New UEFA financial rules

[olgitgooner]

Seriously Martin

Your above post just shows what a chump you are.

That list of posters is not necessarily such big advocates of the board.

They just do not like the way you post.

It is not about the board. It is about YOU.

That's certainly what you want people to believe

It's THE WAY YOU POST. No respect whatsover for anyone who disagrees with you. WUM.

[mrgnu1958]

us martin is sooooooo much on ya mind that you cant sleep eh OLD"y ?

[olgitgooner]

If constructive, eloquent and interesting posters such as OlgitGooner, G88ner, LDB, STG, MM99, AA23Northbank and others are giving USMartin grief, then something has to be wrong with how Martin posts.

They're what now

What you laughing at, Marc?

I've always been constructive, eloquent and interesting. Innit.

[olgitgooner]

us martin is sooooooo much on ya mind that you cant sleep eh OLD"y ?

Yeh. USM has taken over my life. Ya gotta luv im

And why aren't you out prowling the streets of London??

[northbankbren]

i love lamp.

[Belfast Boy]

What about Liverpool, Belfast Boy? Are you suggesting that had their ownership not irresponsibly sold out to a takeover group utlizing debt leverage which has been put on the club's books that they would be in the exact same position they are in now and for the excat same reasons they are in it?

That is an absolutely critical question for us as well as them not only in terms of investment philosophy but in terms of what happens to Arsenal going forward in terms of ownership. I think you are absolutely right to point out what is happening at Liverpool, but I'm afraid you do so for the wrong reasons.

It is very easy to be too eager to be dismissive of others views when debating. Problem is, on a forum such as this, such a stance is self-defeating. Now Martin, I don't want to add to the list of people currently rallying against you as you and myself have no previous. I am, however, familiar with most of the members that I'm referring to and they are mostly long standing and very strong posters using equally intelligent thought processes, and when they do come to a different conclusion to you, maybe you should lend some weight to those conclusions. It's called respect and when people sense you're not listening - and let's face it, people know the difference - they feel disrespect and it's the one thing I think we can all agree on that as individuals we will not take from anyone..................

case in point - when I used L'pool as a comparative I did not do it for the "wrong reasons". I knew exactly what I was doing. They are similar to us in many respects: a massive club, one of the long established "Big Four"; losing financial ground to even so called lesser rivals every single week due to a gate of only 40,000 - just like we were at THOF prior to our move; not exactly made of money and struggling to compete with either the richest club in the world or clubs bankrolled by the richest men in the world; they have also flirted with losing CL footie a few times before finally dropping out last season and it's impossible to see a way back for them. One final and very important point - I think you'll find that the Scousers were already heavily in debt before the septics arrived and Moores was hoping that they could get the stadium built and take the club into the 21st century!

NB Benitez constantly moaned about needing yet more money and we've just witnessed Martin O'Neill walkin out on Villa 5 days before the start of the season, and the only reason that makes any sense is that he asked Lerner - who's already spent well over 100M - for more dosh. Lerner refused as it couldn't be lost on him that with the arrival of moneybags City to the party, he could spend another 100M and still not get into the top 4, so again another gold star for AW!

AUGIE.................... thank you very much for your warm welcome, it means a lot comin from you, seriously - as I know you don't hand out compliments often. I know exactly what you mean about the obvious deficiencies that could be addressed without spending the earth. As I referred to in my post, the board and AW are not perfect and have been the object of my frustration too. You mention Given: perfect example and I lost count of how many peeps I said to "can't believe we didn't go for Given" and AW - contrary to some opinion - is not a fool nor anywhere near it, and anyone who suggests otherwise is themselves a fool. So the only reason I can think of, and it is a valid one IMO, is that AW has always maintained he will not buy a player unless he can make a significant improvement over what he already has, and while I'd ave been turnin cartwheels if we had've got SG, he's only 6ft and I suspect AW wants a taller keeper to deal with our vulnerability to high balls into the box. I think Schwarzer fitted the bill as he's also looking for someone to fill the coaching position in a couple of years, as I think he still has high hopes for our young stoppers, particularly Mannone!

[AA23Northbank]

Yes we are all under-informed by the Board your black-and-white - spend nothing or go broke analysis is massively over-simplified and going out of your to expand the debate to try to make it about me or the petition won't change that for anyone but the people who would prefer things exactly as they are no matter what results.

By the way have you figured how say Belfast boy was absolutely right to point out waht is happening at Liverpoll is saying he was wrong to? I really am curious about that or was that rant you're way of avoiding explaining how you came to that original conclusion?

Well, 1) you can't spell, and 2) if Liverpool weren't taken over by The Yanks there wouldn't have been the crazy spending as the club was well run and living within their means until then. The Yank, debt-leavered ownership model has failed at Liverpool and is close to at Manure and I don't want to see it anywhere near our football club, so there :finger:

Forgive me but other than my spelling and lack of obscene gesture I think I was actually making a similar if not the same point you made above

What about Liverpool, Belfast Boy? Are you suggesting that had their ownership not irresponsibly sold out to a takeover group utlizing debt leverage which has been put on the club's books that they would be in the exact same position they are in now and for the excat same reasons they are in it?

That is an absolutely critical question for us as well as them not only in terms of investment philosophy but in terms of what happens to Arsenal going forward in terms of ownership. I think you are absolutely right to point out what is happening at Liverpool, but I'm afraid you do so for the wrong reasons.

again

That is an absolutely critical question for us as well as them not only in terms of investment philosophy but in terms of what happens to Arsenal going forward in terms of ownership.

I can't help but ask are you attacking me simply because of my overall views because you clearly aren't actually reading what I am saying.After all you accused fo saying BB was wrong to point out Liverpool's difficulties in reply to this

I think you are absolutely right to point out what is happening at Liverpool

What's up because while we disagree on a number of points it makes little sense to argue when in fact we are agreeing on something

But why do you he's right bringing up Liverpool as an example but for the WRONG reasons? I just don't get that and it just sounds contradictory, which is my main problem with me. Belfast Boy has explained why he brought up Liverpool above and I agree with every word he said

[AA23Northbank]

As one who took a year off from here because of stuff I felt was beyond acceptable, I am definitely not keen on what might be seen as "Cyber Bullying".

But USMartin was crossing those lines himself.

He has to either post in a more respectful way, or expect the flack he has been getting.

A few of us managed to have an intense and lengthy thread about the Middle East a few months ago. That is a more serious issue than whether or not the Board messed up by redeveloping Highbury rather than selling it. If the Middle East goes up in flames there could be nukes flying round and no more Arsenal!


Unlike the Board threads, a few of us had friends and family who have died in the conflict, on both sides.
Yet that Middle East thread stayed respectful despite strong differences of opinion.

If constructive, eloquent and interesting posters such as OlgitGooner, G88ner, LDB, STG, MM99, AA23Northbank and others are giving USMartin grief, then something has to be wrong with how Martin posts.

Me? Intellegent?

Anyone for tennis?

[I Hate Hleb]

What about Liverpool, Belfast Boy? Are you suggesting that had their ownership not irresponsibly sold out to a takeover group utlizing debt leverage which has been put on the club's books that they would be in the exact same position they are in now and for the excat same reasons they are in it?

That is an absolutely critical question for us as well as them not only in terms of investment philosophy but in terms of what happens to Arsenal going forward in terms of ownership. I think you are absolutely right to point out what is happening at Liverpool, but I'm afraid you do so for the wrong reasons.

It is very easy to be too eager to be dismissive of others views when debating, problem is on a forum such as this, such a stance is self-defeating, now Martin I don't want to add to the list of people currently rallying against you as you and myself have no previous, I am however familiar with most of the members that I'm referring to and they are mostly long standing and very strong posters using equally intelligent thought processes and when they do come to a different conclusion to you maybe you should lend some weight to those conclusions, it's called respect and when people sense you're not listening, and let's face it, people know the difference, they feel disrespect and it's the one thing I think we can all agree on that as individuals we will not take from anyone..................

case in point when I used L'pool as a comparative I did not do it for the "wrong reasons" I knew exactly what I was doing, they are similar to us in many respects, a massive club, one of the long established "Big Four", losing financial ground to even so called lesser rivals every single week due to a gate of only 40,000, just like we were at THOF prior to our move, not exactly made of money and struggling to compete with either the richest club in the world or clubs bankrolled by the richest men in the world, they have also flirted with losing CL footie a few times before finally dropping out last season and it's impossible to see a way back for them, and one final and very important point I think you'll find that the Scousers were already heavily in debt before the septics arrived and Moores was hoping that they could get the stadium built and take the club into the 21st century!

NB Benitez constantly moaned about needing yet more money and we've just witnessed Martin O'Neill walkin out on Villa 5 days before the start of the season and the only reason that makes any sense is that he asked Lerner who's already spent well over 100M for more dosh and he refused as it couldn't be lost on him that with the arrival of moneybags City to the party he could spend another 100M and still not get into the top 4 so again another gold star for AW!

AUGIE.................... thank you very much for your warm welcome, it means a lot comin from you, seriously - as I know you don't hand out compliments often and I know exactly what you mean about the obvious deficiencies that could be addressed without spendin the earth, as I referred to in my post the board and AW are not perfect and have been the object of my frustration too, you mention Given, perfect example and I lost count of how many peeps I said to "can't believe we didn't go for Given" and AW contrary to some opinion is not a fool nor anywhere near it, and anyone who suggests otherwise is themselves a fool, so the only reason I can think of, and it is a valid one IMO, is that AW has always maintained he will not buy a player unless he can make a significant improvement over what he already has, and while I'd ave been turnin cartwheels if we had've got SG he's only 6ft and I suspect AW wants a taller keeper to deal with our vulnerability to high balls into the box and I think Schwarzer fitted the bill as he's also lookin someone to fill the coaching position in a couple of years as I think he still has high hopes for our young stoppers particularly Mannone!

Feck sake BB - have full stops gone out of fashion in Ireland?

[augie]

Tbh I couldnt follow it with all the comma's in it and amidst all my confusion I wasnt sure if BB was agreeing with me or not

[I Hate Hleb]

Bloody foreigners, eh augie!!!!

I have amended his post slightly to include a few full-stops and hopefully that will make it just a little easier to read.

[Belfast Boy]

Sorry lads outta practice I guess and in my defence I was doin a 6-6 n/shift at work which is why I was missin while it was all kickin off last nite so I just typed it as it came this mornin and didn't pay much attention to readability - sorry

[USMartin]

Yes we are all under-informed by the Board your black-and-white - spend nothing or go broke analysis is massively over-simplified and going out of your to expand the debate to try to make it about me or the petition won't change that for anyone but the people who would prefer things exactly as they are no matter what results.

By the way have you figured how say Belfast boy was absolutely right to point out waht is happening at Liverpoll is saying he was wrong to? I really am curious about that or was that rant you're way of avoiding explaining how you came to that original conclusion?

Well, 1) you can't spell, and 2) if Liverpool weren't taken over by The Yanks there wouldn't have been the crazy spending as the club was well run and living within their means until then. The Yank, debt-leavered ownership model has failed at Liverpool and is close to at Manure and I don't want to see it anywhere near our football club, so there :finger:

Forgive me but other than my spelling and lack of obscene gesture I think I was actually making a similar if not the same point you made above

What about Liverpool, Belfast Boy? Are you suggesting that had their ownership not irresponsibly sold out to a takeover group utlizing debt leverage which has been put on the club's books that they would be in the exact same position they are in now and for the excat same reasons they are in it?

That is an absolutely critical question for us as well as them not only in terms of investment philosophy but in terms of what happens to Arsenal going forward in terms of ownership. I think you are absolutely right to point out what is happening at Liverpool, but I'm afraid you do so for the wrong reasons.

again

That is an absolutely critical question for us as well as them not only in terms of investment philosophy but in terms of what happens to Arsenal going forward in terms of ownership.

I can't help but ask are you attacking me simply because of my overall views because you clearly aren't actually reading what I am saying.After all you accused fo saying BB was wrong to point out Liverpool's difficulties in reply to this

I think you are absolutely right to point out what is happening at Liverpool

What's up because while we disagree on a number of points it makes little sense to argue when in fact we are agreeing on something

But why do you he's right bringing up Liverpool as an example but for the WRONG reasons? I just don't get that and it just sounds contradictory, which is my main problem with me. Belfast Boy has explained why he brought up Liverpool above and I agree with every word he said

It's simple why I say that. The real lesson from Livewrpool's plight is not simply that we shouldn't spend any more more money than we are currently. It's the peril of debt-leveraged ownership.

Make no mistake that is the real message to Arsenal and hopefully our Board.

Tom Hicks's business model is the debt-leveraged purchase and it has resulted in the Texas Rangers a team he purchased under this model declaring bankruptcy with lenders still owed some 500 million USD at the time that club was to be sold this year.

My point is that the spending alone is not the issue at Liverpool - it is that spending on top of the exponentially larger debt on the club's books as a result of its purchase by Messers Hicks and Gillette that is the problem. To suggest otherwise is inaccurate and untrue.

That is not to endorse spending what Liverpool has spent in the transfer market recently out-of-hand. It would be most accurately to say this - supporting spending as Liverpool has spent on players since 2005 or what Arsenal has not spent since 2005 are both position that are dead wrong. After all Liverpool out spent us before 2005 as well but that worked out okay for us as i see it. Just not nearly so much more, because they spent a bit less and we spent a fair bit more.

As I said in a basemented thread Liverpool being declared toxic by banks does not endorse our prudence in the transfer market, it endorses prudence in who we pick to sell this club to and the requirements we (the Board and the Club) demand from any prospective new owners ahead of that sale. As in no debt leverage or no sale.

[AA23Northbank]

Yes we are all under-informed by the Board your black-and-white - spend nothing or go broke analysis is massively over-simplified and going out of your to expand the debate to try to make it about me or the petition won't change that for anyone but the people who would prefer things exactly as they are no matter what results.

By the way have you figured how say Belfast boy was absolutely right to point out waht is happening at Liverpoll is saying he was wrong to? I really am curious about that or was that rant you're way of avoiding explaining how you came to that original conclusion?

Well, 1) you can't spell, and 2) if Liverpool weren't taken over by The Yanks there wouldn't have been the crazy spending as the club was well run and living within their means until then. The Yank, debt-leavered ownership model has failed at Liverpool and is close to at Manure and I don't want to see it anywhere near our football club, so there :finger:

Forgive me but other than my spelling and lack of obscene gesture I think I was actually making a similar if not the same point you made above

What about Liverpool, Belfast Boy? Are you suggesting that had their ownership not irresponsibly sold out to a takeover group utlizing debt leverage which has been put on the club's books that they would be in the exact same position they are in now and for the excat same reasons they are in it?

That is an absolutely critical question for us as well as them not only in terms of investment philosophy but in terms of what happens to Arsenal going forward in terms of ownership. I think you are absolutely right to point out what is happening at Liverpool, but I'm afraid you do so for the wrong reasons.

again

That is an absolutely critical question for us as well as them not only in terms of investment philosophy but in terms of what happens to Arsenal going forward in terms of ownership.

I can't help but ask are you attacking me simply because of my overall views because you clearly aren't actually reading what I am saying.After all you accused fo saying BB was wrong to point out Liverpool's difficulties in reply to this

I think you are absolutely right to point out what is happening at Liverpool

What's up because while we disagree on a number of points it makes little sense to argue when in fact we are agreeing on something

But why do you he's right bringing up Liverpool as an example but for the WRONG reasons? I just don't get that and it just sounds contradictory, which is my main problem with me. Belfast Boy has explained why he brought up Liverpool above and I agree with every word he said

It's simple why I say that. The real lesson from Livewrpool's plight is not simply that we shouldn't spend any more more money than we are currently. It's the peril of debt-leveraged ownership.

Make no mistake that is the real message to Arsenal and hopefully our Board.

Tom Hicks's business model is the debt-leveraged purchase and it has resulted in the Texas Rangers a team he purchased under this model declaring bankruptcy with lenders still owed some 500 million USD at the time that club was to be sold this year.

My point is that the spending alone is not the issue at Liverpool - it is that spending on top of the exponentially larger debt on the club's books as a result of its purchase by Messers Hicks and Gillette that is the problem. To suggest otherwise is inaccurate and untrue.

That is not to endorse spending what Liverpool has spent in the transfer market recently out-of-hand. It would be most accurately to say this - supporting spending as Liverpool has spent on players since 2005 or what Arsenal has not spent since 2005 are both position that are dead wrong. After all Liverpool out spent us before 2005 as well but that worked out okay for us as i see it. Just not nearly so much more, because they spent a bit less and we spent a fair bit more.

As I said in a basemented thread Liverpool being declared toxic by banks does not endorse our prudence in the transfer market, it endorses prudence in who we pick to sell this club to and the requirements we (the Board and the Club) demand from any prospective new owners ahead of that sale. As in no debt leverage or no sale.

Whilst I agree with you that the amount leveraged on the buying of Liverpool on top of the transfer spending is very bad, I disagree with you saying that saying in the last paragraph that Liverpool's spending does not endorse our prudence in the transfer market. The spending imo tipped Liverpool over the edge and our prudence is down to the fact that we've decided not to compete in the transfer market with Liverpool, Man U, Citeh and Chelsea and pay over the odds for players, one example being I wouldn't want us to pay £25million for Milner. We've done things our own way, making good buys like Vermaelen and Nasri, making profits and bringing the debt down and now we're in a good position for the future. It is frustrating that we didn't get a goalkeeper but there is no way Liverpool were going to part from Reina, neither Citeh giving Given to a rival. And we would've had to pay a crazy amount for Lloris. And even Jamie Carragher who has not much reason to love Arsenal says we're run well and looking good for the future. So the board must be doing some things right

[USMartin]

It is very easy to be too eager to be dismissive of others views when debating. Problem is, on a forum such as this, such a stance is self-defeating. Now Martin, I don't want to add to the list of people currently rallying against you as you and myself have no previous. I am, however, familiar with most of the members that I'm referring to and they are mostly long standing and very strong posters using equally intelligent thought processes, and when they do come to a different conclusion to you, maybe you should lend some weight to those conclusions. It's called respect and when people sense you're not listening - and let's face it, people know the difference - they feel disrespect and it's the one thing I think we can all agree on that as individuals we will not take from anyone..................

I think there are two points here.

First I was not challenging the intellect of anyone in the point I made about those posters, or even their manner(though I could in a couple of cases for sure) but was pointing out their common motivation. The fact is their dislike of my actual views has every bit as much to do with their anger about how or how often I post them,and that is that. If I posted the same way in the volume but in support of the Board they would be defending me doing so against other forum members who were upset by my pro-Board views as they are now by my anti-Board views.

It genuinely isn’t personal to me, or wasn’t until very recently and two people’s actions that I think were just bang out of order occurred, but this idea this is simply them not ling bad forum etiquette isn’t true. This is simply them really not liking my forum views. If you play the same song over and over and over but your mates like it that much too no one will complain, will they? Same thing here

I certainly share some responsibility in how this debate about debate has gotten out of hand and more personal but at its roots it comes down to their dislike of my views rather than how or how often I present them.

Second, I have always tried to remain respectful to everybody here, though there is no denying recently the gloves have come off with certain individuals. Have I been perfect in this regard? No but no one has in all honesty.

However, having said that, it is not disrespectful not to just accept a flawed argument as valid or the deliberate withholding of information as dishonest, if that is the truth. The truth is not disrespectful to anyone. For example when someone makes an argument about the similarity between to projects and omits a key difference or distinction between those projects that can alter the perception and judgment of that argument, that is dishonest, not merely a not pointing out a technicality.

Indeed the reason this person chose to avoid providing these details is not to mis-lead me because he knows I am aware of them and thus his omitting them will not mis-lead me, but to mis-lead others reading his views, especially those whose views might be altered toward his own if they accept his thesis without those details. If anything those kinds of activities are not merely disrespectful if you will to the person you are debating but disrespectful or certainly discourteous to any other poster reading the debate as well. It is not disrespectful to point that out.I certainly would not take it disrespectfully especially not if that were actually a valid claim made about something I posted.

It is also not respectful to pretend a person is being honest or accurate when they are not either it only sets them up for a later and possibly greater humiliation down the road either from or someone else when they actually go too far for it to be ignored, which is what happens when people are allowed to get away with anything in any walk of life.

Genuine differences of opinion even strong ones are absolutely legitimate and worthy of respect. Knowingly using bad information however, or withholding valid information to defend or justify those opinions is not legitimate and when done repeatedly or even after being pointed out beyone doubt not worthy of respect.