Manchester United Banter Archive April 29 2013

29 Apr 2013 22:32:50
Last week Lewandowski's agent said he had agreed a deal with a club. This week, he says the opposite.

Fergie having a word?

Hope so. Last thing fergie wants is lewys agent attracting interest from other clubs.

29 Apr 2013 21:55:39
Shappy when you talk of United moving to a 433 style do you mean similar to how Villa play, with Benteke, Weimann and Agbonlahor breaking at speed. MrE

29 Apr 2013 22:44:25
Yes and no, I expect breaking at speed will be an option at times which the team will look to exploit. But with players like RvP, Kagawa and possibly Lewandowski all being part of the attack I would say they are much more technical players than those at Villa and as such I would maybe expect them to look at playing with high pressure higher up the pitch and looking for through balls more. All are comfortable in possession and good passers with great understanding of the game and vision to link up quick passing moves rather than letting teams onto us catchong them on the break. We have been trying to play that kind of style more this season which I think has contributed to the poor form of out wingers who rely on a quick counter style to best suit their skill set.

Shappy

29 Apr 2013 21:33:06
Mignolet is having a shocker.

Not as big a shocker as Cueller

Lowton is having a blinder

29 Apr 2013 18:35:47
Hey ED and others, who do you expect to be loaned out in Premier League next season from United? {Ed002's Note - Far too early to say.}

Good chance of Powell, Henriquez and M Keane. Not sure on the rest.

29 Apr 2013 17:16:28
If anything should have taught us with agents, it's not to believe a single word that ever comes out of their mouths. That's why I'm taking the recent comments in respect to Robert Lewandowski's future with a large pinch of salt.

Agents are interesting in one thing only - and that's getting the best possible deal for their clients, and getting a big lump of cash for themselves at the end of it all. They use the media for leverage, and throw in and out the names of various high profile football clubs to try and activate a bidding war from a personal terms perspective.

If there is anything to be perhaps taken from the recent comments, it's that Lewandowski agent clearly likes talking - something that traditionally never goes down well with Sir Alex Ferguson. We normally like and deal with players who representatives do things the old fashion way, and concentrate on representing their clients away from the media spot-light.

However saying that, I still believe Lewandowski will join Bayern Munich unfortunately - but of course hope I'm 100% wrong!

WF Red Devil

29 Apr 2013 16:29:39
Lewandowski wants premiere league move that's what I have to Say now : ' Lewandowski Agent'

Ed002/syd? Now chances are more? I thnk.?Wbu?

29 Apr 2013 15:07:49
Good to hear Fletcher and Buttner will get an EPL winner's medal each. Could well be Fletcher's last.

29 Apr 2013 16:53:22
He deserves it for all the years of dedicated service he has given the club.

In that case Shola Ameobi deserves one too!

I'm not surprised no name didn't leave one, most ridiculous statement ever!

29 Apr 2013 18:18:17
Ameobi is a good hard working player like Fletcher, but Fletcher has had an impact in several title winning teams, and has helped us win those titles. He has also been robbed of the chance to further his playing career and to have played a bigger part in this title win. So if this is to be his last season due to a debilitating illness then it is only right that he gets a winners medal as a thank you for all the work he has but in to previous title winning team.

I wonder if you would say your smart ass comments to Fletchers face? Mr Keyboard warrior?

Shappy and Ports what's with the agro to someone making a funny comment.

29 Apr 2013 22:49:41
Just goes to show the different levels of humour. Personally I found the comment silly and sarcastic. And sarcasium is the wit of the witless. Or maybe i'm too middle class. Lol.

Yeah a prawn sandwich class of person

I didn't really see it at a funny comment but more of a genuine comment by the individual which is why I said it was a ridiculous statement. A funnier comment would of been:

''In that case KLOOT deserves one too!'' :)

29 Apr 2013 14:47:16
Just read Lew's agent saying summer move to the premiere league unlikely but he would like to play in the pl sometime in the future.

I know it could be just posturing but something tells me he is not coming to either us or Bayern and will end up with Real Madrid or PSG.

I think our issue with this summers transfers market is offloading players as most the guys we want to get rid off will not have too many takers and their wages will be an issue.

Shahram

Shahram

Dont know why but I am getting a feeling that he is going to land up with Real. No clue no logic, just a gut feel LOL.

On second thoughts the tripe that KLOOT spouts about us being linked to the best coinciding with the "season ticket" renewal mailers, can that be true? What do people think about it?

Deeps.

Deeps, United have been interested in Lew since this time last year, possibly earlier. Then he was known as one of "the best". Only a month ago people were saying he is overrated and nowhere near as good as Falcao, Cavani etc. So that fact we have been interested well before the season tickets have been renewed and that fact most never thought he was "the best" puts at least two massive flaws into your post.

Deeps

The reason for my view of where he might end up is after the madrid game this has become a high profile transfer.

I hope, I am wrong but it reminds me of the Hazard case from last year and Dortmund and his agent will hold out for the highest bidder and we are never going to play that game.

I think over the next 4 weeks you will see a large number of other clubs suddenly being interested.

Shahram

Deeps

The reason for my view of where he might end up is after the madrid game this has become a high profile transfer.

I hope, I am wrong but it reminds me of the Hazard case from last year and Dortmund and his agent will hold out for the highest bidder and we are never going to play that game.

I think over the next 4 weeks you will see a large number of other clubs suddenly being interested.

Shahram {Ed002's Note - You might want to go back and read up on Hazard.}

Sorry that's WASN'T known as one of the best.

Sorry that's WASN'T known as one of the best.

Syd

I didn't say for once that I believe in what KLOOT says about the timing of us being linked to high profile players. I just wanted peoples views about that. And forget Lewndowski, there are times where we are all of a sudden linked with players like Falcao. I can see where KLOOT comes from, but in all honesty don't believe that personally. Again I just wanted to know what people think about it?

Deeps.

Shahram

If at all BvB hold out for the highest bidder, I am afraid the chances are slim. I am not sure, because few on here think that there is a "gentlemans" agreement already. Even ed 002 is affirmative that there is a strong chance he may come in. No clue what's up, but it seems like dragging out like a prolonged transfer saga.

Deeps.

Deeps, the Falcao rumour may well have been a bluff from SAF to one of his journalists. That would have benefitted AM, SAF & Mendes. Perhaps not for the ticket renewals, but to take away the focus from our real target Lewandowski.

Deeps

There is no such a thing as a gentleman's agreement. It is hard to see how we can justify having 5 strikers and the wages that go with it.

I think it will come down to if we are willing to pay a large sum and more likely in the 22-24 million pound range and also someone has to go and if there are any takers at our asking price.

Shahram

Pre-renewal there's always a lot of player rumours, last year it was hazzard and moura and look what happened. any company will create commercial spin, utd are no different. its like the texts and emails asking if people want to join the season ticket waiting list when one doesn't exist anymore.
johndenton

29 Apr 2013 13:04:59
Hey Ed/syd?
Can u Explain me FFP rules that any Football club has to follow, to limit thier transfer in Next season?
Whats it about?
Reply Broda {Ed002's Note - The Demystification of the Financial Fair Play Rules (FFPR)
Introduction
I will try and simplify and summarise the FFPR and give examples where I can.
Putting aside all of the “mother country” fluff, the fundamental purpose of the FFPR is to:
(1) Ensure that clubs are operating within their means with transparent financial reporting. Example: Arsenal has debt which they can manage from the money they make as a club (good). Anzhi has a very low turnover given the amount of money they spend on players through donations from wealthy owners (bad).
(2) Protect creditors. Example: When Portsmouth went bust they owed money for players (the extreme case being Glen Johnson who had moved to Liverpool but Portsmouth still owed Chelsea for), money to local businesses (tradesmen who had worked at the ground, newsagents etc.), utility companies, the police et al (bad).
(3) Encourage responsible spending. Example: Liverpool under Hicks and Gillett borrowed money against the value of the club in order to buy players (bad).
(4) Protect the long-term viability of European club football. Example: They want to avoid the scenario of clubs entering administration or going out of business.
The FFPR apply to all UEFA club competitions and will actively come in to force from the end of June 2014 taking account of the financial monitoring period (the season just finished) and the two prior reporting periods (the two seasons before that). So when they first start, the FFPR will look at the 2013/2014 returns, and they will give consideration to the 2011/12 and 2012/13 figures.
I should make clear that it is not the full accounts of a club that are being considered, but just the “relevant” income and the “relevant” expenses. “Excluded” expenses are critical to the FFPR calculations. To this end, all clubs will need to effectively produce two sets of accounts. An audited set which are provided to Companies House and the relevant revenue organisations, and a second audited return laying out the “relevant” income and the “relevant” expenses for the purpose of the FFPR.
Relevant Income
(1) Match day gate receipts. Example: The money made by the club from paying fans attending games. This includes income from cup games when played away from home where a proportion of the gate money goes to the away side.
(2) Broadcasting rights. Example: Television income for games, money provided for radio broadcasting.
(3) Income from commercial activities. Example: Sales of bobble hats and rattles, club shop income, licensed income (e.g. DVD sales). In the future you can expect to see income from other media (e.g. streaming of games on a pay-per-view basis to the web and phones) increase.

(4) Prize money. Example: income from the Premier League, Champions League etc..
(5) Sponsorship. Example: Shirt sponsors (Standard Chartered, Samsung etc.), shirt manufactures (Adidas, Warrior etc.).
(6) Advertising. Example: Companies who buy time on video screens during games or hoardings at the stadium.
(7) Other operating income. Example: Payments made to a club for playing friendly matches in the Far East.
(8) Income from transfers: Example: All income from the sale of a player regardless of payment being due to previous clubs, the player himself etc. as they are allowable expenses which will later be deducted.
(9) Excess proceeds on the sale of tangible fixed assets. Example: The money Arsenal from converting part of Highbury in to apartments and selling them.
(10) Other income: Example: Interest on investments.
Relevant Expenses
(1) The costs of running the business (confusingly referred to as “the cost of sales” by accountants etc.). Example: Wages, ground maintenance, lighting, telephones, IT equipment, travel costs, policing costs etc..
(2) Employee related benefits and associated costs. Example: Costs of providing insurance, dental care, medical, employer NI contribution, housing, loyalty bonuses etc..
(3) Other operating expenses. Example: Payments for advertising, legal fees, agent fees, accounting fees, payments to players in relation to transfers, payments to player’s previous clubs, etc..
(4) Amortisation or transfer costs. Example: The total amount of money paid to another club to transfer a player or, if a club decides to do so, the amortised cost for that year (where a club is spreading the cost of the transfer out over the length of his contract for accounting purposes).
(5) Finance costs. Example: Bank charges, interest on loans etc..
(6) Dividends. Example: The owners may take a dividend from the profits a club makes as income.
Excluded Expenses
(1) Depreciation of tangible fixed assets. Example: The loss, if any, in value of the stadium, cars, IT equipment etc..
(2) Costs associated with the intangible fixed assets (other than player registrations). Example: goodwill, franchises, trademarks, copyrights etc..
(3) Expenditure on youth development activities. Example: All youth development expenses (housing, schooling, travel, medical etc.) are excluded from the calculations.
(4) Community development activities. Example: Outreach programmes, donations to the local community and charities, provision of equipment etc..
(5) Tax expenses. Example: Monies paid to the Inland Revenue, VAT etc..
(6) Finance costs related to construction of tangible fixed assets. Example: The interest on the £300M loan to build a new stadium.
(7) Interest payments on old loans (pre June 1, 2011). Example: Any interest due on a loan taken out for whatever purpose before June 1, 2011 is excluded from the calculations.
(8) Certain expenses from non-football operations. Example: This does not really apply to British clubs, but in other European countries clubs are often “sporting clubs” and have basketball, football, hockey team etc. all under one business.
The Calculation
FFPR calculates from a club’s “relevant” income and the “relevant” expenses whether the club is running at a surplus (profit) or deficit (loss) within a Monitoring Period (e.g. 2013/14). From this the FFPR decides if a club has met the “break even” requirement or not. This is not met if the “relevant” expenses exceed the “relevant” income by more than 5M euros (an acceptable deviation).
If the club exceeds this acceptable deviation, the owners of a club may contribute toward correcting it to a maximum of 45M euro over a rolling three year period (30M euro from 2015/16 on). Example: If Club X made a loss of 50M euro in 2013/14 due to the purchase of players, the calculation will ignore the first 5M euro and assume an owner contribution of 45M euro and there would not be an issue. However, for the two years following, there would be no allowable owner contribution as the full allocation had been used. If Club Y made a loss of 30M euro in 2013/14 due to the purchase of players, the calculation will ignore the first 5M euro and assume an owner contribution of 25M euro and there would not be an issue. But in this case, for the two years following, there would still be 20M euro allowable as owner contribution to cover further losses.
The Punishment
The Threat: If a club has been determined to have violated the “break even” requirement for a season it may be excluded from the next season’s UEFA competitions.
Likely Situation: If a club can show it has been moving in the right direction and doing what it can to overcome financial issues, perhaps brought on by a recession (e.g. in Spain) then I would expect a strongly worded letter as a warning. Perhaps by then end of the 2016/2017 season, If a club has been determined to have violated the “break even” requirement for several seasons then it may be excluded from the next season’s UEFA competitions.
UEFA are willing to make some exceptions to the rule and have already said they will consider:
(1) The quantum and trend of the break even result. Example: Chelsea has spent a lot this summer rebuilding an aging squad, so even with considerable additional income from winning the Champions League it could violate the “break even” requirement. However, spending less next season will show the club moving in the right direction. Expect a strongly worded letter in a couple of years time.
(2) Debt situation. Example: A possible “get out” for Barcelona, Real Madrid and Manchester United should they have a bad season and need to violate the “break even” requirement. Consideration will be given to the existing debt and the ability of the clubs to service that debt. The trend of the debt reducing and an excuse of “one bad season” and “need to rebuild the team” would likely result in a slapped wrist.
(3) Fluctuating exchange rates. Example: All non eurozone countries need to report the FFPR figures in euros which could fluctuate due to the exchange rate, whereas a number of the UEFA figures are fixed amounts (e.g. the 5M euro acceptable deviation).
(4) Projected figures. Example: UEFA will allow clubs to show that they are moving in the right direction if they provide projected figures showing that the “break even” requirement will be met in the following season.
(5) Force majeure. Example: Any extraordinary events or situation arising that is beyond the club’s control will be taken in to account.
(6) Until then end of 2014/15 only - Ongoing reductions in wage costs. UEFA will be flexible over the “break even” requirement if a club can show that their wage bill has been reducing and with the exclusion of wages of players signed before June 1, 2010 they would have met the “break even” requirement. Example: An escape route for the likes of Chelsea prior to prior season with Drogba, Anelka, Bosingwa, Kalou, Cech, Terry, Lampard etc. wages excluded from the calculations. A possible future escape route for the likes of Barcelona.
The Issues
There are a number of matters that UEFA still need to figure out and a number of concerns that certain clubs and certain national associations have. Off the top of my head:
(1) Loopholes: Whilst UEFA has done what it can to block any potential “loopholes” it is well aware that exclusion of wages for players signed before June 2010 is one it has introduced itself, and one that will be popular with the higher paying clubs as a short term escape route through to the summer of 2015. The matters of excessive sponsorship will be addressed via a cap to thwart the concerns over the likes of Manchester City abusing the rules. The cap has yet to be finalised but will require ratification.
(2) Soft Sponsorship: UEFA are concerned at the aggressive approach to obtaining sponsorship some clubs are taking. Questions are being asked about the ethics in clubs having airline travel partners, photocopier partners etc.. The Spanish clubs have raised this as a concern.
(3) National Sponsorship Variations: As we have seen tobacco sponsorship leave Formula 1 UEFA would like to see alcohol sponsorship out of football. We already have a situation where sponsorship by alcohol related businesses are forbidden in certain countries. Wealthy breweries are now focussing their sponsorship in other countries thereby creating a perceived imbalance in what income clubs are able to obtain in sponsorship. The French and Russian clubs have raised this as a concern.
(4) National Financial Distribution Variations: Concerns exist in countries where different models are used for distributing prize money, contributing to the grassroots game and distributing income from television and other media broadcasting. This led to an original request (rejected) from a number of clubs to restrict the FFPR to only the wealthiest of clubs, those with a turnover in excess of xM euros.
(5) National Taxation Variations: There is a considerable difference across UEFA nations in taxation, and this is seen to be reflected in the wages paid to players. The Spanish clubs have raised this as a concern.
(6) Third Party Ownership: Countries that allow third party ownership of players are seen to have a distinct advantage in being able to keep the costs of transfer fees low as they are only paying for a proportion of a player. The English clubs have raised this as a concern.
The Great Fear
Without going in to too much detail: (a) A number of clubs take the opportunity a once or twice a year to discuss various issues including changes in rules, television rights, the power of UEFA, exploitation issues for new technology streams, etc.. These discussions, the last of which were in late August, also always turn to the possibility and structure of a breakaway pan European league. Several are ex-G14 clubs, several are not, and some clubs decline involvement in such discussions. (b) The plan is that at some point a number of clubs would break away from their national leagues and UEFA. They accept that they would be banned from all existing club competition and the players would initially be banned from all FIFA competitions as well, but know that FIFA would be looking to negotiate in any case. It would be the end of UEFA in all probability and UEFA are very aware of this. It would also result in a restructuring of many of the national leagues. (c) The clubs would renegotiate their television rights, rights of distribution via other streams etc.. (d) It remains the greatest fear of UEFA and all major national authorities that one day this will happen.
}

Thanks for That Ed

It's more like G18 now I guess. Can you imagine if the top clubs in England joined a breakaway league. Liverpool may have a slight chance of winning the EPL then.

29 Apr 2013 08:19:06
Its my guess that SAF will sign a striker, Lewandowski, and another midfielder, probably Strootman. Ronnie will not be coming back and there is no way Levy will let Bale come to us. No strikers will leave as Rooney will drop into midfield. No 'sources' or insider knowledge, just my thoughts