Football League chairman: The exclusive interview

Lancashire Telegraph: PREPARED TO GET TOUGH: The Football League’s chairman Greg Clarke PREPARED TO GET TOUGH: The Football League’s chairman Greg Clarke

Q. Accrington Stanley came close to going out of business last year. Was that a concern?

GREG CLARKE: The situation is that economically things are difficult.

No-one has a lot of money and whatever they have they don’t want to put into football. Banks aren’t keen to lend to football clubs and it’s always nip and tuck.

A few clubs get close to the edge. Accrington were a bit close last season, they’ll be different clubs a bit close this season.

Luckily we’ve only got one club in arrears at the moment to HM Revenue and Customs because the rules say if you’re in arrears you can’t sign players.

Clubs don’t like being told they can’t sign players so they tend to pay their bills. We’re always working with a few clubs who have problems and last year it was Accrington’s turn.

Q. Do you monitor each club’s situation with tax?

A. We do two things, we monitor them but HMRC also tell us.

If they say, 'These guys aren’t paying', we phone up and say, 'What’s going on, boys? You know that if you don’t pay this, we’ll have to put a transfer embargo on you'.

Miraculously, nine times out of 10, HMRC gets paid.

Q. Are you happy with Stanley’s finances now?

A. Yes, but I’m not au fait with week-to-week financial situations. I just know that it’s difficult at most clubs.

It’s not easy for them, even in the Championship. If you’re playing well you get a few more fans, if you’re winning less, people are worried about whether they’re going to have a job and they tend not to buy an away shirt.

Q. Burnley recently announced a £14.4m pre-tax profit. Are you encouraged by those results?

A. The chairman there, Barry Kilby, is a very sound businessman. He didn’t go crazy when they got promoted to the Premier League.

He ran the club well, sadly they were relegated but they are not one of the clubs that have found themselves in a huge crisis. They are focused on the long-term well-being of the club.

I was in their boardroom the other week for their game against Doncaster Rovers and had a long chat with them.

Barry and his people are running that club well so I’m not surprised that they’ve made a profit.

Q. Are Burnley a good example for the rest of the League?

A. They are a good example in that when they went up to the Premier League the most important thing wasn’t Premier League success, it was the long-term survival of the football club.

It is never smart to bet the future of the football club and they didn’t do that. They said, 'Okay, we’re investing but if it doesn’t turn well and it looks like we’re going to get relegated we’re not going to throw all our money at trying to survive in the Premier League. We’re going to retain our funds and make sure the club is healthy in the longer term'.

Barry said that was what he is going to do, he did it and they now have a competitive team in the Championship.

The Burnley fans have had their day in the Premier League, they’ll get it again and they’ve had it in the past. I walked down the Bob Lord Stand back in the good old heydays of the 1970s when I was a boy and Burnley were a big team.

They were a big team last year and they’ll be a big team at some point in the future. That is the thing - well-run clubs who play a long game and stay in business for the long term tend to get their turn in the top league. It comes around again. So good luck to them.

Q. Stanley have had four transfer embargoes in the last year or so, and Burnley also had two a couple of seasons ago. Are you happy with the current regulations?

A. You don’t own a football club, you are a custodian of a heritage. People who own football clubs tend to get a bad rep but the large majority of them put a lot of money into preserving their local football club and we should admire those people.

My view is that the rules of football should be biased in favour of the long-term health of football clubs, not the short term. So what we’ve tried to do is make sure there are no rewards for excessive spending.

Football is a volatile business and sometimes things get difficult. It’s very difficult to explain to HM Revenue and Customs why a club who is in debt to them can still buy footballers.

Realistically speaking, the club is skint, not to put too fine an economic word on it. I’m not a great believer in big words. If we’re struggling to pay policemen, firemen and nurses, and keep hospitals open, the state should not be subsidising football clubs.

We have the rules in place to make sure that football clubs are encouraged to pay their bills on time and run their businesses sensibly. We can’t always achieve that but we do our best.

Q. Are you concerned about clubs like Stanley who have had so many embargoes?

A. I don’t want to pick on Accrington. The guys who run Accrington are probably working really hard to keep a small club successful in the Football League with small crowds and a little ground, trying to extend their ground to 5,000. It’s hard.

It’s not a case of Greg Clarke has a tablet of stone that he’ll hand to chairmen and say, 'Just do that and it will all be okay'. They are doing their best.

Every now and again they get a little bit close to the edge and we have to say, 'You can’t do this or you can’t do that'.

It doesn’t mean they are bad people. They are people trying to keep their local football club alive and I tend to go the extra mile. I want them to keep their football club alive. We at the Football League aren’t neutral arbiters. We don’t just sit there saying, 'Well, if your football club lives, good, if it dies, that’s tough'.

Our job is to keep 72 clubs in business and try to have the rules that encourage them to do it the right way.

Some of them step over the mark now and again and we have a sensible private conversation with them and they move back in the right direction usually. But we have to have those rules to make sure that it’s fair.

I have been to see more than 30 football clubs since I took over six months ago. I do two or three games a week and I try to get round the clubs.

We at the Football League aren’t some faceless bureaucrats. We are part of the team trying to make sure football is successful and the more we know what’s going on in the real world, the more help we can be. It’s just a general chat to ask, 'How’s it going, how are you trading, what can you see, what’s going on, what are you concerned about, how can we help?'.

The more we know about the day-to-day problems facing the game, the better we can prioritise our time to help fix them.

We are a real democracy. We are run by the football clubs, for the football clubs. Four times a year we have a general meeting when they all come along and vote on all the big issues.

We genuinely try to fulfil their wishes and ambitions. Sometimes it’s not easy to get 72 people who have the same opinion so we help them coalesce about how to manage wage costs, what to do about some of the big safety issues facing the game and things like that.

But you tend to find out by listening to people what they think is important, and then our job is to go away and try to build a consensus about what is important.

Q. You have been speaking to Stanley about trying to get their ground up to 5,000 capacity. The deadline is December 31.

A That’s one of the basic rules of the game – you’ve got to have the ability to get 5,000 fans in the ground and they’ve struggled. They’re talking about temporary stands and this, that and the other.

But we’re sympathetic. They’re working hard to achieve it and they tell us they’re going to have it done by Christmas.

Q. If the work wasn’t done by December 31, what would happen?

A. The rules are that you can’t play in the Football League unless you’ve got this, but are we in the business of trying to find ways to throw clubs out of the Football League? Of course we’re not. We want to find ways to help clubs succeed, not fail.

So, yes, we’re going to keep whipping them, because that’s our job, but we want to find a way to help them get there.

Q. There is a lot of talk about salary caps. What are your views on that?

A. I’m a big fan of managing costs down in football. We spend too much.

There is a salary cost management protocol in League Two, which has been improved this season.

That means they cap their wage budget at 55 per cent revenue. That means they cap their wage budget, not individual player’s salaries, so we don’t tell them what they can pay any player.

We just say that if you cap your wages as a percentage of revenue, you probably won’t go bust. The financial health of League Two has improved over the years as they’ve made that bite.

League One are shadowing it, which means they’re putting it in place and measuring it all without the penalties. They’re seeing how it goes, it’s just an experiment.

he Championship are looking at imposing the same system as the Premier League with what’s called the financial fair play rules, meaning that you’re not allowed to lose more than a certain amount of money over a certain period of time. The only way you can actually achieve that is not paying your players too much money. It’s a different way of achieving the same result.

My personal belief is that we in football have to get our player wage budgets under control if we’re going to improve the long-term chances of survival of football clubs. Can we solve all those problems overnight? No. Do we need to work together with the PFA, the League Managers’ Association and everyone else to achieve that? Yes, we do because the stability of all football clubs is in the interests of the fans, the players, the managers, the owners and the game.

We’re making progress down that road. I am not outspoken on this issue, I just believe in working quietly behind the scenes to achieve better financial stability for the clubs because then more clubs will survive and fans will be happy.

Q. Do you envisage a 55 per cent salary cap being introduced in the Championship?

A. I don’t know what the number will be but the only way of the Championship moving towards more financial stability is to reduce the amount of money they spend on their squads. How and when they achieve that, we’re talking about. I don’t expect it to be this season or next season, but in the end I believe we will achieve better control of our costs.

Q. Blackburn Rovers are not in the Football League after maintaining their place in the Premier League for 10 years. Can Football League clubs still sustain a place in the top flight?

A. If you’ve got a huge global brand like Manchester United, Liverpool or Chelsea, you’ve got access to sponsorship and revenue that people like Blackburn don’t get. It’s always going to be harder for the little sides. When we don’t have room for the teams like Blackburn, it’s going to be a worse Premier League. I like to see clubs get promoted and hang on in there.

Q. Burnley are one of the first clubs to be helped by the new parachute payments, which now last for four years. There was some controversy when the payments were increased - are you happy with the level of money that goes to relegated teams at the moment?

A. I was one of the people who wasn’t too fussed about that. There were people within football, within the Football League and within the Football League board who had really deep concerns.

But to me, what the parachute payment did was make sure the clubs coming out of the Premier League could pay the players they had because when the revenue falls and they’ve got long-term contracts in place it’s going to be a problem.

When you look at it, the people received parachute payments at the minute aren’t the clubs at the top of the Championship. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

We can all have our opinions but if every year the three teams who go down go up again, you’d have to say there’s something wrong there. But at the minute it’s not looking even close to that.

Look at Middlesbrough, they’re fourth from bottom, and Hull are down at the bottom. The guys at the top, Cardiff, Swansea, Derby, none of those guys are receiving parachute payments. So I think it’s achieving its objective of making sure that teams who go down don’t go bust.

I don’t worry too much about it stilting competition. In the end you want to believe that your team have got a chance of winning something. There are 17 teams in the Championship who don’t have parachute payments and they’re doing okay.

Q. You have been on a regional tour taking in Preston North End, Accrington Stanley, Crewe Alexandra and Stockport County. Are they an important part of your job?

A. What we’re trying to do is make sure that the Football League team get out and around clubs to listen. Our decision making has to be embedded in reality.

It’s a bit like a politician, if you spend your whole time in Westminster, what do you know? You’ve got to get out around the estates, the working men’s clubs and the shopkeepers to find out what’s really going on. That’s what we try to do, to feel the real pulse of football.

Q. At Stanley there is currently a dispute between three people over the ownership. Can you mediate in that situation?

A. We tend not to because in the end our job is to look after the football club. There are mediation and legal remedies available, and I’m involved in one club at the moment where discussions are going on between different owners and different creditors, and we’re trying to find a way through it all to resolve the situation.

But when you’ve got 72 clubs, there are about 60 people in the Football League and they do things like arrange the referees, do the television deals, make sure the sponsorship is in place and all the other stuff, we don’t actually have a lot of time to do all the other things.

We tend to focus on what our job is and let club owners sort out all the other stuff.

Q. For clubs like Accrington, they find it expensive to travel long distances to away games. Has there ever been a thought of regionalising League Two?

A. Regionalisation tends not to have much of a following among fans and owners, because actually they want to play the best teams they can.

Yes it’s a pain if you’ve got Torquay and on a Tuesday night you’ve got to go from Accrington nearly into Cornwall in some cup game maybe, that’s hard.

But whenever you talk to people who own clubs, they want to play the best teams, they don’t want to play the local teams. It’s a practical solution, but no-one wants it.

Q. Burnley striker Chris Iwelumo said recently that he felt more professional footballers should be allowed to become referees. Do you agree with that?

A. The hardest job in football is the referee’s job. I make decisions and if I get nine out of 10 right I’m a hero. If a referee doesn’t get 99 out of 100 right he’s a villain.No-one sits there looking a club owner, the chairman of the Football League or the chief executive of the Premier League and replays every decision 100 times on television.

Anything that brings the best referees to the game is a good thing. I think the standard of refereeing in this country is excellent. Could it improve? Of course it could. But the problem is it’s a very specialist occupation.

What I like at the minute is younger and younger referees are coming through, because the sooner they referee at the top level, the more experience they get and the better they’re going to be.

The big problem is if you play until you’re 33 or 34 and then try training to be a ref, it’s different being a ref than being a player. So if you start learning the refereeing game in your early 30s you’re not going to be much good until your early 40s, because it takes 10 years to learn anything that’s hard.

So, yes, of course there is room for ex-players as referees, but I don’t think it is the one solution.

The solution is to identify really good referees early and get them into the top level and let them start learning on the job.

Q. The Europa League and the Champions League have brought in an extra official behind each goal. Could that happen soon in the Football League?

A. We at the Football League like to see ourselves as innovators. When UEFA and FIFA ask for people to try out new technologies and approaches, we will always put our hands up because we think any game that is forward looking should be looking to innovate and try to be better.

So we want to take on new ideas and if that’s one of them, we’ll have a go.

Comments (19)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:26pm Wed 17 Nov 10

midas says...

Quick Tetley send him your dossier of evidence on Burnley! His views seem at odds to yours! Strange that isn't it? Hes obviously not privy to the gossip amongst the "East Lancs professional circles"
Quick Tetley send him your dossier of evidence on Burnley! His views seem at odds to yours! Strange that isn't it? Hes obviously not privy to the gossip amongst the "East Lancs professional circles" midas

4:52pm Wed 17 Nov 10

jack01 says...

Well done flanagan and the telegraph. You've succeeded in getting this week's positive burnley story and negative blackburn story all rolled into one neat interview with somebody supposedly in 'the know'

Nice to see that rovers are still 'hanging on in there', being a little club in the big boys league what a miraculous achievement that is. No mention of a lowest finish of 15th, top-10 finishes and european qualification. No, we're just a little club making up the numbers and scraping survival every year. It might just be me but i think that one of just four clubs to win the league deserves a bit more respect.

Meanwhile burnley are an example to the rest of the football league. Quite how i'm not sure. An example of how to be as unambitious as possible perhaps?

This bloke doesn't sound like he has a clue what's going on anyway, doesn't exactly inspire people with confidence reading this drivel.
Well done flanagan and the telegraph. You've succeeded in getting this week's positive burnley story and negative blackburn story all rolled into one neat interview with somebody supposedly in 'the know' Nice to see that rovers are still 'hanging on in there', being a little club in the big boys league what a miraculous achievement that is. No mention of a lowest finish of 15th, top-10 finishes and european qualification. No, we're just a little club making up the numbers and scraping survival every year. It might just be me but i think that one of just four clubs to win the league deserves a bit more respect. Meanwhile burnley are an example to the rest of the football league. Quite how i'm not sure. An example of how to be as unambitious as possible perhaps? This bloke doesn't sound like he has a clue what's going on anyway, doesn't exactly inspire people with confidence reading this drivel. jack01

5:33pm Wed 17 Nov 10

Longside Bex says...

Jack 01, your drivel doesn't inspire me!
Jack 01, your drivel doesn't inspire me! Longside Bex

6:35pm Wed 17 Nov 10

incywincyhaha says...

jack01 wrote:
Well done flanagan and the telegraph. You've succeeded in getting this week's positive burnley story and negative blackburn story all rolled into one neat interview with somebody supposedly in 'the know'

Nice to see that rovers are still 'hanging on in there', being a little club in the big boys league what a miraculous achievement that is. No mention of a lowest finish of 15th, top-10 finishes and european qualification. No, we're just a little club making up the numbers and scraping survival every year. It might just be me but i think that one of just four clubs to win the league deserves a bit more respect.

Meanwhile burnley are an example to the rest of the football league. Quite how i'm not sure. An example of how to be as unambitious as possible perhaps?

This bloke doesn't sound like he has a clue what's going on anyway, doesn't exactly inspire people with confidence reading this drivel.
Not being persistently on the verge of going bust is how!

Funny how B45t4rd5 only got where they are cos Jack gave them all their funding - now it's not looking quite so good, is it?
[quote][p][bold]jack01[/bold] wrote: Well done flanagan and the telegraph. You've succeeded in getting this week's positive burnley story and negative blackburn story all rolled into one neat interview with somebody supposedly in 'the know' Nice to see that rovers are still 'hanging on in there', being a little club in the big boys league what a miraculous achievement that is. No mention of a lowest finish of 15th, top-10 finishes and european qualification. No, we're just a little club making up the numbers and scraping survival every year. It might just be me but i think that one of just four clubs to win the league deserves a bit more respect. Meanwhile burnley are an example to the rest of the football league. Quite how i'm not sure. An example of how to be as unambitious as possible perhaps? This bloke doesn't sound like he has a clue what's going on anyway, doesn't exactly inspire people with confidence reading this drivel.[/p][/quote]Not being persistently on the verge of going bust is how! Funny how B45t4rd5 only got where they are cos Jack gave them all their funding - now it's not looking quite so good, is it? incywincyhaha

8:14pm Wed 17 Nov 10

Old Man Ray says...

Is this an interview or a press release. Not exactly an inquisition is it from young Flannelagain? What will happen if we don't up our capacity?
Is this an interview or a press release. Not exactly an inquisition is it from young Flannelagain? What will happen if we don't up our capacity? Old Man Ray

10:20pm Wed 17 Nov 10

jack01 says...

incywincyhaha wrote:
jack01 wrote:
Well done flanagan and the telegraph. You've succeeded in getting this week's positive burnley story and negative blackburn story all rolled into one neat interview with somebody supposedly in 'the know'

Nice to see that rovers are still 'hanging on in there', being a little club in the big boys league what a miraculous achievement that is. No mention of a lowest finish of 15th, top-10 finishes and european qualification. No, we're just a little club making up the numbers and scraping survival every year. It might just be me but i think that one of just four clubs to win the league deserves a bit more respect.

Meanwhile burnley are an example to the rest of the football league. Quite how i'm not sure. An example of how to be as unambitious as possible perhaps?

This bloke doesn't sound like he has a clue what's going on anyway, doesn't exactly inspire people with confidence reading this drivel.
Not being persistently on the verge of going bust is how!

Funny how B45t4rd5 only got where they are cos Jack gave them all their funding - now it's not looking quite so good, is it?
Things are looking pretty good thanks incy lad. Fresh back of ANOTHER top 10 finish we're getting set for some VERY wealthy investors to come in and make us a big club. Don't think we've had any of jack's money for a decade, since which we've won trophies and qualified for europe several times. What about your deluded little club? Getting all excited because your one season in the sun was enough to ensure your financial survival for the next 10 years. Thanks for the concern, but i'm quite happy with how things are here in the premier league. Where's all your money going?
[quote][p][bold]incywincyhaha[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jack01[/bold] wrote: Well done flanagan and the telegraph. You've succeeded in getting this week's positive burnley story and negative blackburn story all rolled into one neat interview with somebody supposedly in 'the know' Nice to see that rovers are still 'hanging on in there', being a little club in the big boys league what a miraculous achievement that is. No mention of a lowest finish of 15th, top-10 finishes and european qualification. No, we're just a little club making up the numbers and scraping survival every year. It might just be me but i think that one of just four clubs to win the league deserves a bit more respect. Meanwhile burnley are an example to the rest of the football league. Quite how i'm not sure. An example of how to be as unambitious as possible perhaps? This bloke doesn't sound like he has a clue what's going on anyway, doesn't exactly inspire people with confidence reading this drivel.[/p][/quote]Not being persistently on the verge of going bust is how! Funny how B45t4rd5 only got where they are cos Jack gave them all their funding - now it's not looking quite so good, is it?[/p][/quote]Things are looking pretty good thanks incy lad. Fresh back of ANOTHER top 10 finish we're getting set for some VERY wealthy investors to come in and make us a big club. Don't think we've had any of jack's money for a decade, since which we've won trophies and qualified for europe several times. What about your deluded little club? Getting all excited because your one season in the sun was enough to ensure your financial survival for the next 10 years. Thanks for the concern, but i'm quite happy with how things are here in the premier league. Where's all your money going? jack01

9:26am Thu 18 Nov 10

midas says...

Jackie you need to decide what sort of club you are. 2 days ago you were saying that your competitors were Wigan, Bolton and Blackpool and that you shouldn't be compared to the big city clubs like Sunderland and Everton!
.
This is exactly what Greg Clarke is saying - you are a little club in the big boys league. You have already conceded you cannot compare yourselves to the other former champions, you cannot compare yourselves to the big city clubs so what are you left with - comparing yourselves to Burnley?
.
Like your mum often tells you - you are a bit premature - in relation to the VERY wealthy investors. How much are they investing?
Jackie you need to decide what sort of club you are. 2 days ago you were saying that your competitors were Wigan, Bolton and Blackpool and that you shouldn't be compared to the big city clubs like Sunderland and Everton! . This is exactly what Greg Clarke is saying - you are a little club in the big boys league. You have already conceded you cannot compare yourselves to the other former champions, you cannot compare yourselves to the big city clubs so what are you left with - comparing yourselves to Burnley? . Like your mum often tells you - you are a bit premature - in relation to the VERY wealthy investors. How much are they investing? midas

12:18pm Thu 18 Nov 10

Walter Carey says...

Flanagan’s obviously completed his weekly objective set by his superiors to get “well-run” and “financially stable” into every BFC report. A few observations to the contrary from a die-hard :
.
Serious under-investment last season meant the season effectively ended at the end of October
.
Failed to retain best manager in a generation and lost him to a team lower in the league
.
Replaced him with cheapest alternative who employs tactics to match his 80’s haircut
.
Gave him money to spend on players that he doesn’t pick
.
Now punching below our weight but not breaking any pots
.
Short term financial stability gained despite chairman’s aversion to “illegal subsidies” but mostly off-set to re-pay “loans” (no fool him)
.
......Aye well run club
Flanagan’s obviously completed his weekly objective set by his superiors to get “well-run” and “financially stable” into every BFC report. A few observations to the contrary from a die-hard : . Serious under-investment last season meant the season effectively ended at the end of October . Failed to retain best manager in a generation and lost him to a team lower in the league . Replaced him with cheapest alternative who employs tactics to match his 80’s haircut . Gave him money to spend on players that he doesn’t pick . Now punching below our weight but not breaking any pots . Short term financial stability gained despite chairman’s aversion to “illegal subsidies” but mostly off-set to re-pay “loans” (no fool him) . ......Aye well run club Walter Carey

4:04pm Thu 18 Nov 10

Robert Jennings says...

In commercial terms the Premier League is the only place to be. Clubs that are outside it will inevitably struggle if they have high business costs. Re : Burnley. The accounts do reveal mult-million pound loans to associated companies presumably at commercial rates of interest, which may explain directors remuneration issues. As hes not a member of the East Lancashire professional community he would be unaware of those rumours and thus in no position to comment.
In commercial terms the Premier League is the only place to be. Clubs that are outside it will inevitably struggle if they have high business costs. Re : Burnley. The accounts do reveal mult-million pound loans to associated companies presumably at commercial rates of interest, which may explain directors remuneration issues. As hes not a member of the East Lancashire professional community he would be unaware of those rumours and thus in no position to comment. Robert Jennings

6:38pm Thu 18 Nov 10

jack01 says...

midas wrote:
Jackie you need to decide what sort of club you are. 2 days ago you were saying that your competitors were Wigan, Bolton and Blackpool and that you shouldn't be compared to the big city clubs like Sunderland and Everton!
.
This is exactly what Greg Clarke is saying - you are a little club in the big boys league. You have already conceded you cannot compare yourselves to the other former champions, you cannot compare yourselves to the big city clubs so what are you left with - comparing yourselves to Burnley?
.
Like your mum often tells you - you are a bit premature - in relation to the VERY wealthy investors. How much are they investing?
Ho ho not quite!

In terms of on the pitch performances over the last 8-9 years we've put most of the other clubs in the premier league to shame, and will continue to do so. This is why we should be considered one of the big boys. Considering how much we've invested in comparison to west ham & sunderland etc, we've embarrassed them. In terms of support base it is not fair to compare us to west ham/everton/sunderla
nd. In terms of support we should be looking at similar sized areas e.g. bolton, wigan, blackpool and the like. If rovers are a 'little club' considering what's happened on the pitch over the last 20 years then so is every other team outside the top 6.

In relation to the VERY wealthy investors, nobody knows how much they're putting in. That's the sign of a sensible, well run club, not telling people how much money you have. Contrast that to the goings on at turf moor, where parachute payments make the chairman and manager shout how rich they are from the rooftops!
[quote][p][bold]midas[/bold] wrote: Jackie you need to decide what sort of club you are. 2 days ago you were saying that your competitors were Wigan, Bolton and Blackpool and that you shouldn't be compared to the big city clubs like Sunderland and Everton! . This is exactly what Greg Clarke is saying - you are a little club in the big boys league. You have already conceded you cannot compare yourselves to the other former champions, you cannot compare yourselves to the big city clubs so what are you left with - comparing yourselves to Burnley? . Like your mum often tells you - you are a bit premature - in relation to the VERY wealthy investors. How much are they investing?[/p][/quote]Ho ho not quite! In terms of on the pitch performances over the last 8-9 years we've put most of the other clubs in the premier league to shame, and will continue to do so. This is why we should be considered one of the big boys. Considering how much we've invested in comparison to west ham & sunderland etc, we've embarrassed them. In terms of support base it is not fair to compare us to west ham/everton/sunderla nd. In terms of support we should be looking at similar sized areas e.g. bolton, wigan, blackpool and the like. If rovers are a 'little club' considering what's happened on the pitch over the last 20 years then so is every other team outside the top 6. In relation to the VERY wealthy investors, nobody knows how much they're putting in. That's the sign of a sensible, well run club, not telling people how much money you have. Contrast that to the goings on at turf moor, where parachute payments make the chairman and manager shout how rich they are from the rooftops! jack01

10:28pm Thu 18 Nov 10

Carl S'berg says...

jack01 wrote:
midas wrote:
Jackie you need to decide what sort of club you are. 2 days ago you were saying that your competitors were Wigan, Bolton and Blackpool and that you shouldn't be compared to the big city clubs like Sunderland and Everton!
.
This is exactly what Greg Clarke is saying - you are a little club in the big boys league. You have already conceded you cannot compare yourselves to the other former champions, you cannot compare yourselves to the big city clubs so what are you left with - comparing yourselves to Burnley?
.
Like your mum often tells you - you are a bit premature - in relation to the VERY wealthy investors. How much are they investing?
Ho ho not quite!

In terms of on the pitch performances over the last 8-9 years we've put most of the other clubs in the premier league to shame, and will continue to do so. This is why we should be considered one of the big boys. Considering how much we've invested in comparison to west ham & sunderland etc, we've embarrassed them. In terms of support base it is not fair to compare us to west ham/everton/sunderla

nd. In terms of support we should be looking at similar sized areas e.g. bolton, wigan, blackpool and the like. If rovers are a 'little club' considering what's happened on the pitch over the last 20 years then so is every other team outside the top 6.

In relation to the VERY wealthy investors, nobody knows how much they're putting in. That's the sign of a sensible, well run club, not telling people how much money you have. Contrast that to the goings on at turf moor, where parachute payments make the chairman and manager shout how rich they are from the rooftops!
I don't bother allowing the poison in your mind to infect mine so don't read what you 'write' but just remain convinced there isn't a bigger tedionaut than you on god's green earth.

Carry on.
[quote][p][bold]jack01[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]midas[/bold] wrote: Jackie you need to decide what sort of club you are. 2 days ago you were saying that your competitors were Wigan, Bolton and Blackpool and that you shouldn't be compared to the big city clubs like Sunderland and Everton! . This is exactly what Greg Clarke is saying - you are a little club in the big boys league. You have already conceded you cannot compare yourselves to the other former champions, you cannot compare yourselves to the big city clubs so what are you left with - comparing yourselves to Burnley? . Like your mum often tells you - you are a bit premature - in relation to the VERY wealthy investors. How much are they investing?[/p][/quote]Ho ho not quite! In terms of on the pitch performances over the last 8-9 years we've put most of the other clubs in the premier league to shame, and will continue to do so. This is why we should be considered one of the big boys. Considering how much we've invested in comparison to west ham & sunderland etc, we've embarrassed them. In terms of support base it is not fair to compare us to west ham/everton/sunderla nd. In terms of support we should be looking at similar sized areas e.g. bolton, wigan, blackpool and the like. If rovers are a 'little club' considering what's happened on the pitch over the last 20 years then so is every other team outside the top 6. In relation to the VERY wealthy investors, nobody knows how much they're putting in. That's the sign of a sensible, well run club, not telling people how much money you have. Contrast that to the goings on at turf moor, where parachute payments make the chairman and manager shout how rich they are from the rooftops![/p][/quote]I don't bother allowing the poison in your mind to infect mine so don't read what you 'write' but just remain convinced there isn't a bigger tedionaut than you on god's green earth. Carry on. Carl S'berg

9:26am Fri 19 Nov 10

midas says...

jack01 wrote:
midas wrote: Jackie you need to decide what sort of club you are. 2 days ago you were saying that your competitors were Wigan, Bolton and Blackpool and that you shouldn't be compared to the big city clubs like Sunderland and Everton! . This is exactly what Greg Clarke is saying - you are a little club in the big boys league. You have already conceded you cannot compare yourselves to the other former champions, you cannot compare yourselves to the big city clubs so what are you left with - comparing yourselves to Burnley? . Like your mum often tells you - you are a bit premature - in relation to the VERY wealthy investors. How much are they investing?
Ho ho not quite! In terms of on the pitch performances over the last 8-9 years we've put most of the other clubs in the premier league to shame, and will continue to do so. This is why we should be considered one of the big boys. Considering how much we've invested in comparison to west ham & sunderland etc, we've embarrassed them. In terms of support base it is not fair to compare us to west ham/everton/sunderla nd. In terms of support we should be looking at similar sized areas e.g. bolton, wigan, blackpool and the like. If rovers are a 'little club' considering what's happened on the pitch over the last 20 years then so is every other team outside the top 6. In relation to the VERY wealthy investors, nobody knows how much they're putting in. That's the sign of a sensible, well run club, not telling people how much money you have. Contrast that to the goings on at turf moor, where parachute payments make the chairman and manager shout how rich they are from the rooftops!
No, you are a little club (in Premiership terms) because you get 25k support and are in debt. Performance wise you are floating in the middle. One in ten years you may get a crack at European places. Thats about right for a club the size of Rovers.
.
"we're getting set for some VERY wealthy investors to come in and make us a big club" - as you don't know how much they are investing, nor why they want to invest, you are being premature. Post a link to any comment from Barry Kilby where he is "shouting how rich we are!"
[quote][p][bold]jack01[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]midas[/bold] wrote: Jackie you need to decide what sort of club you are. 2 days ago you were saying that your competitors were Wigan, Bolton and Blackpool and that you shouldn't be compared to the big city clubs like Sunderland and Everton! . This is exactly what Greg Clarke is saying - you are a little club in the big boys league. You have already conceded you cannot compare yourselves to the other former champions, you cannot compare yourselves to the big city clubs so what are you left with - comparing yourselves to Burnley? . Like your mum often tells you - you are a bit premature - in relation to the VERY wealthy investors. How much are they investing?[/p][/quote]Ho ho not quite! In terms of on the pitch performances over the last 8-9 years we've put most of the other clubs in the premier league to shame, and will continue to do so. This is why we should be considered one of the big boys. Considering how much we've invested in comparison to west ham & sunderland etc, we've embarrassed them. In terms of support base it is not fair to compare us to west ham/everton/sunderla nd. In terms of support we should be looking at similar sized areas e.g. bolton, wigan, blackpool and the like. If rovers are a 'little club' considering what's happened on the pitch over the last 20 years then so is every other team outside the top 6. In relation to the VERY wealthy investors, nobody knows how much they're putting in. That's the sign of a sensible, well run club, not telling people how much money you have. Contrast that to the goings on at turf moor, where parachute payments make the chairman and manager shout how rich they are from the rooftops![/p][/quote]No, you are a little club (in Premiership terms) because you get 25k support and are in debt. Performance wise you are floating in the middle. One in ten years you may get a crack at European places. Thats about right for a club the size of Rovers. . "we're getting set for some VERY wealthy investors to come in and make us a big club" - as you don't know how much they are investing, nor why they want to invest, you are being premature. Post a link to any comment from Barry Kilby where he is "shouting how rich we are!" midas

1:24pm Fri 19 Nov 10

Robert Jennings says...

Its not Burnley FC who are rich its certain individuals. Rovers have won 2 major trophies in 15 years placing them in the top 6 since formation of the Premier League in 1992. With a turnover of around £52 million, you will find in overall commercial terms Blackburn are comfortable in the Premier League and ditto re the gates for a town club.
How on earth can you even comment on gates when Burnley's are 5th bottom of the npower championship?
Its not Burnley FC who are rich its certain individuals. Rovers have won 2 major trophies in 15 years placing them in the top 6 since formation of the Premier League in 1992. With a turnover of around £52 million, you will find in overall commercial terms Blackburn are comfortable in the Premier League and ditto re the gates for a town club. How on earth can you even comment on gates when Burnley's are 5th bottom of the npower championship? Robert Jennings

1:32pm Fri 19 Nov 10

midas says...

Robert Jennings wrote:
Its not Burnley FC who are rich its certain individuals. Rovers have won 2 major trophies in 15 years placing them in the top 6 since formation of the Premier League in 1992. With a turnover of around £52 million, you will find in overall commercial terms Blackburn are comfortable in the Premier League and ditto re the gates for a town club. How on earth can you even comment on gates when Burnley's are 5th bottom of the npower championship?
Now Tetley I don't have to keep correcting you every time you change name do I?
.
What are Rovers Debts? and where do Rovers rank in relation to others in the Premiership. above Wigan, Blackpool and possibly Fulham?
.
Aren't you embarressed writing that historically Rovers are in the top 6 clubs in the Prem but look how far they have fallen from the other "big" clubs.
.
Have Rovers ever played in the European Cup?
[quote][p][bold]Robert Jennings[/bold] wrote: Its not Burnley FC who are rich its certain individuals. Rovers have won 2 major trophies in 15 years placing them in the top 6 since formation of the Premier League in 1992. With a turnover of around £52 million, you will find in overall commercial terms Blackburn are comfortable in the Premier League and ditto re the gates for a town club. How on earth can you even comment on gates when Burnley's are 5th bottom of the npower championship?[/p][/quote]Now Tetley I don't have to keep correcting you every time you change name do I? . What are Rovers Debts? and where do Rovers rank in relation to others in the Premiership. above Wigan, Blackpool and possibly Fulham? . Aren't you embarressed writing that historically Rovers are in the top 6 clubs in the Prem but look how far they have fallen from the other "big" clubs. . Have Rovers ever played in the European Cup? midas

1:45pm Fri 19 Nov 10

Robert Jennings says...

Yes in 1995-96. What about the 5th bottom attendances in the npower championship? Rovers in commercial terms are at least the equal if not bigger than Bolton.
Yes in 1995-96. What about the 5th bottom attendances in the npower championship? Rovers in commercial terms are at least the equal if not bigger than Bolton. Robert Jennings

2:11pm Fri 19 Nov 10

midas says...

No, European Cup tetley, not Champions League.
.
What about 5th bottom? As I keep telling you that is just an indicator as to how far above our position we are playing. Obviously its different in the Premiership where clubs do not have to worry about gate reciepts and, as in Rovers case, can afford to just give the tickets away for a nominal price.
No, European Cup tetley, not Champions League. . What about 5th bottom? As I keep telling you that is just an indicator as to how far above our position we are playing. Obviously its different in the Premiership where clubs do not have to worry about gate reciepts and, as in Rovers case, can afford to just give the tickets away for a nominal price. midas

5:33pm Fri 19 Nov 10

jack01 says...

midas wrote:
No, European Cup tetley, not Champions League.
.
What about 5th bottom? As I keep telling you that is just an indicator as to how far above our position we are playing. Obviously its different in the Premiership where clubs do not have to worry about gate reciepts and, as in Rovers case, can afford to just give the tickets away for a nominal price.
But surely the 14 million profits could go a long way to bringing down the high price of season tickets at turf moor?

What else is the money being used on? Loan signings like kevin phillips?

Maybe another crack at the top flight in a decade or so and you'll be able to buy back turf moor.
[quote][p][bold]midas[/bold] wrote: No, European Cup tetley, not Champions League. . What about 5th bottom? As I keep telling you that is just an indicator as to how far above our position we are playing. Obviously its different in the Premiership where clubs do not have to worry about gate reciepts and, as in Rovers case, can afford to just give the tickets away for a nominal price.[/p][/quote]But surely the 14 million profits could go a long way to bringing down the high price of season tickets at turf moor? What else is the money being used on? Loan signings like kevin phillips? Maybe another crack at the top flight in a decade or so and you'll be able to buy back turf moor. jack01

6:20pm Fri 19 Nov 10

midas says...

Do we really have to repeat ourselves for every new sign in alias you have?
.
The season tickets at Burnley are no higher than elsewhere in the championship. why should Burnley reduce the price?
.
Why would we want to buy back TM now?
.
I know you find it hard to acknowledge how well we are doing for such a small club, but thats obviously one of your (many) defects.
Do we really have to repeat ourselves for every new sign in alias you have? . The season tickets at Burnley are no higher than elsewhere in the championship. why should Burnley reduce the price? . Why would we want to buy back TM now? . I know you find it hard to acknowledge how well we are doing for such a small club, but thats obviously one of your (many) defects. midas

1:52am Sat 20 Nov 10

jack01 says...

Why should burnley reduce the price? Because that's what clubs with an ounce of interest in the common supporter do. Rovers do it, admittedly because they can afford to make tickets accessible to all. Burnley have boasted about this profit they've made. Now why not put it to use and give the supporters something back? It's about time the long suffering faithful got rewarded. As I said, what else is the 14 million going to be spent on? Scraping around the loan markets for more 30 somthings to go with jensen, alexander, iwelumo, cort? Now that's a long term strategy for you.

Why not buy turf moor back? If you apparently have the money to do it surely this is as good a time as any to reunite club with home and put an end to the possibility of the two being separated when property developers come calling with a bag of cash?

Yes, for a club of your size you are doing remarkably well. Along with doncaster, watford, swansea and the other massive clubs next to you in the league. 99% of your success over the last 3 years has been down to one man - owen coyle - who's hard work is being systematically dismantled by the powers that be at turf moor. With no investment at burnley under the stewardship of brian 'football genius' laws there's only one direction you're going when the parachute money dries up.
Why should burnley reduce the price? Because that's what clubs with an ounce of interest in the common supporter do. Rovers do it, admittedly because they can afford to make tickets accessible to all. Burnley have boasted about this profit they've made. Now why not put it to use and give the supporters something back? It's about time the long suffering faithful got rewarded. As I said, what else is the 14 million going to be spent on? Scraping around the loan markets for more 30 somthings to go with jensen, alexander, iwelumo, cort? Now that's a long term strategy for you. Why not buy turf moor back? If you apparently have the money to do it surely this is as good a time as any to reunite club with home and put an end to the possibility of the two being separated when property developers come calling with a bag of cash? Yes, for a club of your size you are doing remarkably well. Along with doncaster, watford, swansea and the other massive clubs next to you in the league. 99% of your success over the last 3 years has been down to one man - owen coyle - who's hard work is being systematically dismantled by the powers that be at turf moor. With no investment at burnley under the stewardship of brian 'football genius' laws there's only one direction you're going when the parachute money dries up. jack01

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

Get Adobe Flash player
About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree