Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The Premier League Thread!
- Thread starter MOFS
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
This I do know. As a child, he spilt a kettle of scalding water over himself.Actually, while we're on the subject of physical oddities, and Carlos Tevez...
I wonder this everytime I see him on the telly does anyone know what happened to his neck? It looks all scarred and stuff, like he's been burnt.
Very very worrying.
I'm not up on my Arsenal history, so I didn't know this was a big deal.
On a side note, my favorite hockey team (Colorado Avalanche) really flourished under the Kroenke family ownership, and hopefully they will contribute to the Gunners as well.
Re Tevez; from Wikipedia:
"Tevez has a distinctive scar from the right ear, down his neck to his chest. This occurred when he was ten months old while he was exploring the terrain of his mothers kitchen floor he inadvertently pulled a kettle of boiling water over himself. This caused third-degree burns to the right side of his face, neck and chest and left him in intensive care for almost two months. Today the scars are a visible signature of Tevez, who refused an offer from his Boca Juniors to have them cosmetically improved, saying that the scars were a part of who he was in the past and who he is today."
Jaffa, that avatar is looking more realistic now, all you are missing is the pathetic tiger print under the arms and Karoo on the front made by a two year olds stencil!
"Tevez has a distinctive scar from the right ear, down his neck to his chest. This occurred when he was ten months old while he was exploring the terrain of his mothers kitchen floor he inadvertently pulled a kettle of boiling water over himself. This caused third-degree burns to the right side of his face, neck and chest and left him in intensive care for almost two months. Today the scars are a visible signature of Tevez, who refused an offer from his Boca Juniors to have them cosmetically improved, saying that the scars were a part of who he was in the past and who he is today."
Jaffa, that avatar is looking more realistic now, all you are missing is the pathetic tiger print under the arms and Karoo on the front made by a two year olds stencil!
Ok, I'll explain, as its on my mind a bit, I feel like putting it all down into text.
David Dein has been at Arsenal for more than 20 years, and he is a fan - he's a gooner. He is the only football man on the board, and he has 15% of the shares, give or take.
Recently Kroenke purchased ITV's 9.9% share in the club, and some other shares another board member (Fitzman) let go. He has 11.x% of the shares at the moment.
Most Arsenal fans on the whole, whether its right or wrong, don't want an American to own the club - or any kind of foreigners really. We are proud of not having been bought out, like the other 3 top 4 English teams, and want to keep it that way.
The issue of Kroenke's purchasing has obviously come up with the board - and talk of a potential take over I guess has been discussed as well - or for all we know Kroenke could have even been in touch. Dein was on the side of the takeover being in the best interests of Arsenal, the other board members clearly weren't. As people have commented today, Dein wouldn't leave the club he loves unless he had to - and I wouldn't be suprised if he was forced out. The remaining board members, who hold 45% of the shares together, have pledged not to sell for a minimum of a year. In my opinion, that's next to useless - they may as well sell now. Whatever. Seems worthless.
Dein was directly responsible for bring Bergkamp, and even more vitally, Wenger, to Arsenal. He is the transfer man - he and Arsene work together on every player Arsene wants to bring to Arsenal. Alongside this, David and Arsene are very good personal friends. This will be a big loss for Arsene, and who knows how he will react to it.
It seems to me that Dein sees the only way for his beloved club to move forward to the Kroenke deal. Its really not about the money for him, he has been putting anything he can into Arsenal for years, and trying to do whats best for the club. I wouldn't be suprised at all to see Dein back at Arsenal eventually - with Kroenke. If Dein sells his shares to Kroenke, Kroenke will have over 25% - enough to start to do something with.
Currently I'm thinking I'd rather have Kroenke and Dein there than the remaining board members - basically placing my trust in Dein's actions. Its worrying the other board members, while wanting whats best for the club, are not strong supporters and football men like Dein.
Its encouraging that Kroenke was successful with your hockey team. I am deeply worried that instead of a Liverpool-like takeover, where all the conditions are amicable, and everything is left in place, Kroenke will try to wring all the money out of the club he can, and it can hardly be good for us. On the other hand, he could inject some money in, which one can argue is needed to compete with Manchester United, Chelsea and Liverpool - along with the other top European teams.
No one really knows right now, but as I said earlier - very worrying times really. Hope this made sense, I tried to get it all down logically.
You must have been 'proud' for all of three weeks, Liverpool have only just been taken over. Somewhat ironically, many Liverpool fans seem prouder and more protective over the new owners than they ever were over the old English owner.
As you say though, Liverpool's deal is a whole different kettle of fish. We spend three years looking for the right investors, we turned so so many people down and ended up having a huge choice to make between 2 amazing investors. 1) was the Investment arm of Dubai who have wealth to make Roman look like he has sweetie money, 2) A pair of Americans who know sport, sport buildings and money like few others, they also know winning and have a mentality that they want to win above making money, they also realise that to make money you have to have a quality team that is winning. They have the expertise to make a large impact on the global market. So we had a choice between brilliant and brilliant... er.
The choice Arsenal have is the same choice Manchester United had, nobody knows if it will turn out the same or not, especially with Liverpool, Chelsea and other european teams now having such a punch in the transfer market. I feel that Arsenal need something to halt this decline that they are in, by the time the stadium pays for itself and starts to give huge profit, I think it will be to late. Fourth place is being fought for again, although not scraping as bad as last season, and other than one semi-successfull European campaign that avenue is looking poor for both success and large financial gains. So if I was an Arsenal fan, I would be begging for a take over, unless 'pride' in an indian born 'English' board member and an 'English' Danny Fiszman who was born to both a Belgian mother and father is so much that you would prefer this mediocrity that Arsenal seem to be in at the moment.
Maybe you could get the new owner a british passport, that seems to be the source of pride over the current two largest shareholders.
It's highly realistic already! Its based on a strip worn by the Tigers between 1955-1960. Meticulous research goes into every kit my Jaffatar dons, you know.
But Im not impressed with the new one, especially the sponsor. Me and Karoo have had our dealings in the past, suffice to say...
And thanks for the Tevez-trivia fest, guys I feel better for knowing that.
Hello és:. The difference is having an American owner who has no connection with Arsenal at all, and may well simply be interested in making money, and having members on the board who have shown that they are committed to Arsenal - they have been there a long time, and the club has grown vastly.
I heard on a podcast yesterday that Wenger stated he didn't intend to do any major spending over the summer - I would think he has to.
I thought that Mr Wenger was going to be given money this summer as they have more income with the new stadium.
I was thinking that Tevez would be a great signing for them, he plays the Arsenal style of football and with him and Van Persie or Baptista playing just off Henry would make some attacking line-up.
I was thinking that Tevez would be a great signing for them, he plays the Arsenal style of football and with him and Van Persie or Baptista playing just off Henry would make some attacking line-up.
I don't think Tevez will go down with West Ham (if they do go down), so someone will snap him up, and Arsenal seems the best fit...
Over the last 10 years or so, its not money and expensive players that have lead us to the success we have had. However, I do feel in some areas our squad must be strengthened. We are still heavily in debt from the stadium, so its not helping us financially yet - its paying itself off. But allegedly Arsene has a fairly substantial bundle of money to spend should he want to.
So if it were a Brit with no previous ties to Arsenal, would you assume he/she was only interested in making money?
I can't speak for sports teams owners over there, but in the U.S. the typical pattern seems to be: make a fortune in some other business, then buy a team as a hobby/ego booster. In fact, they often seem to forget the rules of economics when running a team. I sometimes wonder how they managed to get rich in the first place.
Speaking of which, that was an odd comment (from another poster) about how the new American owners of Liverpool have shown a commitment to winning. One has owned the Montreal Canadiens, the most historically successful franchise in NHL history, during some of their weakest seasons. The other owner's signature move was to outbid his fellow baseball owners for a superstar player (Alex Rodriguez) by almost $100 million, then trade him to play for another team while still playing part of his salary.
I'm not saying that Liverpool won't be successful under their ownership, just that I don't see why these Americans breed confidence among the team's fans. Then again, you don't hear much complaining anymore about Glazer's debts from Man U fans either, now that the team is on top again.
If the performance of American sports teams with new stadiums is any indicator, then you shouldn't expect them to suddenly improve the product on the field. There's been a huge boom in stadium and arena building here in the last 10-12 years, but it doesn't seem related to winning more games. Some teams even got worse soon after the new park opened. And a lot of these new facilities were subsidized by taxpayers, so the teams got more revenue without the debt.
Since your businessmen over there care much less about making money, I'm sure that won't happen to you.
I'd be as worried as I am now about this American.
I also don't really want us to become a rich man's play thing - a la Chelsea.
I don't really know what to think about the whole thing.
On a brighter note I have my ticket for Spurs away, looking forward to that.
Thanks for the illuminating explanation XIII, I appreciate knowing a little more about Arsenal than I did when I woke up this morning.
Cheers
Old-time baseball manager/owner Connie Mack had a theory about making money vs. winning. He said that winning obviously made the team more money in the short-term, but when you win a championship, all the players demand a raise. So if you only care about profits, it's better to come in a close second or third, because being a contender means fans in the seats. As it turned out, he didn't follow his own advice very well. His teams tended to be very bad or very good.
The reverse corollary: Baseball Hall of Famer Ralph Kiner once asked for a raise after winning the home run title with a weak Pittsburgh Pirates team. The owner's response: "We can finish last without you."
I'd be as worried as I am now about this American.
I also don't really want us to become a rich man's play thing - a la Chelsea.
I don't really know what to think about the whole thing.
On a brighter note I have my ticket for Spurs away, looking forward to that.
If it makes you feel better, a few years ago my beloved Dodgers were bought by a guy whose main business asset was a parking lot in Boston, which he used as collateral for a loan to buy the team. That doesn't inspire much confidence!
On the other hand, the previous owner was Rupert Murdoch, so we considered it a step up.
Baseball is a one country sport (really, where massive money is concerned) football is far bigger, the best way to make money is win, expand your brand throughout the world and reap the rewards. Higher TV earnings, higher sponsorship etc etc. It has been proven unarguably by the success of teams like Manchester United, Real Madrid and it's starting at Chelsea.
Actually I was being somewhat facetious. Connie Mack managed when radio was new and there was no TV or much international media to speak of, so the comparison doesn't go very far.
But let me put it this way: Real Madrid hasn't won any trophies since, what, 2003? Have they lost a lot of revenue since then? Have the fans given up on them? Not at all. By staying in contention and coming close to winning, they're still a big business. How many years did Arsenal come close to winning? They were a high-revenue team with strong fan support before they started winning trophies again.
Maybe we should specify that we're talking about success for the top teams, since there are only a very small number of teams around the world that truly have a global brand. Depending on how you define it, maybe two dozen teams have a large fanbase in many countries around the world. The vast majority of soccer teams can't hope to develop a global brand any time soon.
But they are the biggest, most successful team in Europe that have already built that brand through the nineties through a winning tradition. A few years doesn't mean much in the world of football.
But the team I was talking about, and that you picked me up on was Liverpool, more than any club in the world, that is the club that can grow it's global brand, simply because the previous owner wasn't that good at doing it. The Manchester United higherachy embraced the sky revolution, where as Liverpool fell behind.
With all said and done, it is proven that success breads success off the field. Maybe not in every sport, but certainly football.
Peter Hill-Wood gave an interview with the BBC. I found this quote fantastic:
"Our objective is keep Arsenal English, albeit with a lot of foreign players."
Pure class.
I must admit I think that when Arsenal play well they are by far the best team in the country, if not Europe. They play with such style, pace and ability. For a true football fan they are a joy to behold. It is just a shame they don't do it very often anymore.
"Our objective is keep Arsenal English, albeit with a lot of foreign players."
Pure class.
I must admit I think that when Arsenal play well they are by far the best team in the country, if not Europe. They play with such style, pace and ability. For a true football fan they are a joy to behold. It is just a shame they don't do it very often anymore.
He is a crackpot if you ask me. Keep arsenal English. Makes me a bit angry when they send no English players out week in, week out have a brilliant french manager and play in a stadium called "the Emirates". I don't disagree with them doing any of that, but to talk about English yadda yadda, it's hypocrytical.
I think they played the best football a few years ago when they had top players, now I find them hard to watch esspecially compared to the team I loved watching around 2001/2/3/4 with the likes of Pires, Bergkamp, Henry, Vieira, Campbell and even stretching back as far as Overmars and Petit. They don't deserve to shine that teams boots now and they don't play anything like it.
Good lad! You've made my evening there.
"Launching a new licensed player identification system" that's the new numbers, then? Although there's not a full alphabet shown on the sheet you posted, it's the same typeface used on the new Premier League logo so we have a good idea what the letters other than P-L-A-Y-E-R look like. It doesn't look too bad, a good replacement for the squished version of Optima they've been using for a while but I'll reserve judgement until I've seen the actual letters printed on an actual shirt.
I'm assuming the Football League is sticking with their current style, as I've not seen or heard any different. A shame, as it's bloody awful.
"Launching a new licensed player identification system" that's the new numbers, then?
Although there's not a full alphabet shown on the sheet you posted, it's the same typeface used on the new Premier League logo so we have a good idea what the letters other than P-L-A-Y-E-R look like. It doesn't look too bad, a good replacement for the squished version of Optima they've been using for a while but I'll reserve judgement until I've seen the actual letters printed on an actual shirt.I'm assuming the Football League is sticking with their current style, as I've not seen or heard any different. A shame, as it's bloody awful.
- Status