The Daily ITK Discussion Thread - 25th June 2012

[Dundalk_Spur]

Seriously guys there are a lot of other places to discuss this.

A&C is gonna have a field day.

 

[Spurger King]

A transfer cap could be interesting as well, though maybe allow it to be a 3 year rolling average. Would allow for big summers on occasion. But I think the wage cap would be more of fix since that would impact players more. With limited transfer money but unlimited wages, I think you'd see more people running down their contracts and then the rich teams stepping in. A club wage cap would avoid such a thing.

As for Karl Marx, alas, I am not terribly familiar with all his writings so I shall have to cede that argument to you.

Well I guess both a wage cap and a transfer cap would be the way to go. There could be a 3 year rolling average, with no roll-overs, and this would have no bearing on salaries. It would still allow rich clubs to spend big every now and then if they feel they need to, but this advantage would be counter-balanced by reducing the number of players they can bring in. If a club runs out of players through injury they'll have to utilise their youth team or draft in players on a free.

Well I think between us we've sorted out football. I'm going to email the solution to Blatter, and then I'm going to get back to work.

 

[Spurger King]

Seriously guys there are a lot of other places to discuss this.

A&C is gonna have a field day.

It's half two in the morning and this thread will be replaced by a new one in a few hours. I can't imagine anyone checking in at this time is likely to miss out on a sudden piece of fresh ITK.

 

[SpurSince57]

I think there is only so much of a level playing field that one can construct. A team like Spurs is going to have more resources than a team based in a smaller city (let's say Stoke). I think the approach that is needed is something similar to what the FFP shoots for. There are too many clubs to ensure that everybody can (naturally) pay a similar wage. And even if there were 15-20 rich clubs like you talked about (assuming you mean domestic, not the CL) the bigger clubs would still be able to massively outspend the smaller ones, so you'd see the same problems.

I think the best solution would be some sort of wage cap. Limit the amount clubs can spend on players, and you'll give a smaller, well run club a chance to make an impact. Obviously the rich clubs can offer more marketing money and exposure. But as long as they are allowed to spend stupid amounts of money I believe we'll see the game continue to be warped towards the money. At some point our society will have to realize that the hellbent pursuit of the dollar/pound/euro is not the be all, end all of happiness and civilization. Unfortunately we aren't their yet.

At the moment, 'smaller city' appears to be everywhere but London and Manchester: Birmingham's fallen by the wayside, and even Liverpool's in the balance. Sheffield and Leeds? Gone, baby, gone.

The game has always been warped towards the money; I really do think some of us have this notion of a Golden Age that never really existed. You are not going to be able to turn back the clock and impose a maximum wage, still less reverse Bosman; it would be nice to think the Fair Play regulations will have an effect, but I'll rest my judgement. If there's a way round a regulation, it will be found.

 

[King of Otters]

I just penned a fairly long post about Marx in response to Antilokhos re the shape shifting nature of that old fiend capitalism but I deleted it because i thought that it might be taking it just one step too far.

No need to thank me.

Night all.

 

[HappySpur]

Seriously guys there are a lot of other places to discuss this.

A&C is gonna have a field day.

He's going to change over in less than 3 hours and it's the smart people talking, so as long as people like me don't tard it up, I think he'll let it stand

 

[SpurSince57]

Jeez SS, you must be fun at parties!

Wait till you see my Funky Toulouse-Lautrec, where I get into a lotus position and dance on my knees.

 

[spud]

i dare say there will be a few members without ITK access for a while.

I am sure we are all familiar with the history of THFC and if not there are plenty of books and dvds to choose from.

A number of you should be wise and old enough not to continue this conversation on in this thread.

Now fuck off to bed and please lets not have a repeat tomorrow.

Your admonishment is appropriate, and I have no intention to continue this discussion on this thread, or its later equivalents, at any future time.

However, as has been pointed out, it is stupid o'clock in England and this thread will be replaced by a new one shortly so no great harm will be done. Plus your tone is fucking objectionable, so how about you wind you neck in?

 

[Ionman34]

It's a theoretically-proven fact that the faster that you travel in relation to the speed of light then the slower time passes, as time is a relative measurement. Nothing travels faster than the speed of light though. (Probably.)

Sorry for the off-topic crap. That's the end of it.

How can a theory prove something?

Don't know your sense of humour well enough so, if you're having a bubble, then apologies.

 

[HappySpur]

How can a theory prove something?

Don't know your sense of humour well enough so, if you're having a bubble, then apologies.

Depends on your definition of theory. If it's a layman's term it means a guess. If its scientific (and I believe this is the way spud is applying it), then that's a fairly verifiable fact. It can often cause disconnect

Definition: a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Theories make falsifiable predictions in order to make themselves better over time

Hope that helps

 

[Antilokhos]

I just penned a fairly long post about Marx in response to Antilokhos re the shape shifting nature of that old fiend capitalism but I deleted it because i thought that it might be taking it just one step too far.

No need to thank me.

Night all.

Bah, I would have appreciated being enlightened!

At the very least would have been good bedtime material.

 

[spursandbarca]

While not doubting Pep's ability Frank Rijkaard won the treble in 2005 including CL and has been a gigantic flop at every club and country he has managed since, that is not reflecting on Pep's ability but there is no overwhelming proof yet that he isn't another Rijkaard

who has he manages since the russin club that Eto'o plays for with the billionaire owner. Think thats it

 

[Antilokhos]

Depends on your definition of theory. If it's a layman's term it means a guess. If its scientific (and I believe this is the way spud is applying it), then that's a fairly verifiable fact. It can often cause disconnect

Definition: a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Theories make falsifiable predictions in order to make themselves better over time

Hope that helps

As an example, it's the theory of gravity or theory of relativity. Very few definites in science, something that frequently causes confusion amongst the peons less educated here in the US.

 

[spursandbarca]

Not really enough said. He had an amazing group of players and got them playing wonderful possession football. But as we saw this season, when he had to try something different, he couldn't implement any plan B, then he left. Add to that the issue that a lot of the players he brought in from the outside flopped.

The jury is still out for me. It's not as if he has managed multiple teams with great success, just managed a golden generation well IMO.

Besides chygrnsky and Ibrahimovic(who he didnt want and told Laporta repetadly who flopped???? Hard when your cf has a broken leg, your lb cancer and president who is being budget concisous and cut 100 million euros off the debt in 2 seasons: to compete with Florentino Perez spending 750 million euros

 

[Ionman34]

YES. Pep is leaving the best team EVER!!! Leaving the best player in the world to join Spurs.. You lot need to get out more.

And you need to think about what you are posting.

He's left the best team ever eh? So unless he is retiring indefinitely, he will be going to a 'lesser' team no?

He has already, reportedly, turned down a 15 million offer by Cheatski and, IIRC, Liverpool too. From that, I think it's safe to say that money is not his motivation.

It is widely believed that his desire is to 'repeat' the process that built Barca into the set up that it is today. If this really is the case then there are few clubs in Europe as primed and ready for this vision than Spurs. This doesn't mean that he will go for it, but just because he managed Barca doesn't immediately mean that he will turn his nose up at us, not if his desire is to take a club and MAKE them into one of the big players. This is DL's desire too so, at the very least, he would be intrigued by the possibility, especially if this 'investment' ITK has any legs to it.

Logic dictates that we are not a dead cert for him, but logic also dictates that there is a definite attraction if the information at hand is correct.

 

[Ionman34]

As I've had to post several times already this window, how do you think we assembled the Double Team?

And it has been answered SS57. We assembled the double team in much the same way Utd assembled their title winning teams. We bought players with the revenue generated by the club, not from the pocket of a multi Billionaire who got the money from elsewhere.

Chalk and Cheese really.

 

[etchedchaos]

Harry was officially announced as gone at stupid o'clock, Luka was announced at stupid o'clock too. So it's not an adequate excuse for all the Off-Topic yammering.

 

[Spurger King]

Harry was officially announced as gone at stupid o'clock, Luka was announced at stupid o'clock too. So it's not an adequate excuse for all the Off-Topic yammering.

Yes it is.

By their very definition official announcements have nothing to do with a thread designed to discuss the unofficial business occurring behind closed curtains.

 

[Ionman34]

Depends on your definition of theory. If it's a layman's term it means a guess. If its scientific (and I believe this is the way spud is applying it), then that's a fairly verifiable fact. It can often cause disconnect

Definition: a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Theories make falsifiable predictions in order to make themselves better over time

Hope that helps

It certainly does. As my last experience with Science occurred in the classroom (some 28 years ago ............ God I'm depressed now), it's no surprise that I was unaware that scientists had decided to redefine the English language one word at a time.

But thank you HS as a day is never wasted when you learn something new.

 

[Ionman34]

As an example, it's the theory of gravity or theory of relativity. Very few definites in science, something that frequently causes confusion amongst the peons less educated here in the US.

But gravity isn't a theory is it?