Unfair advantage in my opinion.
I would now make Watford one of the favourites for promotion. If the Forest and Derby squads remain the same, we have both essentially been moved back a place in the league as with that squad and manager, surely they're better than both of us?
Watford fans might be pleased but are they even Watford anymore? I distanced myself from the accusations of "Udinese B" last year but they well and truly are Udinese B now. Do the players care about Watford's history, fans and the club in general? Probably not, I reckon they are in it for the financial rewards of the premier league, a stepping-stone club in an obscure sense.
It's easy to sound jealous, but I certainly would not be happy if the soul was being sucked out of my club.
I agree and I am sure most Watford fans would call us jealous - A Watford fan at work just has! But I have to say I am not sure I would like it if Derby was being ran in this way. What happens if the FA or UEFA ban owners from having more than one club, it could easily be called a conflict of interest, or the family lose interest in Watford and get rid? Where do they stand then with all these high paid mercenaries who in actual fact never signed for Watford anyway they signed to Udinese and were practically told to go to Watford.
I have no problem with sourcing a few players from overseas and in actual fact it is something I wish Derby would do more of however I do have a problem with signing a whole B team from Udinese as a cheap way of reaping the benefits of getting to the Premiership and the extra money that would bring.
Also, how are they being allowed to sign all these players when under an embargo??
How is this any different to them owning one club and artificially inflating its turnover by pumping in personal wealth, like an Abramovich..?
Granted, there's a bit more complexity to this system but essentially it's just asset management, an accounting procedure.
666 Are you saying you have no problem with what Watford are doing even if it gives them an advantage over other teams in the division?
I see what you are saying. It probably is similar to them owning one club and pumping it full of personal wealth however I highly doubt that if Watford ended up with a sugar daddy chairman who would grant them the most money in the league (a bit like Leicester a couple of seasons back) they would be able to attract some of the players that they have under this arrangement. Lets not forget that one of the signings has played for Italy as recently as last year and the others tend to have impressive CV's. The reaction of most of these players would be "Watford who?" if they came calling under any other circumstances.
Watford, formerly decent club now just cheating vermin. As these players didn't seem to be available to any other club have they contravened EU free trade rules?
At least it'll please those nincompoops who like to think Zola is better manager of a football club than Our Nige is
...you mean like the open and honest sale of DCFC to the 3 Amigos for a quid each?
I'm sure none of us would've gone to £3.50
Don't seem to be many Watford fans on here. I feel the same way to most of you lot. As a Forest fan living 5 miles from Watford I respect the way they used to bring the youth through. My step-dad used to teach that Murray kid. Local lad who came through before this all happened and scored 10 or so goals. He hasn't had a sniff since Zola arrived.
It is certainly a grey area because while under the rules as they are written, it is fair, but the problem is these loopholes could be undermine the game. Right now, in theory, someone could literally buy two or three clubs in the same league and then purposefully 'stack' the odds against two of them for the third clubs benefit.
Having another club paying your wages, (whether it is de facto or otherwise) is to my mind, a conflict of interest.
"Watford fans might be pleased but are they even Watford anymore? I distanced myself from the accusations of "Udinese B" last year but they well and truly are Udinese B now. Do the players care about Watford's history, fans and the club in general? Probably not, I reckon they are in it for the financial rewards of the premier league, a stepping-stone club in an obscure sense."
Then surely the same could be said about any player who joins any other club?
If they get you promoted would you really care?
comment by Taiwan's-Al-ram (U9929)
posted 1 week, 5 days ago
It is certainly a grey area because while under the rules as they are written, it is fair, but the problem is these loopholes could be undermine the game. Right now, in theory, someone could literally buy two or three clubs in the same league and then purposefully 'stack' the odds against two of them for the third clubs benefit
---------------------------------------
You can't own more than one English football club
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
Unfair advantage or clever tactic??
Page 1 of 1
posted on 19/7/13
posted on 19/7/13
Unfair advantage in my opinion.
I would now make Watford one of the favourites for promotion. If the Forest and Derby squads remain the same, we have both essentially been moved back a place in the league as with that squad and manager, surely they're better than both of us?
Watford fans might be pleased but are they even Watford anymore? I distanced myself from the accusations of "Udinese B" last year but they well and truly are Udinese B now. Do the players care about Watford's history, fans and the club in general? Probably not, I reckon they are in it for the financial rewards of the premier league, a stepping-stone club in an obscure sense.
It's easy to sound jealous, but I certainly would not be happy if the soul was being sucked out of my club.
posted on 19/7/13
I agree and I am sure most Watford fans would call us jealous - A Watford fan at work just has! But I have to say I am not sure I would like it if Derby was being ran in this way. What happens if the FA or UEFA ban owners from having more than one club, it could easily be called a conflict of interest, or the family lose interest in Watford and get rid? Where do they stand then with all these high paid mercenaries who in actual fact never signed for Watford anyway they signed to Udinese and were practically told to go to Watford.
I have no problem with sourcing a few players from overseas and in actual fact it is something I wish Derby would do more of however I do have a problem with signing a whole B team from Udinese as a cheap way of reaping the benefits of getting to the Premiership and the extra money that would bring.
Also, how are they being allowed to sign all these players when under an embargo??
posted on 19/7/13
How is this any different to them owning one club and artificially inflating its turnover by pumping in personal wealth, like an Abramovich..?
Granted, there's a bit more complexity to this system but essentially it's just asset management, an accounting procedure.
posted on 19/7/13
666 Are you saying you have no problem with what Watford are doing even if it gives them an advantage over other teams in the division?
I see what you are saying. It probably is similar to them owning one club and pumping it full of personal wealth however I highly doubt that if Watford ended up with a sugar daddy chairman who would grant them the most money in the league (a bit like Leicester a couple of seasons back) they would be able to attract some of the players that they have under this arrangement. Lets not forget that one of the signings has played for Italy as recently as last year and the others tend to have impressive CV's. The reaction of most of these players would be "Watford who?" if they came calling under any other circumstances.
posted on 19/7/13
Watford, formerly decent club now just cheating vermin. As these players didn't seem to be available to any other club have they contravened EU free trade rules?
posted on 19/7/13
At least it'll please those nincompoops who like to think Zola is better manager of a football club than Our Nige is
posted on 19/7/13
...you mean like the open and honest sale of DCFC to the 3 Amigos for a quid each?
I'm sure none of us would've gone to £3.50
posted on 20/7/13
Don't seem to be many Watford fans on here. I feel the same way to most of you lot. As a Forest fan living 5 miles from Watford I respect the way they used to bring the youth through. My step-dad used to teach that Murray kid. Local lad who came through before this all happened and scored 10 or so goals. He hasn't had a sniff since Zola arrived.
posted on 21/7/13
It is certainly a grey area because while under the rules as they are written, it is fair, but the problem is these loopholes could be undermine the game. Right now, in theory, someone could literally buy two or three clubs in the same league and then purposefully 'stack' the odds against two of them for the third clubs benefit.
Having another club paying your wages, (whether it is de facto or otherwise) is to my mind, a conflict of interest.
posted on 26/7/13
"Watford fans might be pleased but are they even Watford anymore? I distanced myself from the accusations of "Udinese B" last year but they well and truly are Udinese B now. Do the players care about Watford's history, fans and the club in general? Probably not, I reckon they are in it for the financial rewards of the premier league, a stepping-stone club in an obscure sense."
Then surely the same could be said about any player who joins any other club?
posted on 2/8/13
If they get you promoted would you really care?
posted on 2/8/13
comment by Taiwan's-Al-ram (U9929)
posted 1 week, 5 days ago
It is certainly a grey area because while under the rules as they are written, it is fair, but the problem is these loopholes could be undermine the game. Right now, in theory, someone could literally buy two or three clubs in the same league and then purposefully 'stack' the odds against two of them for the third clubs benefit
---------------------------------------
You can't own more than one English football club
Page 1 of 1