Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

sussexpob wrote:Hearty thanks to Potter. He's done a great job, and I wish him well....

Who next for Brighton, Sussex?

Gingerfinch wrote:

sussexpob wrote:Hearty thanks to Potter. He's done a great job, and I wish him well....

Who next for Brighton, Sussex?

I would be very surprised if Bloom appointed someone I had heard of, as its not his style. Bloom has become a quite shrewd "moneyball" type owner - putting a system at both of his clubs in place that focuses on identifying talent that others cant see. Its really starting to work for both clubs too (USG winning in Europe yesterday was a staggering achievement considering the playing budget)....I have absolute faith in Bloom to find the right man. And while I very much doubt Brighton will finish in the top 8 and get Europe, just being increasingly relevant is pretty exciting.

For years I was skeptical that a rich owner and PL football would ruin the club's identity.... but while it has changed, and I might be biased, I do think Bloom has done things in a way that makes Brighton a likeable team for neutrals.

So I expect we will get a nobody from League Two who has been thoroughly assessed over time. When you read about the scouting network at Brighton and how bloody thoroughly they do things, it wont be snap appointment.

I say that, and watch Big Sam get the job now...

All Football including Grassroots and even training cancelled till Tuesday the 13th. I'm not in agreement with the FA on this one. They'll also be no football next weekend as I think the funeral is on the Saturday, though not confirmed. Oh well I can go and watch Rugby or the great north run, who are running and cheering in memory of the Queen, apparently!

there was paper talk this morning of the GNR having been cancelled, but fortunately common sense appears to have prevailed. I'm not sure Her Maj would have approved of charities having to decide which of their worthy projects would not be receiving funding after all. THe FA have it completely wrong, I think. There was an opportunity there for clubs and fans up and down the land to pay their own tributes to her

Durhamfootman wrote:there was paper talk this morning of the GNR having been cancelled, but fortunately common sense appears to have prevailed. I'm not sure Her Maj would have approved of charities having to decide which of their worthy projects would not be receiving funding after all. THe FA have it completely wrong, I think. There was an opportunity there for clubs and fans up and down the land to pay their own tributes to her

I agree with the GNR going ahead as it would have been a massive pain in the arris to cancel but it was the sickly running and applauding for the Queen statement that got my goat. At least be honest in the reasoning. Like with the Cricket, cancelling the match makes no sense.

Brendan Rogers quoted as saying that he'd like to see the job through at Leicester but with things not improving under his stewardship he would understand if the board moved him on (or words to that effect). Of course he would... nowt like 10 million quid in the back pocket to help see him through the cost of living crisis with the chance of a nice holiday somewhere sunny and warm for the winter so he can turn the heating at home onto winter pipe defrost mode

never feel sorry for a sacked manager

Durhamfootman wrote:Brendan Rogers quoted as saying that he'd like to see the job through at Leicester but with things not improving under his stewardship he would understand if the board moved him on (or words to that effect). Of course he would... nowt like 10 million quid in the back pocket to help see him through the cost of living crisis with the chance of a nice holiday somewhere sunny and warm for the winter so he can turn the heating at home onto winter pipe defrost mode

never feel sorry for a sacked manager

One thing I really dont understand about football is management contracts. There are two managers in the league that have lasted at their clubs longer than 5 years, yet so many teams offer ridiculous packages to managers without seemingly appreciating that most are sacked within 2-3 years when it doesnt go right.

Its like Man United offering Ole multiple years contracts at world leading wages..... the guy was managaging a pub team in Norway, he'd have taken the job on a week to week rolling contract, and for a pack of peanuts.... so why offer him 200,000 a week and a contract that lasts to the end of the human race?

has it anything to do with fair play rules? Do really long contracts reduce the annual cost to the club and free up payments to players or something silly like that? I don't understand it all....... or perhaps I should say that I have almost as little an understanding of it as the administrators who are charged with monitoring Barcelona's annual accounts

There must be a reason for it if the bean counters are prepared to sign these things off, but I'm beggared if I can deduce what those reasons might be

It's great for managers, though. Sign up on a long contract at a ridiculous rate, do a sh1t job, get sacked and get an enormous payout to leave quietly.

Personally I think too much is made of the role of the manager in the success of a team, and I always have, especially at international level.

Durhamfootman wrote:has it anything to do with fair play rules? Do really long contracts reduce the annual cost to the club and free up payments to players or something silly like that? I don't understand it all....... or perhaps I should say that I have almost as little an understanding of it as the administrators who are charged with monitoring Barcelona's annual accounts

There must be a reason for it if the bean counters are prepared to sign these things off, but I'm beggared if I can deduce what those reasons might be

I think the only payments that dont count towards fair play rules are stadium development costs and youth academy costs. So paying off a manager millions of quid would impact that years FFP hit, and hiring another would mean you'd be essentially paying double. So not an advantage.

I think its just a case of teams believing they have hired the right man, and locking said person down for a long time.... because if someone swoops for the manager, you have to pay compensation to the club.

bigfluffylemon wrote:It's great for managers, though. Sign up on a long contract at a ridiculous rate, do a sh1t job, get sacked and get an enormous payout to leave quietly

The funniest example of that I can think of was Andre Villas-Boas.

Was touted as the new Mourinho and some boy genius of football. Chelsea stumped up a huge contract in order to get his services over other teams, he was suitably terrible, was sacked before the season ended, and got a huge payout. Tottenham then did the same, and a few months later found out he was also rubbish and sacked him too.

I think in the end he made somewhere between 35-40 million quid for 18 months of terrible quality work, because he received 11-12 years pay in total for being sacked.

He then got offered mega money in China, before coming back to Europe to manage Marseille.... where he called the owner of the team dumb in a press conference because he was unhappy with who the club had bought, and was suitably sacked with another large payout.

Imagine getting rich by being terrible.

sussexpob wrote:

Durhamfootman wrote:has it anything to do with fair play rules? Do really long contracts reduce the annual cost to the club and free up payments to players or something silly like that? I don't understand it all....... or perhaps I should say that I have almost as little an understanding of it as the administrators who are charged with monitoring Barcelona's annual accounts

There must be a reason for it if the bean counters are prepared to sign these things off, but I'm beggared if I can deduce what those reasons might be

I think the only payments that dont count towards fair play rules are stadium development costs and youth academy costs. So paying off a manager millions of quid would impact that years FFP hit, and hiring another would mean you'd be essentially paying double. So not an advantage.

I think its just a case of teams believing they have hired the right man, and locking said person down for a long time.... because if someone swoops for the manager, you have to pay compensation to the club.

the reason I ask is because I was reading about FFP and why it would make sense for Newcastle to extend the contract of Chris Wood. This theory, and I have no idea how correct it is, seems to be that if the fee for the player was £25million and it was a fairly short contract, lets say 2 years for arguments sake, then FFP says he's worth 12.5 per year to the club, but despite being pretty hopeless as a goal scoring threat, the club could extend his contract by 3 years, and at that point his 25 million is worth 5 million a year for FFP purposes and not the 12.5 he is now. That then free's up enough FFP flexibility to sign another player..... or something like that (if only it made any sense to me). I might have misunderstood all that, of course

Not the same as giving long contracts to managers, I know, but bean counters look at things differently to normal people.... more creatively, as it were, so I just wondered.

compensation in case of head hunting makes more sense, in truth.... especially if it's England who come a calling. The first thing Newcastle did this summer was tie Howe down to a much longer deal, so maybe they had that in mind

sussexpob wrote:

bigfluffylemon wrote:It's great for managers, though. Sign up on a long contract at a ridiculous rate, do a sh1t job, get sacked and get an enormous payout to leave quietly

The funniest example of that I can think of was Andre Villas-Boas.

Was touted as the new Mourinho and some boy genius of football. Chelsea stumped up a huge contract in order to get his services over other teams, he was suitably terrible, was sacked before the season ended, and got a huge payout. Tottenham then did the same, and a few months later found out he was also rubbish and sacked him too.

I think in the end he made somewhere between 35-40 million quid for 18 months of terrible quality work, because he received 11-12 years pay in total for being sacked.

He then got offered mega money in China, before coming back to Europe to manage Marseille.... where he called the owner of the team dumb in a press conference because he was unhappy with who the club had bought, and was suitably sacked with another large payout.

Imagine getting rich by being terrible.

the Sven Goran Erikson career pathway

never feel sorry for a sacked manager

A second win for Newcastle.... finally!

and goals too.... even better.

I was a bit worried about the curse of the ex player, but the red card and Newcastle's ruthlessness put paid to that

That dodgy defeat to Liverpool remains the only pointless match this season

Two one-sided derby results....

Arsenal beat Tottenham 3-1
Manchester City thrash Manchester United 6-3