but fans of Leeds did all that too and look where they ended up. Newcastle needed a wealthy benefactor and Mike Ashley stepped up to save the club from oblivion.
In any case, Keegan ain't Wenger or Ferguson. In truth, he is a below-average manager, who built his reputation on being able to outspend everyone in the mid nineties, and still managed to win nothing. Every subsequent job where he has been asked to work within a budget, he has performed very poorly. He has a worse record as England manager than Steve McClown for God's sake! He even has a worse record in his second term as Newcastle manager than Sam Allardyce. If Ashley can be criticised for anything it is for his mistake to rehire Keegan.
Supposedly the split came over selling Owen and Barton. Why exactly is Keegan fighting this? Selling them is a good idea. The reasons to sell Barton are obvious and Owen is an injury-prone has-been who has displayed very little sign of loyalty to Newcastle. He will leave on a free next June, mark my words. Might as well get some money for him now.
Keegan wanted four quality players and didn't get them. Well, it's not like it was before under the Halls, Kev, where you were a kid in a candy store and could point at any player, and cry I want! I want! Infinitely better managers like Juande Ramos and David Moyes didn't get exactly what they wanted at the end of this transfer window either and they didn't throw their toys out of the pram. Keegan's recklessness in his first tenure is what began the downward slide in financial administration at Newcastle and is what is forcing Mike Ashley to cut spending now. Keegan is reaping the whirlwind of both his own errors and unfortunately those of previous administrations and it is Newcastle fans who must suffer.
Robert Vard
How To Choose Between City And Liverpool...
Oh f***, as a United fan there is a nightmare scenario I wouldn't know what I'd want to happen at the end of this season. It goes as follows:
Just say City can hang on to the top four until January, as they did last year, and buy a s***-load of players come January and sustain a challenge to the end of the season. Potentially Liverpool will be battling it out with them for 4th place. Liverpool then proceed to get the Champions League final and give up on the league as they don't have a good enough squad to challenge for both and City grab 4th. The Champions League spots go to the top 4 clubs in England except if one of them finishes outside the top 4 but wins the competition, in which case it reverts to the top 3 and the winners (this has been clarified by The FA and Premier League after it happened with Everton and Liverpool).
If Liverpool wins the final it f***s City but if they don't it means City get in the Champions League and it f***s Liverpool. Aaaaarrrrggghhhh! I honestly don't want either of them to do well at anything, but I suppose if I had to pick one it would be Liverpool getting f***ed as without the Champions League money I can see another Leeds coming on fast!
Tim (the vein in my head is sticking out after thinking about that) Collins
A More Likely Scenario
Come January, a combination of Mark Hughes' managerial skills and Liverpool's continual bad form sees City in fourth place. The team's playing well, there's a great feeling about the club and even Robhino is happy. Are the new owners satisfied? They don't seem the sort to me. They suddenly get (even more) impatient and demand the Premiership title this year. In order to do this they use all their expert footballing knowledge to bring in such top stars as (fat) Ronaldo and (not so quick anymore) Thierry Henry. When Hughes refuses to play them in their next game due to the fact that they aren't as good as the regulars, he is ousted, the owners get a more compliant manager who is forced to play a 3-3-4 formation to accommodate them and City end up 9th. Cue another managerial sacking and even more aging mercenaries.
Remember you read it here first.
Rod Fricker
Not The End Of A Big Four, Just This Big Four
Having read various articles and e-mails about Man City I think I have come up with my two penneth worth.
Firstly I don't think that this spells the end of 'the big 4' and the birth of a 'big 5', at least not for the long term. What it spells is the end of either Liverpool's or Arsenal's involvement in the big 4 within the next three seasons. The reason these two clubs continue to stay ahead of the chasing pack is because of the revenue from the Champions League and also the quality of player Champions League football allows them to attract to the club and also keep at the club. It isn't a coincidence that the number of teams in the big 4 matches the number of Champions League places. If the emergence of Man City means that Liverpool or Arsenal don't finish in the top 4 for a couple of seasons whoever it is will simply slip back in to the pack and be competing for UEFA cup places every season, in Liverpool's case this may well cause a Leeds-style implosion unless new investors come in to the club.
I think people who are dismissive of the threat Man City will cause because they wont attract top players are being a bit naive. I don't think they will sign Ronaldo or Torres or Fabregas in January but I fully expect them to have a side with a realistic chance of winning the league at the start of next season if they are about to throw money about as expected. Is their current squad really that far off what Chelsea had the day Abramovich took over? I don't think so and Chelsea won the league within two years. I know Chelsea offered Champions League football instantly but there are plenty of quality players out there playing for sides that have no realistic chance of ever winning the Champions League or even their domestic league. These players may well accept a year out of it for massive wages and the promise that there will be no expense spared in the pursuit of trophies. Think Villa, Benzema, Young, Arteta, Totti, Ribery and also world-class players at the biggest clubs in the world that will just take the money and run, those players will remain to be seen I guess but don't for a second think there won't be any at all.
I also agree with the people who can see that it would hardly be the end of football if Liverpool and Arsenal did fall in to obscurity for a while. It will only enable other teams to have their moment in the sun. As long as the clubs didn't go out of business altogether then so what really? The real fans would still support the club until the day they found their way back to the top.
Martyn, Loyal Royal
Will Hughes Be Able To Choose His Own Signings?
Sarah Winterburn puts the current Man City hysteria into some perspective, but I'm not convinced that her theory of how the season will play out is going to be correct.
I agree that City have a fairly good squad without Robinho, and that Hughes looks to have made some good signings. I don't agree that they looked like a top four finisher just yet, although they might have been a good shout for fifth. However, I think she is being over-optimistic if she thinks that Hughes will be allowed to quietly add to the team with likes of Cahill/Young level players.
Monday's 'statement of intent' was clear - City have the cash and have announced their arrival at the top table. By targeting two marquee names with money-no-object bids the message they are sending out is that they will compete with anybody. Does anyone seriously believe that Hughes was asked who he would like for the squad, or rather that, at best, he was told that they were happy to make bids for Berbatov and Robinho and would he like them? What remains to be seen is if Hughes will be backed when he wants to buy, say, Cahill, rather than, say, Kaka.
Of course, Everton will now be asking £20m+ for Cahill if City make an enquiry, so the owners might be duped into thinking that he is an international superstar, rather than, as we all know, and extremely effective Premiership performer.
The chances of many of the current squad still being at City in two years time look fairly slim. They really will be playing for their shirt this season - even if they have a good match by City's usual standards, they will need to be world-class every week to stop the club replacing them with someone that the owners like the look of. New players won't get long to settle in, and the existing squad will largely be replaced. It happened at Chelsea and it regularly happens at Real Madrid - see the turn over of Johnson/Kezman/Del Horno/Jarosik/Pizarro/Sidwell/Ben Haim/etc at the Bridge, and England's Michael Owen at Madrid. Hughes, will also have to impress in a short space of time. Good as he is, he isn't the new owner's choice, and he doesn't have a track record full of trophies. And there is plenty of money available to pay him off if the club sees someone they like better. I think he's probably got until the end of next season to get them into the Champions League, and maybe another season after that to win the Premiership. If he's lucky.
This season, assuming that Hughes is left to get on with things, I think City will do OK, and depending on how the fourth of the top four does, and what level of player the January window brings, might even get a sniff at a Champions League place. But next season, then it's all going to happen, and the rest of the World's Chairmen must be rubbing their hand with glee at the thought of the prices they will be able to charge if City want one of their players - just as Chelsea are reigning in their spending.
As a Chelsea fan I say welcome to the billionaire's club. Far from being the death of football, isn't it fun to have another team who can afford to buy the players to mount a genuine challenge for the Premiership? A three-horse, rather than a two-horse race.
Monkey Steve
Take That Gallagher
Leaving aside the irony of Man City's fans lording it up over United in a manner reminiscent of some chavved-up Lotto winner waving about their newly-acquired wad where previously they had poured scorn on United's 'undignified' commercial activities, I'd just like to point a couple of things out to Noel Gallagher regarding his recent ill-informed comments:
1. A good proportion of petrol sold in the UK comes from North Sea oil (cue legions of City fans bleating on about most United fans being from Singapore, etc.)
2. A good proportion of revenue from each gallon ends up with the Treasury.
For what it's worth, though, I'd welcome City into the top four, especially if it's at the expense of the scousers, but I hope they don't forget their place. Incidentally, I remember Noel Gallagher publicly (but metaphorically, thankfully) licking Shinawatra's arse this time last year too. What a tool.
Griff
No It Wasn't Just You...We Had About 427 Similar E-Mails
Was it just me who thought Marcel Guerrier, LFC (there's a good local scouse name for you) as being a bit Pot Kettle Black-ish this morning when he said: 'They have one world-class player, a couple of half-decent ones and a lot of average players.'
Euros Rees, EFC
Football365: Biased Against Spurs
Top four drama queens!
When will you move away from your crazed total support for the top four clubs and look a little wider? I appreciate that they are important to your masters at Sky but your coverage of all clubs outside this posing little clique is pathetic. Re the Berbatov transfer. Of course David Gill is going to say that Campbell is simply moving to gain experience and in the end it's win-win for United. Nothing is said about him paying around 10 million more than he planned for Berbatov, or that Spurs have the services of said Campbell, free of a transfer fee, or that he's a player purple nose was desperate to hang onto. Then what about them being so worried about the truth of their tap-up tactics coming out that they insisted on the Spurs's charge being dropped? That tells you everything you need to know about the devious bunch of charlatans who run United.
So, Levy is going away to 'consider Comolli's future'. Oh yes, he's got nothing better to do on holiday in Bermuda. Get real, then explain why another of your top four faves, Liverpool, paid 18m for Keane so they could subsitute him every match. Or why Chelsea now look so stupid over the Ronaldinho deal, or why Wenger is so blinkered he wants a team that's wall to wall with moaning French players.
Phil Rowson
Why Pay For Setanta?
Is anyone else glad that neither ITV or the BBC have not bothered with the upcoming England qualifiers?
So in order to watch them you have to subscribe to Setanta and who in their right mind would pay to watch that s**t?
Si (I've nothing to say)
Two Quick Points
The blue cheese in my fridge didn't age well at all. It started life as cheddar.
As to Mark Hughes having no experience of dealing with big-name players, didn't he manage Khizanishvili.
Damian, Athenry
Miller Time
Is your Nick Miller the same one that presents the local weather on East Midlands Today?
Hope so.
Dan T' Forest Fan
('Fraid not - The Editor)
