Search

Gill to step down at Man United

David Gill has announced he is to stand down as Manchester United's chief executive on June 30.

Post a Comment:

Comments 1 - 10 of (37)

fishcake (Manchester United) says...

@Dactyl....the familiar counter story. What you aren't telling us is that the alternative is we just have one, maybe two super clubs spending what they like, hoovering up the best players and killing competition. City's owners have deterred many investors from Prem clubs because whats the point if you can't spend a billion to 'catch up'? City have stolen Evertons place in the CL, why should they suffer because they tried to do it properly? What about the fans with self respect that don't want to see their club transformed and turn into a hobby or advertising project? Blackburn fans, portsmouth fans, Rangers fans, even chelsea fans don't like the way their club is run. You might not like this new ruling, but its certainly for the best.....and when the oil runs out, you'll be grateful.

Posted 11:07pm 22nd February 2013

dactyl (Manchester City) says...

It's hard work trying to get United fans to understand football finance isn't it? Both City's and Chelsea's owners have increased the value and income of their clubs hugely since they took over and City are now 7th and Chelsea 5th with United 3rd. Should either owner suddenly bow out and sell to some worthy organisation like Venky's the impact wouldn't be felt except in the transfer market. We might as well speculate what would happen to United if their debts were suddenly called in and they had to repay over £300m before the end of the season. Pointless. FFP was originally publicised as a mechanism to prevent clubs from running up unserviceable debt - a good idea. In practice it doesn't tackle massively indebted clubs like United but has the effect of keeping already big income clubs in the money. It is anticompetitive and gives no hope to those clubs who don't have rich owners or have significant extra incomes from Euro competitions.

Posted 3:59pm 22nd February 2013

fishcake (Manchester United) says...

I think anything that ensure that clubs get what they deserve on merit is a good thing. Everton are far more deserving of a CL place than City, in fact they have been robbed of their place really just because they have competed fairly. This is a step in the right direction. City only have themselves to blame....they didn't seem to be that fussed when they had -196m in loses or when their wage bill went over 200m! They took the p**s and will now pay the price.....perhaps City fans should consider that before trying to blame it all on United and David Gill??

Posted 2:21pm 21st February 2013

mancunian way (Manchester City) says...

..."serviceable debt does not therefore represent a risk to this particular clubs survival, if City or Chelsea lost their owners they would have huge wage bills coupled with relatively under perofrming commercial revenues which would lead to the risk of financial ruin." But how many clubs think they have serviceable debt which then becomes UNserviceable? I appreciate Uniteds' revenue makes them impervious to this and Prem history is littered with the likes of Pompey and Birmingham City (and shortly, QPR) but United were instrumental in pushing for this specific type of FFP and displaying naked self interest. If all financial considerations were taken into account, I'd hold my hands up but that ain't the case.

Posted 12:41pm 21st February 2013

jim de ville (Manchester United) says...

So, 'truth' = 'delusional conspiracy theory', now? If you say so....

Posted 11:46am 21st February 2013

msbunitd84 (Manchester United) says...

You are aware that there were 19 other Chairmen present at the meeting don't you? FFP is designed to reduce the risk of clubs trading beyond their means - serviceable debt does not therefore represent a risk to this particular clubs survival, if City or Chelsea lost their owners they would have huge wage bills coupled with relatively under perofrming commercial revenues which would lead to the risk of financial ruin. The fact is that the current FFP regulations for the Premier League don't really go far enough to protect the clubs at significant risk and appear to me at least to be a pretty limp attempt at levelling the playing field for the clubs already competing at the top.

Posted 11:27am 21st February 2013

mancunian way (Manchester City) says...

..."Ferguson's comment about Gill 'always wanting the best for United', was solely in the context of arguments between the two"...clearly that is true and yet, it encompasses football in general, otherwise the new FFP regulations would have also included provision for debt. Telling the truth isn't whining but I can see why you and your ilk consider it inconvenient and somewhat irritating.

Posted 10:03am 21st February 2013

jim de ville (Manchester United) says...

@macunian way: 'Hilarious' insults, there. Your implication was that Gill was in favour of FFP, purely for the benefit of United, and to the detriment of City. So yes, I can read, and yes, you were whining. On the subject of 'reading', if you read the article properly, you would be aware that Ferguson's comment about Gill 'always wanting the best for United', was solely in the context of arguments between the two. Clown.

Posted 9:28am 21st February 2013

msbunitd84 (Manchester United) says...

And @mancunian way - did you really expect Fergie to say 'Gill always had what was the best for the game as a whole' when he is being asked for his comments on the CEO of Manchester United? Overlooking FFP in favour of discussing Gill's achievements at United shouldn't be jumped on as some conspiratorial plot that proves it was all done to defeat City by the lizard like overlord Ferguson.

Posted 9:22am 21st February 2013

msbunitd84 (Manchester United) says...

People squabbling over the FFP implications clearly haven't read the F365 piece on the matter, can't see how the changes being made to Premier League clubs will really hinder Chelsea and City all that much, we have already seen from the Chelsea financial results that some creative accountancy can cover most losses.

Posted 9:19am 21st February 2013

Related News

Sky Bet

    • Retrieving latest Sky Bet odds

Most Commented

Readers' Comments

A

nd nothing of value was lost.

ahx00
Pulis' Stoke exit confirmed

S

anity1892 Yes I probably should... But everytime I go back and read Almunia for England I just lose bladder control.

sir danne
The Busy Gossip

P

erfect replacement for Carragher. Slow, average when he was at his best, now well past it. Would just slot straight in! :)

rez plus
Liverpool eye Kolo move - Report

Footer 365

Kris Commons retires from international duty with Scotland

Kris Commons has retired from international duty with Scotland to 'concentrate on his family and on club football'.

Transfer news: Samir Nasri staying with Manchester City despite links to PSG

Manchester City midfielder Samir Nasri insists he wants to stay at the Etihad Stadium.

Premier League: Chelsea defender Gary Cahill would welcome Jose Mourinho

Chelsea defender Gary Cahill would welcome the anticipated return of Jose Mourinho to Stamford Bridge.

Mail Box

Mourinho Isn't Short-Term, Football Is

There's more in the afternoon Mailbox about Jose Mourinho and his potential return to Chelsea, while there's also a link to some pictures of eagles that look like Arsene Wenger...

Should Chelsea Be Worried About Jose Return?

After a disappointing end to his three years at Real Madrid, could Jose Mourinho struggle to bring immediate success if he completes his anticipated return to Chelsea?

Site Map

Our Network

Websites

Partners

Betting & Gaming

Mobile, Fun & Games

© 2013 British Sky Broadcasting Ltd. All Rights Reserved