Manchester United vs Liverpool | Match postponed

Status
Not open for further replies.

RUCK4444

New Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2015
Messages
9,553
Location
$¥$¥$¥$¥$
For those who don't understand:
• Glazers bought the club with a loan
• Transferred the debt of the loan to the club
• Have put £0 of their own money into the club
• All transfers have come from club revenue
• They have taken 2 billion from the club
I think this needs embedding into the main banner of the site for those who seemingly don’t comprehend it.
 

Drawfull

Full Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2014
Messages
4,887
Location
Just close your eyes, forget your name
Steve from Liverpool writes

“If today’s riot had have happened at Millwall/Chelsea or, god forbid...Anfield – the reporting (sic) would have been 180 degrees different. By the way – any news on the Liverpool team? Sky were camped outside the vastly overrated Lowry weeping for their team inside. They never showed the slightest interest in Liverpool FC. Disgusting bias dominating English football, on and off the field, for the last 40 years.”

Lolski
 

TrustInOle

Full Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2019
Messages
2,467
Location
Manchester
For those who don't understand:
• Glazers bought the club with a loan
• Transferred the debt of the loan to the club
• Have put £0 of their own money into the club
• All transfers have come from club revenue
• They have taken 2 billion from the club
This needs to be stamped on the home page.
 

OrcaFat

Full Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,663
For those who don't understand:
• Glazers bought the club with a loan
• Transferred the debt of the loan to the club
• Have put £0 of their own money into the club
• All transfers have come from club revenue
• They have taken 2 billion from the club
The club being loaded with the debt and the taking of 2 billion are the ones from that list that matter. These are the things that have meant we haven’t been able to massively outspend our rivals, as we should be able to.

We wouldn’t need them to actually put any of their own money in. Transfers should come from club revenue. Problem is Glazers spend revenue on interest and dividends.

We just want someone who will stop crippling our club’s obvious and pretty unassailable revenue-generating advantage.
 

DomesticTadpole

Doom-monger obsessed with Herrera & the M.E.N.
Joined
Jun 4, 2011
Messages
100,976
Location
Barrow In Furness
The club being loaded with the debt and the taking of 2 billion are the ones from that list that matter. These are the things that have meant we haven’t been able to massively outspend our rivals, as we should be able to.

We wouldn’t need them to actually put any of their own money in. Transfers should come from club revenue. Problem is Glazers spend revenue on interest and dividends.

We just want someone who will stop crippling our club’s obvious and pretty unassailable revenue-generating advantage.
We have spent money, wherever it came from, however it has been spent incredibly badly, because instead of having a football man involved, they let their lackey and his mates deal with everything.
 

hungrywing

Full Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
10,225
Location
Your Left Ventricle
How in the name of feck do people STILL not understand this.
It's kind of weird how the staff has really let themselves down on this point. How hard is it to make a sticky with the below-

For those who don't understand:
• Glazers bought the club with a loan
• Transferred the debt of the loan to the club
Have put £0 of their own money into the club
• All transfers have come from club revenue
• They have taken 2 billion from the club
-and then state a policy where if a person posts anything along the lines of 'but the Glazers have spent so much for us' they're permanently banned.

It's flirting with the ludicrous that there are still people who make that kind of post. That's how misinformation survives and spreads.
 

Cast5

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
634
Location
Warrington
1,3 billion pounds over the last 10 years, slightly surpassed by City or Chelsea, although our net spend is much higher than Chelsea's and second only to City.
Talk shit then don’t reply, typical.
 

Jev

Full Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
7,983
Location
Denmark
Talk shit then don’t reply, typical.
I misread your question as "how much have United spent?" Glazers haven't put the penny in the club, no, that's common knowledge. Whether an owner should be expected to do that is another matter, ideally the club should be able to generate enough revenue without needing a sugar daddy owner. There's no denying Glazers have leeched the club, though. I never argued that they didn't.
 
Last edited:

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
53,004
The thing is that tie is won, we can hold some players back.



I'm sure they'll try and get it done tomorrow, I don't think the protests would happen again tomorrow as suddenly Ole and the players could suffer if its postponed twice.



Yeah, that's right, it was the Wednesday.

It was the Tuesday (17th), 48 hours after the Sunday (15th).

I'd misremembered as being the day after so had to look it up.
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
53,004
The thing is that tie is won, we can hold some players back.



I'm sure they'll try and get it done tomorrow, I don't think the protests would happen again tomorrow as suddenly Ole and the players could suffer if its postponed twice.



Yeah, that's right, it was the Wednesday.
No chance by the look of it.
Even the bomb scare year was 2 days, and that was an obvious mistake, not tonnes of fans causing it.

They'll move that Brom game forward a few days and have it 15/16th May
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
53,004
Steve from Liverpool writes

“If today’s riot had have happened at Millwall/Chelsea or, god forbid...Anfield – the reporting (sic) would have been 180 degrees different. By the way – any news on the Liverpool team? Sky were camped outside the vastly overrated Lowry weeping for their team inside. They never showed the slightest interest in Liverpool FC. Disgusting bias dominating English football, on and off the field, for the last 40 years.”

Lolski
Steve obviously doesn't realise that Liverpool were totally inconsequential in today, as their hotel wasn't being bombarded!
 

Cast5

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
634
Location
Warrington
I misread you're question as "how much have United spent?" Glazers haven't put the penny in the club, no, that's common knowledge. Whether an owner should be expected to do that is another matter, ideally the club should be able to generate enough revenue without needing a sugar daddy owner. There's no denying Glazers have leeched the club, though. I never argued that they didn't.
You said they’ve spent 1.3 billion come on pal.
 

calodo2003

Flaming Full Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
41,742
Location
Florida
Steve from Liverpool writes

“If today’s riot had have happened at Millwall/Chelsea or, god forbid...Anfield – the reporting (sic) would have been 180 degrees different. By the way – any news on the Liverpool team? Sky were camped outside the vastly overrated Lowry weeping for their team inside. They never showed the slightest interest in Liverpool FC. Disgusting bias dominating English football, on and off the field, for the last 40 years.”

Lolski
Good god.
 

Jev

Full Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
7,983
Location
Denmark
You said they’ve spent 1.3 billion come on pal.
I said we, as a club, have spent 1.3 billion pounds on transfers over 10 years. Like I just said, I misread your question to mean what have the club spent rather than the Glazers themselves out of their own pockets (which, again, I don't think is fair to expect, although it is fair to expect them not to suck as much money out of the club as they have).
 

Cast5

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
634
Location
Warrington
I misread you're question as "how much have United spent?" Glazers haven't put the penny in the club, no, that's common knowledge. Whether an owner should be expected to do that is another matter, ideally the club should be able to generate enough revenue without needing a sugar daddy owner. There's no denying Glazers have leeched the club, though. I never argued that they didn't.
Okay mate if you misread what I wrote then fair enough I don’t want an argument.
 

Devil may care

New Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
35,976
No chance by the look of it.
Even the bomb scare year was 2 days, and that was an obvious mistake, not tonnes of fans causing it.

They'll move that Brom game forward a few days and have it 15/16th May
Makes sense, I imagine the PR team will be looking to float some positive stories out into the media this week to try and calm things before the game is actually played.
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
53,004
Makes sense, I imagine the PR team will be looking to float some positive stories out into the media this week to try and calm things before the game is actually played.
A mate just said there's talk of 3pm tomorrow. But no idea if this is random nobber fans, or any legit journos...will try and find out.
 

royalewithcheese2006

Full Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2019
Messages
230
Supports
A Director of Football
A mate just said there's talk of 3pm tomorrow. But no idea if this is random nobber fans, or any legit journos...will try and find out.
Bet365 seems to think it's 3pm tomorrow too. Not sure how reliable that is:confused:
 

OrcaFat

Full Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,663
It's kind of weird how the staff has really let themselves down on this point. How hard is it to make a sticky with the below-



-and then state a policy where if a person posts anything along the lines of 'but the Glazers have spent so much for us' they're permanently banned.

It's flirting with the ludicrous that there are still people who make that kind of post. That's how misinformation survives and spreads.
Yeah but it’s all relative.

The Glazers effectively are the club as long as they own it, in the sense that there is no real distinction between the club doing something or the Glazers doing something.

The club has spent a lot of money on players over the last ten years, we all know that. The club could have spent nil. Or could have spent double what we spent. As it is, the club spent more than everyone bar City.

The real point is that the amount taken out by the Glazers on interest and profit has “prevented” the club from spending in line with its potential relative to the amount of revenue we generate. In other words under the right ownership we could (and would) outspend everyone.
 

langster

Captain Stink mouth, so soppy few pints very wow!
Scout
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Messages
21,568
Location
My brain can't get pregnant!
We're second in the league (unless the fans have cost us a points deduction today, great job guys) and favourites to win the Europa League. We've spent fortunes on players since Fergie left, more than enough to stay competitive. The fact that we haven't been is down to failings of various managers rather than a lack of spending. You can criticize the Glazers for many things but honestly, a lack of spending is not one of them.

What have they spent on the stadium?

I'll wait ....
 

Rolandofgilead

Trigger Happy Priest Killer
Scout
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
21,508
Location
Bob Lucas Stadium
Supports
Weymouth
Bet 365 have it as 3pm tomorrow. Very interesting for them to add it. Surely they've not just gambled!?
Somebody posted a screenshot in our group chat earlier, but all the other bookies don't have it listed. Looks like a cash grab keeping the market open to me.
 

sewey89

Incorrectly predicted the de Jong transfer 2022
Joined
Jun 15, 2011
Messages
10,677
Location
Chesterfield
Not a chance they’re announcing when it’s been rescheduled to until after Line of Duty.. and to be honest, I don’t blame them
 

always_hoping

Full Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
7,722
I said we, as a club, have spent 1.3 billion pounds on transfers over 10 years. Like I just said, I misread your question to mean what have the club spent rather than the Glazers themselves out of their own pockets (which, again, I don't think is fair to expect, although it is fair to expect them not to suck as much money out of the club as they have).
it would be fair to expect most owners to fix the leaky Old Trafford roof.
 

hungrywing

Full Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
10,225
Location
Your Left Ventricle
Yeah but it’s all relative.

The Glazers effectively are the club as long as they own it, in the sense that there is no real distinction between the club doing something or the Glazers doing something.

The club has spent a lot of money on players over the last ten years, we all know that. The club could have spent nil. Or could have spent double what we spent. As it is, the club spent more than everyone bar City.

The real point is that the amount taken out by the Glazers on interest and profit has “prevented” the club from spending in line with its potential relative to the amount of revenue we generate. In other words under the right ownership we could (and would) outspend everyone.
Just talking about the issue of either a. supporters believing the Glazers are mega-billionaires who've pumped several billion of their outside wealth into the club, or b. negative actors being able to come to a forum like this and claim so, thereby creating confusion.
 

Cast5

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
634
Location
Warrington
Thousands of people at a protest and 2 coppers got injured, put 5000 people in a field with no protest and I guarentee you more than 2 people will be injured.

Sky reporting: MAN UNITED FANS ATTACK POLICE!

Christ who writes this shite, Glazers spend more on PR than they do our roof. :lol: :lol:
 

OrcaFat

Full Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,663
Just talking about the issue of either a. supporters believing the Glazers are mega-billionaires who've pumped several billion of their outside wealth into the club, or b. negative actors being able to come to a forum like this and claim so, thereby creating confusion.
Oh. Amazing if anyone thinks that!
 

Annihilate Now!

...or later, I'm not fussy
Scout
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Messages
49,879
Location
W.Yorks
Must be a lot that goes into organising a game, cos I don't really get why a) they couldn't have had it tonight at 8pm (unless the pitch is really that bad?) or b) they can't just have it tomorrow lunchtime/afternoon
 

Dve

Full Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2019
Messages
2,908
That is very interesting...as why would they think that?
Not sure what they are basing that on, but tomorrow is still the most likely day. The schedule for rest of this season is otherwise filled.
 

TrustInOle

Full Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2019
Messages
2,467
Location
Manchester
Must be a lot that goes into organising a game, cos I don't really get why a) they couldn't have had it tonight at 8pm (unless the pitch is really that bad?) or b) they can't just have it tomorrow lunchtime/afternoon
The only thing I can think of are the Covid bubbles and restrictions and how the stadium invasion has disrupted that. Could they not just have dual games on MNF? Surely that's plenty of time to Sanatise....... Depending on how much the Glazers are spending on it, oh wait.
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
53,004
Must be a lot that goes into organising a game, cos I don't really get why a) they couldn't have had it tonight at 8pm (unless the pitch is really that bad?) or b) they can't just have it tomorrow lunchtime/afternoon
Especially when they said the players were getting driven back to the ground to get their cars anyway!
Couldn't have been that much security risk by then!
 

Adamsk7

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
2,706
Must be a lot that goes into organising a game, cos I don't really get why a) they couldn't have had it tonight at 8pm (unless the pitch is really that bad?) or b) they can't just have it tomorrow lunchtime/afternoon
Perhaps there’s Covid protocols in place due to touch points - more likely is that the teams are so well prepared they have food etc at a certain point before the match to give them maximum energy levels and it just messes with preparation too much.
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
53,004
Not sure what they are basing that on, but tomorrow is still the most likely day. The schedule for rest of this season is otherwise filled.
I expect it's just a place holder on the site. The 3pm bit makes me think that as you never get 3pm Bank hol games do you?

I don't think tomorrow is at all likely now, it's 10.30pm now. If clubs/media had been told it'd have been leaked by now, and they'd need to know already so players rest/eat right etc.

It'll be May 15/16th, and move Brom v Pool to 12th. Simple as that unfortunately.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.