Audio: Crystal Palace manager Ian Holloway says loan situation at Watford is 'wrong'

Pictures: Action Images

Pictures: Action Images

First published in Sport
Last updated
by

Crystal Palace manager Ian Holloway has not hiden his displeasure at Watford being able to sign ten loan players from Udinese in the summer.

The Palace boss said that whilst the Hornets were not breaking any rules, he believes “it is wrong”.

English clubs are only able to loan two players from the same club and Holloway claimed the current rules mean Watford are not operating on a fair playing field.

Below are two parts of Holloway’s post-match press conference from last night, where he discussed his views on Watford’s current situation regarding loan signings.

Comments (113)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:10am Sat 9 Feb 13

stewbyhorn says...

I heard his whining last night on 3CR, sour grapes anyone? We bossed the first half and they certainly bossed the second half so a fair result all said and told so why the bleating Holloway?
It's a shame because I thought he was better than that but obviously he's not, as he says if the boot was on the other foot he would love it, what a mug!
I heard his whining last night on 3CR, sour grapes anyone? We bossed the first half and they certainly bossed the second half so a fair result all said and told so why the bleating Holloway? It's a shame because I thought he was better than that but obviously he's not, as he says if the boot was on the other foot he would love it, what a mug! stewbyhorn
  • Score: 0

8:21am Sat 9 Feb 13

Ronny oh Ronny Ronny says...

It's not giving youngsters a chance??funny how we had 4 academy graduates in our squad and they had 2, that bloke needs a schlap! Even sky sports news now finally reporting on our loan situation, I wish they would publish all of the facts!!
It's not giving youngsters a chance??funny how we had 4 academy graduates in our squad and they had 2, that bloke needs a schlap! Even sky sports news now finally reporting on our loan situation, I wish they would publish all of the facts!! Ronny oh Ronny Ronny
  • Score: 0

8:33am Sat 9 Feb 13

c'wood says...

A rather confused, jealous and slightly xenophobic ramble from Holloway. "I'm not having a go" "Zola is fantastic" etc. "....but if we don't stop it they will do really well" was the gist of it. Add in "my local boys" (well one of them is Welsh but that's appears to be the same thing!) and you see how confused it is.

I wonder if he really thinks it is wrong for us have a fantastic foreign player like Vydra but that it's OK for Southampton to bid and possibly buy the same fantastic and foreign Vydra? This is the club that built an fantastic ground and then went bankrupt leaving people like St John's Ambulance unpaid. (Leicester are another fine example of this type of club we have to compete with.)

Watford never left debts like that, even after ITV Digtial, Vialli etc. We have never had an owner like Forest had who put apparently put in £100m before he died either. We are simply trying to compete as best we can against bigger budgets and with clubs who have acted a lot less scrupulously.

Oh, and we had two academy players start last night plus one on the bench. That suggests we are not killing English talent. We are merely making it better by surrounding the best of it with great foreign talent that raises the overall level.

Maybe it's all a smokescreen to cover for the rather obviously pre-planned rota to kick Chalobah out of the match.

Managers really do not talk straight do they?
A rather confused, jealous and slightly xenophobic ramble from Holloway. "I'm not having a go" "Zola is fantastic" etc. "....but if we don't stop it they will do really well" was the gist of it. Add in "my local boys" (well one of them is Welsh but that's appears to be the same thing!) and you see how confused it is. I wonder if he really thinks it is wrong for us have a fantastic foreign player like Vydra but that it's OK for Southampton to bid and possibly buy the same fantastic and foreign Vydra? This is the club that built an fantastic ground and then went bankrupt leaving people like St John's Ambulance unpaid. (Leicester are another fine example of this type of club we have to compete with.) Watford never left debts like that, even after ITV Digtial, Vialli etc. We have never had an owner like Forest had who put apparently put in £100m before he died either. We are simply trying to compete as best we can against bigger budgets and with clubs who have acted a lot less scrupulously. Oh, and we had two academy players start last night plus one on the bench. That suggests we are not killing English talent. We are merely making it better by surrounding the best of it with great foreign talent that raises the overall level. Maybe it's all a smokescreen to cover for the rather obviously pre-planned rota to kick Chalobah out of the match. Managers really do not talk straight do they? c'wood
  • Score: 0

8:47am Sat 9 Feb 13

mattymashup says...

Holloway has a point. We are not breaking any rules though, and even if the loan loophole was closed we could buy the udinese players for ten euro each if we wanted. Surely the rule where chairmen can own more than one club albeit in foreign countries is the problem.

It would not surprise me to see palace taken over by juventus, hull taken over by real Madrid etc, then I don't think Holloway and co would be moaning about it!

The fact is we have gone from relegation favourites to a top championship team all because of the udinese connection.

Not that I'm complaining mind you.

It's just a shame we didn't sign them permanently in the transfer window, would have shut Holloway up!

P.s Holloway is still one of my fave managers, well done to you and palace, got a point from a game you should have lost, no sour grapes from me.
Holloway has a point. We are not breaking any rules though, and even if the loan loophole was closed we could buy the udinese players for ten euro each if we wanted. Surely the rule where chairmen can own more than one club albeit in foreign countries is the problem. It would not surprise me to see palace taken over by juventus, hull taken over by real Madrid etc, then I don't think Holloway and co would be moaning about it! The fact is we have gone from relegation favourites to a top championship team all because of the udinese connection. Not that I'm complaining mind you. It's just a shame we didn't sign them permanently in the transfer window, would have shut Holloway up! P.s Holloway is still one of my fave managers, well done to you and palace, got a point from a game you should have lost, no sour grapes from me. mattymashup
  • Score: 0

8:47am Sat 9 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

c'wood wrote:
A rather confused, jealous and slightly xenophobic ramble from Holloway. "I'm not having a go" "Zola is fantastic" etc. "....but if we don't stop it they will do really well" was the gist of it. Add in "my local boys" (well one of them is Welsh but that's appears to be the same thing!) and you see how confused it is.

I wonder if he really thinks it is wrong for us have a fantastic foreign player like Vydra but that it's OK for Southampton to bid and possibly buy the same fantastic and foreign Vydra? This is the club that built an fantastic ground and then went bankrupt leaving people like St John's Ambulance unpaid. (Leicester are another fine example of this type of club we have to compete with.)

Watford never left debts like that, even after ITV Digtial, Vialli etc. We have never had an owner like Forest had who put apparently put in £100m before he died either. We are simply trying to compete as best we can against bigger budgets and with clubs who have acted a lot less scrupulously.

Oh, and we had two academy players start last night plus one on the bench. That suggests we are not killing English talent. We are merely making it better by surrounding the best of it with great foreign talent that raises the overall level.

Maybe it's all a smokescreen to cover for the rather obviously pre-planned rota to kick Chalobah out of the match.

Managers really do not talk straight do they?
Yes, agreed. I am not necessarily they are right but the rules are the same for everyone. Why didn't he exploit them as well then? We may have the advantage that it only needs one phone call instead of several but that's all.

It annoys me when clubs get taken over by completely out of touch mega-rich mafia men or oil sheikhs who either want to hide money or want clubs as trophies, who don't care one jot about running it like a business and can lose a £100 million without even blinking, giving them a gob-smackingly unfair advantage and we can't field an extra 4 loan players than Holloway!
[quote][p][bold]c'wood[/bold] wrote: A rather confused, jealous and slightly xenophobic ramble from Holloway. "I'm not having a go" "Zola is fantastic" etc. "....but if we don't stop it they will do really well" was the gist of it. Add in "my local boys" (well one of them is Welsh but that's appears to be the same thing!) and you see how confused it is. I wonder if he really thinks it is wrong for us have a fantastic foreign player like Vydra but that it's OK for Southampton to bid and possibly buy the same fantastic and foreign Vydra? This is the club that built an fantastic ground and then went bankrupt leaving people like St John's Ambulance unpaid. (Leicester are another fine example of this type of club we have to compete with.) Watford never left debts like that, even after ITV Digtial, Vialli etc. We have never had an owner like Forest had who put apparently put in £100m before he died either. We are simply trying to compete as best we can against bigger budgets and with clubs who have acted a lot less scrupulously. Oh, and we had two academy players start last night plus one on the bench. That suggests we are not killing English talent. We are merely making it better by surrounding the best of it with great foreign talent that raises the overall level. Maybe it's all a smokescreen to cover for the rather obviously pre-planned rota to kick Chalobah out of the match. Managers really do not talk straight do they?[/p][/quote]Yes, agreed. I am not necessarily they are right but the rules are the same for everyone. Why didn't he exploit them as well then? We may have the advantage that it only needs one phone call instead of several but that's all. It annoys me when clubs get taken over by completely out of touch mega-rich mafia men or oil sheikhs who either want to hide money or want clubs as trophies, who don't care one jot about running it like a business and can lose a £100 million without even blinking, giving them a gob-smackingly unfair advantage and we can't field an extra 4 loan players than Holloway! Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

8:51am Sat 9 Feb 13

onlyonerodthomas says...

is this the same man that fielded an under strength team for blackpool against villa? which was "AGAINST" the premiership rules.and is this the same man that said if blackpool were found guilty and fined would resign his position from manager of blackpool?.you have to love holloway because he is funny and does have a weird sense of humour,but what he needs to know is that wfc are not breaking any rules and if palace were the first team to take advantage of this he would have done it too.maybe his mate warnock will pipe up with some witty bu77sh1t about our situation as well.
is this the same man that fielded an under strength team for blackpool against villa? which was "AGAINST" the premiership rules.and is this the same man that said if blackpool were found guilty and fined would resign his position from manager of blackpool?.you have to love holloway because he is funny and does have a weird sense of humour,but what he needs to know is that wfc are not breaking any rules and if palace were the first team to take advantage of this he would have done it too.maybe his mate warnock will pipe up with some witty bu77sh1t about our situation as well. onlyonerodthomas
  • Score: 0

8:51am Sat 9 Feb 13

mimiperena says...

i HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR IAN, THIS IS SOUR GRAPES AND IM SURE IF THE BOOT WAS ON THE OTHER FOOT HE WOULD NOT BE WHINGING. THIS IS THE SAME HOLLOWAY THAT EARLIER IN THE WEEK BELEIVED WATFORD COULD ONLY PLAY FIVE FORIGN LOANS EACH GAME. GET UR FACTS RIGHT B4 U OPEN UR GOB
i HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR IAN, THIS IS SOUR GRAPES AND IM SURE IF THE BOOT WAS ON THE OTHER FOOT HE WOULD NOT BE WHINGING. THIS IS THE SAME HOLLOWAY THAT EARLIER IN THE WEEK BELEIVED WATFORD COULD ONLY PLAY FIVE FORIGN LOANS EACH GAME. GET UR FACTS RIGHT B4 U OPEN UR GOB mimiperena
  • Score: 0

8:54am Sat 9 Feb 13

napoleorn says...

I've never understood why he's apparently so highly thought of. Personaly, i've aways thought that he's a half wit that thinks he's a manager come stand up comedian..
He hasn't achieved anything as either a player or manager and shown a distinct lack of class with his comments last night.
I've never understood why he's apparently so highly thought of. Personaly, i've aways thought that he's a half wit that thinks he's a manager come stand up comedian.. He hasn't achieved anything as either a player or manager and shown a distinct lack of class with his comments last night. napoleorn
  • Score: 0

9:00am Sat 9 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

onlyonerodthomas wrote:
is this the same man that fielded an under strength team for blackpool against villa? which was "AGAINST" the premiership rules.and is this the same man that said if blackpool were found guilty and fined would resign his position from manager of blackpool?.you have to love holloway because he is funny and does have a weird sense of humour,but what he needs to know is that wfc are not breaking any rules and if palace were the first team to take advantage of this he would have done it too.maybe his mate warnock will pipe up with some witty bu77sh1t about our situation as well.
Quite, I had forgotten about all that....

I agree, can't stand either Holloway or Warnock but the volume always gets turned up when they are interviewed!
[quote][p][bold]onlyonerodthomas[/bold] wrote: is this the same man that fielded an under strength team for blackpool against villa? which was "AGAINST" the premiership rules.and is this the same man that said if blackpool were found guilty and fined would resign his position from manager of blackpool?.you have to love holloway because he is funny and does have a weird sense of humour,but what he needs to know is that wfc are not breaking any rules and if palace were the first team to take advantage of this he would have done it too.maybe his mate warnock will pipe up with some witty bu77sh1t about our situation as well.[/p][/quote]Quite, I had forgotten about all that.... I agree, can't stand either Holloway or Warnock but the volume always gets turned up when they are interviewed! Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

9:07am Sat 9 Feb 13

Ronny oh Ronny Ronny says...

How any of our fans can say they still like and respect that xenophobic fool of a man is beyond me, I used to quite like his wit but he went far too over the top last night, cheap shot for a bit of publicity.
Right down in the gutter with Warnock now in my opinion, still fuming!!
How any of our fans can say they still like and respect that xenophobic fool of a man is beyond me, I used to quite like his wit but he went far too over the top last night, cheap shot for a bit of publicity. Right down in the gutter with Warnock now in my opinion, still fuming!! Ronny oh Ronny Ronny
  • Score: 0

9:12am Sat 9 Feb 13

The BestTrip2011 says...

Eastsussexhornet wrote:
onlyonerodthomas wrote:
is this the same man that fielded an under strength team for blackpool against villa? which was "AGAINST" the premiership rules.and is this the same man that said if blackpool were found guilty and fined would resign his position from manager of blackpool?.you have to love holloway because he is funny and does have a weird sense of humour,but what he needs to know is that wfc are not breaking any rules and if palace were the first team to take advantage of this he would have done it too.maybe his mate warnock will pipe up with some witty bu77sh1t about our situation as well.
Quite, I had forgotten about all that....

I agree, can't stand either Holloway or Warnock but the volume always gets turned up when they are interviewed!
When it suits you Ollie, when it suits you. "I'm from Bristol"...yes, well.
[quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]onlyonerodthomas[/bold] wrote: is this the same man that fielded an under strength team for blackpool against villa? which was "AGAINST" the premiership rules.and is this the same man that said if blackpool were found guilty and fined would resign his position from manager of blackpool?.you have to love holloway because he is funny and does have a weird sense of humour,but what he needs to know is that wfc are not breaking any rules and if palace were the first team to take advantage of this he would have done it too.maybe his mate warnock will pipe up with some witty bu77sh1t about our situation as well.[/p][/quote]Quite, I had forgotten about all that.... I agree, can't stand either Holloway or Warnock but the volume always gets turned up when they are interviewed![/p][/quote]When it suits you Ollie, when it suits you. "I'm from Bristol"...yes, well. The BestTrip2011
  • Score: 0

9:19am Sat 9 Feb 13

Travelling Hornet says...

What was bad last night was that we didn't get a chance to answer his accusations , I would of done by punching him squarely on the nose!
What was bad last night was that we didn't get a chance to answer his accusations , I would of done by punching him squarely on the nose! Travelling Hornet
  • Score: 0

9:42am Sat 9 Feb 13

stevyweavy says...

His comments are totally reasonable and we would all be saying it if the boot was on the other foot. Maybe the way he said it was not. I love what we are doing and the way we are playing but it does not make it fair. The loophole should be closed (but hopefully after we get where we want to be and have the players we want permanently signed).
His comments are totally reasonable and we would all be saying it if the boot was on the other foot. Maybe the way he said it was not. I love what we are doing and the way we are playing but it does not make it fair. The loophole should be closed (but hopefully after we get where we want to be and have the players we want permanently signed). stevyweavy
  • Score: 0

9:46am Sat 9 Feb 13

wfclegends says...

Ian has to realise that domestically the loaning of several players from the same club, more than 2, can cause the issue of a conflict of interest or fair play to brought into question. Where either judgements of players not playing 100% because your playing against a parent team rival or if playing your parent team forces you to play an under strength team to abstain your selection of these loanee's.
However those scenarios dont really play into the same situations for "foreign" loans when taken from teams outside of the domestic leagues when playing in the English leagues.
No doubt this is why there are different rules and no doubt that to ensure that the loan system is fairer for all your little outburst will probably nullify that.

Oh P.S. Mr Holloway, which club was it that brought your equalising scorer of K Philips into professional football?

Watford FC

Its not all about youth development but recognizing talent when you see it.
Ian has to realise that domestically the loaning of several players from the same club, more than 2, can cause the issue of a conflict of interest or fair play to brought into question. Where either judgements of players not playing 100% because your playing against a parent team rival or if playing your parent team forces you to play an under strength team to abstain your selection of these loanee's. However those scenarios dont really play into the same situations for "foreign" loans when taken from teams outside of the domestic leagues when playing in the English leagues. No doubt this is why there are different rules and no doubt that to ensure that the loan system is fairer for all your little outburst will probably nullify that. Oh P.S. Mr Holloway, which club was it that brought your equalising scorer of K Philips into professional football? Watford FC Its not all about youth development but recognizing talent when you see it. wfclegends
  • Score: 0

9:49am Sat 9 Feb 13

Ronny oh Ronny Ronny says...

Fair?? Loophole??? It's not like the rules have suddenly changed and we have exploited them, anyone could have done this anytime. The fact is we only signed all these players on loan innitually because of our poor financial state and to get them all in the door for Zola to look at. Most of them were unknown and hadn't done anything previously.
Zola has done a fantastic job, we have done nothing unfair and people like that prat can carry on moaning but we are playing the better football and going up
Fair?? Loophole??? It's not like the rules have suddenly changed and we have exploited them, anyone could have done this anytime. The fact is we only signed all these players on loan innitually because of our poor financial state and to get them all in the door for Zola to look at. Most of them were unknown and hadn't done anything previously. Zola has done a fantastic job, we have done nothing unfair and people like that prat can carry on moaning but we are playing the better football and going up Ronny oh Ronny Ronny
  • Score: 0

9:55am Sat 9 Feb 13

Watforddogs says...

stevyweavy wrote:
His comments are totally reasonable and we would all be saying it if the boot was on the other foot. Maybe the way he said it was not. I love what we are doing and the way we are playing but it does not make it fair. The loophole should be closed (but hopefully after we get where we want to be and have the players we want permanently signed).
No they aren't so don't brown nose the twit
If Udinese had made them free transfers and permanent from day 1 knowing that could transfer them back at anytime as they have control and they had paid us a development fee to cover the wages - would that have been better?
Or if Pozzo had reached into his pocket givenus 10m and then made us buy the players for 10m from Udinese and then taken a 10m loan back from them - would that be different?
All Pozzos have done is to saddle us with players rather than debt (Chelski or Man City - albeit that debt is with the owner)
So don't appease Gollum - there is nothing wrong - the reason it is different with domesic loans is potential conflict of interest - we are unlikely to draw Granada in the cup or have to play Siena in a league game where Udinese will benefit from Siena losing are we!
[quote][p][bold]stevyweavy[/bold] wrote: His comments are totally reasonable and we would all be saying it if the boot was on the other foot. Maybe the way he said it was not. I love what we are doing and the way we are playing but it does not make it fair. The loophole should be closed (but hopefully after we get where we want to be and have the players we want permanently signed).[/p][/quote]No they aren't so don't brown nose the twit If Udinese had made them free transfers and permanent from day 1 knowing that could transfer them back at anytime as they have control and they had paid us a development fee to cover the wages - would that have been better? Or if Pozzo had reached into his pocket givenus 10m and then made us buy the players for 10m from Udinese and then taken a 10m loan back from them - would that be different? All Pozzos have done is to saddle us with players rather than debt (Chelski or Man City - albeit that debt is with the owner) So don't appease Gollum - there is nothing wrong - the reason it is different with domesic loans is potential conflict of interest - we are unlikely to draw Granada in the cup or have to play Siena in a league game where Udinese will benefit from Siena losing are we! Watforddogs
  • Score: 0

10:00am Sat 9 Feb 13

wfclegends says...

Oh yeah and dont start bringing the Failings of the National football team onto the loan system at Watford.

In actual fact we do play like a foreign team, like you say we do, but we are also gelling in the youngsters.
In actual fact if you had read the whole matchday program and read about our academy you will realise the Watford way is to introduce this style of football throughout all the academy teams. Clubs like Watford and Swansea will start establishing players through to the National team that can play a passing game and start to be competitive with the Spaniards etc at a different style of football from the Bristolian Hoof ball tactics your accustomed to which has won England squat for the past 50 odd years..
Oh yeah and dont start bringing the Failings of the National football team onto the loan system at Watford. In actual fact we do play like a foreign team, like you say we do, but we are also gelling in the youngsters. In actual fact if you had read the whole matchday program and read about our academy you will realise the Watford way is to introduce this style of football throughout all the academy teams. Clubs like Watford and Swansea will start establishing players through to the National team that can play a passing game and start to be competitive with the Spaniards etc at a different style of football from the Bristolian Hoof ball tactics your accustomed to which has won England squat for the past 50 odd years.. wfclegends
  • Score: 0

10:11am Sat 9 Feb 13

BigRussMalta says...

I dont know what holloways on about,i thought they were the much better side overall so whys he moaning???? That blonde Willuams who got MOM was mustard as was Zaha ,run rings round us in 2nd half and i reckon we were lucky not to lose.
I dont know what holloways on about,i thought they were the much better side overall so whys he moaning???? That blonde Willuams who got MOM was mustard as was Zaha ,run rings round us in 2nd half and i reckon we were lucky not to lose. BigRussMalta
  • Score: 0

10:22am Sat 9 Feb 13

Bush Hornet says...

Ronny oh Ronny Ronny wrote:
Fair?? Loophole??? It's not like the rules have suddenly changed and we have exploited them, anyone could have done this anytime. The fact is we only signed all these players on loan innitually because of our poor financial state and to get them all in the door for Zola to look at. Most of them were unknown and hadn't done anything previously.
Zola has done a fantastic job, we have done nothing unfair and people like that prat can carry on moaning but we are playing the better football and going up
Well said.

I haven't listened to Hollowhead's interview because he's just too irritating.
[quote][p][bold]Ronny oh Ronny Ronny[/bold] wrote: Fair?? Loophole??? It's not like the rules have suddenly changed and we have exploited them, anyone could have done this anytime. The fact is we only signed all these players on loan innitually because of our poor financial state and to get them all in the door for Zola to look at. Most of them were unknown and hadn't done anything previously. Zola has done a fantastic job, we have done nothing unfair and people like that prat can carry on moaning but we are playing the better football and going up[/p][/quote]Well said. I haven't listened to Hollowhead's interview because he's just too irritating. Bush Hornet
  • Score: 0

10:22am Sat 9 Feb 13

Mjp99 says...

Says a manager who sells a player to Utd , bags the money and guess what, the lads back on loan. How fair is that
Says a manager who sells a player to Utd , bags the money and guess what, the lads back on loan. How fair is that Mjp99
  • Score: 0

10:25am Sat 9 Feb 13

Bush Hornet says...

napoleorn wrote:
I've never understood why he's apparently so highly thought of. Personaly, i've aways thought that he's a half wit that thinks he's a manager come stand up comedian..
He hasn't achieved anything as either a player or manager and shown a distinct lack of class with his comments last night.
Good summary. He loves the limelight but he's a limited manager.
[quote][p][bold]napoleorn[/bold] wrote: I've never understood why he's apparently so highly thought of. Personaly, i've aways thought that he's a half wit that thinks he's a manager come stand up comedian.. He hasn't achieved anything as either a player or manager and shown a distinct lack of class with his comments last night.[/p][/quote]Good summary. He loves the limelight but he's a limited manager. Bush Hornet
  • Score: 0

10:28am Sat 9 Feb 13

gloryhornet4 says...

stevyweavy wrote:
His comments are totally reasonable and we would all be saying it if the boot was on the other foot. Maybe the way he said it was not. I love what we are doing and the way we are playing but it does not make it fair. The loophole should be closed (but hopefully after we get where we want to be and have the players we want permanently signed).
I take the view WFC would be a Premier side established or yoyo, like WBA if rich foreigners were not buying trophies & filling up the top half of the Prem Lg so there are less spots for genuine clubs with genuine supporters in the top flight.

What is fair also by clubs gambling with creditors money WITHOUT their consent to try to enjoy the big time.

One club springs to mind Ollie.

WFC are within the rules.
[quote][p][bold]stevyweavy[/bold] wrote: His comments are totally reasonable and we would all be saying it if the boot was on the other foot. Maybe the way he said it was not. I love what we are doing and the way we are playing but it does not make it fair. The loophole should be closed (but hopefully after we get where we want to be and have the players we want permanently signed).[/p][/quote]I take the view WFC would be a Premier side established or yoyo, like WBA if rich foreigners were not buying trophies & filling up the top half of the Prem Lg so there are less spots for genuine clubs with genuine supporters in the top flight. What is fair also by clubs gambling with creditors money WITHOUT their consent to try to enjoy the big time. One club springs to mind Ollie. WFC are within the rules. gloryhornet4
  • Score: 0

10:31am Sat 9 Feb 13

bigthunder says...

Ah well let me see here this is the ramblings of a man who has just sold his best player for 15 million pounds to Man Utd and promptly loaned him back !!! all in the spirit of the game is it Holloway ?

also the man accussed by Ferguson at P'boro of constantly tapping up Boyd by ringing him every day , a player under contract !

just ask Leicester supporters about him man is a moron loves the sound of his own voice and was so ill informed thinking we could only play 5 loan players he was embarressed and spouts of this garbage , WFC have not broken any rules , you can only break a rule if there is one , there is not
Ah well let me see here this is the ramblings of a man who has just sold his best player for 15 million pounds to Man Utd and promptly loaned him back !!! all in the spirit of the game is it Holloway ? also the man accussed by Ferguson at P'boro of constantly tapping up Boyd by ringing him every day , a player under contract ! just ask Leicester supporters about him man is a moron loves the sound of his own voice and was so ill informed thinking we could only play 5 loan players he was embarressed and spouts of this garbage , WFC have not broken any rules , you can only break a rule if there is one , there is not bigthunder
  • Score: 0

10:31am Sat 9 Feb 13

Pete_The_Boy says...

Tell nogeniusfrombristol that it is just the same as foreign owners providing funds for new players; the Pozzo's just own the players already. Sounded like a drunken rant from Holloway, full of inconsistencies and contradictions. As for not knowing until he read the program; all part of his 'comedy' routine!
Tell nogeniusfrombristol that it is just the same as foreign owners providing funds for new players; the Pozzo's just own the players already. Sounded like a drunken rant from Holloway, full of inconsistencies and contradictions. As for not knowing until he read the program; all part of his 'comedy' routine! Pete_The_Boy
  • Score: 0

10:35am Sat 9 Feb 13

Ronny oh Ronny Ronny says...

Watforddogs wrote:
stevyweavy wrote:
His comments are totally reasonable and we would all be saying it if the boot was on the other foot. Maybe the way he said it was not. I love what we are doing and the way we are playing but it does not make it fair. The loophole should be closed (but hopefully after we get where we want to be and have the players we want permanently signed).
No they aren't so don't brown nose the twit
If Udinese had made them free transfers and permanent from day 1 knowing that could transfer them back at anytime as they have control and they had paid us a development fee to cover the wages - would that have been better?
Or if Pozzo had reached into his pocket givenus 10m and then made us buy the players for 10m from Udinese and then taken a 10m loan back from them - would that be different?
All Pozzos have done is to saddle us with players rather than debt (Chelski or Man City - albeit that debt is with the owner)
So don't appease Gollum - there is nothing wrong - the reason it is different with domesic loans is potential conflict of interest - we are unlikely to draw Granada in the cup or have to play Siena in a league game where Udinese will benefit from Siena losing are we!
Well said!
Show me the loophole?
A loophole is an ambiguity in a system which manages to avoid the implied intent or rules of that system??
You show me anywhere that it states a club can not have more that a certain number of season long loans from a foreign country? 
No? Thought not!
The bloke should think before he speaks and makes an utter fool of himself next time.
[quote][p][bold]Watforddogs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevyweavy[/bold] wrote: His comments are totally reasonable and we would all be saying it if the boot was on the other foot. Maybe the way he said it was not. I love what we are doing and the way we are playing but it does not make it fair. The loophole should be closed (but hopefully after we get where we want to be and have the players we want permanently signed).[/p][/quote]No they aren't so don't brown nose the twit If Udinese had made them free transfers and permanent from day 1 knowing that could transfer them back at anytime as they have control and they had paid us a development fee to cover the wages - would that have been better? Or if Pozzo had reached into his pocket givenus 10m and then made us buy the players for 10m from Udinese and then taken a 10m loan back from them - would that be different? All Pozzos have done is to saddle us with players rather than debt (Chelski or Man City - albeit that debt is with the owner) So don't appease Gollum - there is nothing wrong - the reason it is different with domesic loans is potential conflict of interest - we are unlikely to draw Granada in the cup or have to play Siena in a league game where Udinese will benefit from Siena losing are we![/p][/quote]Well said! Show me the loophole? A loophole is an ambiguity in a system which manages to avoid the implied intent or rules of that system?? You show me anywhere that it states a club can not have more that a certain number of season long loans from a foreign country?  No? Thought not! The bloke should think before he speaks and makes an utter fool of himself next time. Ronny oh Ronny Ronny
  • Score: 0

10:51am Sat 9 Feb 13

HunsburyHornet says...

napoleorn wrote:
I've never understood why he's apparently so highly thought of. Personaly, i've aways thought that he's a half wit that thinks he's a manager come stand up comedian..
He hasn't achieved anything as either a player or manager and shown a distinct lack of class with his comments last night.
Spot on mate. He's still mad at the fact we beat his Plymouth in the cup semi final all those years ago. That's about his level. (Sorry Plymouth).
[quote][p][bold]napoleorn[/bold] wrote: I've never understood why he's apparently so highly thought of. Personaly, i've aways thought that he's a half wit that thinks he's a manager come stand up comedian.. He hasn't achieved anything as either a player or manager and shown a distinct lack of class with his comments last night.[/p][/quote]Spot on mate. He's still mad at the fact we beat his Plymouth in the cup semi final all those years ago. That's about his level. (Sorry Plymouth). HunsburyHornet
  • Score: 0

10:54am Sat 9 Feb 13

holtonian says...

Mjp99 wrote:
Says a manager who sells a player to Utd , bags the money and guess what, the lads back on loan. How fair is that
Exactly.
[quote][p][bold]Mjp99[/bold] wrote: Says a manager who sells a player to Utd , bags the money and guess what, the lads back on loan. How fair is that[/p][/quote]Exactly. holtonian
  • Score: 0

11:13am Sat 9 Feb 13

dorothyparker12 says...

The man complains about the loans of a pocketful of reserve players who sat on the bench of Udinese. What if Udinese starts sending the real players
The man complains about the loans of a pocketful of reserve players who sat on the bench of Udinese. What if Udinese starts sending the real players dorothyparker12
  • Score: 0

11:31am Sat 9 Feb 13

cliff46 says...

How was it that sky sports interviewed two palace players and the idiotic Holloway after the game, why no Zola interview?
Holloway is Bristolian -- no need to say anymore than that!!
How was it that sky sports interviewed two palace players and the idiotic Holloway after the game, why no Zola interview? Holloway is Bristolian -- no need to say anymore than that!! cliff46
  • Score: 0

11:58am Sat 9 Feb 13

lutondown says...

cliff46 wrote:
How was it that sky sports interviewed two palace players and the idiotic Holloway after the game, why no Zola interview?
Holloway is Bristolian -- no need to say anymore than that!!
Cliff, Zola would have only been positive about the gnome as GFZ is a gentleman, whereas Oily ( not misspelt) is a self adoring wanna be piddle poor comedian.
I've never understood why Watford fans like him, for he's never liked us loanees or not.
Did anyone else see them little slithers of carrot zipping out if his twisted mouth when he talked?
Munchkin tool
[quote][p][bold]cliff46[/bold] wrote: How was it that sky sports interviewed two palace players and the idiotic Holloway after the game, why no Zola interview? Holloway is Bristolian -- no need to say anymore than that!![/p][/quote]Cliff, Zola would have only been positive about the gnome as GFZ is a gentleman, whereas Oily ( not misspelt) is a self adoring wanna be piddle poor comedian. I've never understood why Watford fans like him, for he's never liked us loanees or not. Did anyone else see them little slithers of carrot zipping out if his twisted mouth when he talked? Munchkin tool lutondown
  • Score: 0

1:08pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Only 2 Ross Jenkins says...

On one hand he critisizes the fact we can have all these 'loans'. Then he says he's going to get his chairman to do the same thing. If he has only just realised what the rules are he can't be very bright. But by his own admission, he's from Bristol so I guess there is your answer.
On one hand he critisizes the fact we can have all these 'loans'. Then he says he's going to get his chairman to do the same thing. If he has only just realised what the rules are he can't be very bright. But by his own admission, he's from Bristol so I guess there is your answer. Only 2 Ross Jenkins
  • Score: 0

1:16pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

Only 2 Ross Jenkins wrote:
On one hand he critisizes the fact we can have all these 'loans'. Then he says he's going to get his chairman to do the same thing. If he has only just realised what the rules are he can't be very bright. But by his own admission, he's from Bristol so I guess there is your answer.
Yes, he says he's going to ring up Barcelona! I would love to eavesdrop on that one - "Who is this? Who, Crsytal who?"
[quote][p][bold]Only 2 Ross Jenkins[/bold] wrote: On one hand he critisizes the fact we can have all these 'loans'. Then he says he's going to get his chairman to do the same thing. If he has only just realised what the rules are he can't be very bright. But by his own admission, he's from Bristol so I guess there is your answer.[/p][/quote]Yes, he says he's going to ring up Barcelona! I would love to eavesdrop on that one - "Who is this? Who, Crsytal who?" Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

1:36pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Dr Johnny Fever says...

Aaahhhh...shut the %*&^$ up Holloway...un -fair, yes, what a shame.

Maybe we should be like Manchester City and go out and buy any player we like, because we have more money than anyone else, know doubt you'd moan about that being un-fair too.
Aaahhhh...shut the %*&^$ up Holloway...un -fair, yes, what a shame. Maybe we should be like Manchester City and go out and buy any player we like, because we have more money than anyone else, know doubt you'd moan about that being un-fair too. Dr Johnny Fever
  • Score: 0

1:41pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

dorothyparker12 wrote:
The man complains about the loans of a pocketful of reserve players who sat on the bench of Udinese. What if Udinese starts sending the real players
I know what you are saying in that Udinese are only a mid-table Serie A team but hold on....that is a little insulting to them! The way I see it is that by a quirk of fate we have acquired what have turned out to be "real players" as you put it. They were probably underestimated at Udinese, especially Abdi, and also Vydra who had not much earlier come out an injury period and probably had not been tested enough. It's like buying a second had sofa and finding £ 10 000 in it!
[quote][p][bold]dorothyparker12[/bold] wrote: The man complains about the loans of a pocketful of reserve players who sat on the bench of Udinese. What if Udinese starts sending the real players[/p][/quote]I know what you are saying in that Udinese are only a mid-table Serie A team but hold on....that is a little insulting to them! The way I see it is that by a quirk of fate we have acquired what have turned out to be "real players" as you put it. They were probably underestimated at Udinese, especially Abdi, and also Vydra who had not much earlier come out an injury period and probably had not been tested enough. It's like buying a second had sofa and finding £ 10 000 in it! Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

1:44pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Holly68 says...

Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !! Holly68
  • Score: 0

1:45pm Sat 9 Feb 13

watford1881 says...

If no rules have been broken why is it not a level playing field?? Ian stick to your one season wonders.. Murrys 7 pen mean our vydra has scored the same amount of free play goals with a dozen less starts.. One trick wonder is off at seasons end.. Murrys head will get too big for his boots and want away.. Palace only has a forward line of any note. The rest of the team is very average.. Watford had a number of internationals playing soon beforehand so wwe're rightly a little tired... 4 points from them this season is a good return... Hollowbrain u are so two faced & envious.. U won't reach the prem & even if u did u would be down by Christmas.... Watford are building... Palace are surviving.... Muppets...... COYH....
If no rules have been broken why is it not a level playing field?? Ian stick to your one season wonders.. Murrys 7 pen mean our vydra has scored the same amount of free play goals with a dozen less starts.. One trick wonder is off at seasons end.. Murrys head will get too big for his boots and want away.. Palace only has a forward line of any note. The rest of the team is very average.. Watford had a number of internationals playing soon beforehand so wwe're rightly a little tired... 4 points from them this season is a good return... Hollowbrain u are so two faced & envious.. U won't reach the prem & even if u did u would be down by Christmas.... Watford are building... Palace are surviving.... Muppets...... COYH.... watford1881
  • Score: 0

1:46pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

Holly68 wrote:
Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
I have just started salivating!!
[quote][p][bold]Holly68[/bold] wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !![/p][/quote]I have just started salivating!! Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

1:48pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Bearded George says...

mattymashup wrote:
Holloway has a point. We are not breaking any rules though, and even if the loan loophole was closed we could buy the udinese players for ten euro each if we wanted. Surely the rule where chairmen can own more than one club albeit in foreign countries is the problem.

It would not surprise me to see palace taken over by juventus, hull taken over by real Madrid etc, then I don't think Holloway and co would be moaning about it!

The fact is we have gone from relegation favourites to a top championship team all because of the udinese connection.

Not that I'm complaining mind you.

It's just a shame we didn't sign them permanently in the transfer window, would have shut Holloway up!

P.s Holloway is still one of my fave managers, well done to you and palace, got a point from a game you should have lost, no sour grapes from me.
I think that doing a deal with a premiership club so that you sell them your best player and they immediately loan him back, whilst not being against the rules, is equally concerning if not more so. After all the Pozzi's own these players and therefore it is up to them where they play them. They are developing these players which should be applauded. After all we are not buying instant success like some clubs do.
[quote][p][bold]mattymashup[/bold] wrote: Holloway has a point. We are not breaking any rules though, and even if the loan loophole was closed we could buy the udinese players for ten euro each if we wanted. Surely the rule where chairmen can own more than one club albeit in foreign countries is the problem. It would not surprise me to see palace taken over by juventus, hull taken over by real Madrid etc, then I don't think Holloway and co would be moaning about it! The fact is we have gone from relegation favourites to a top championship team all because of the udinese connection. Not that I'm complaining mind you. It's just a shame we didn't sign them permanently in the transfer window, would have shut Holloway up! P.s Holloway is still one of my fave managers, well done to you and palace, got a point from a game you should have lost, no sour grapes from me.[/p][/quote]I think that doing a deal with a premiership club so that you sell them your best player and they immediately loan him back, whilst not being against the rules, is equally concerning if not more so. After all the Pozzi's own these players and therefore it is up to them where they play them. They are developing these players which should be applauded. After all we are not buying instant success like some clubs do. Bearded George
  • Score: 0

2:12pm Sat 9 Feb 13

lutondown says...

Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Holly68 wrote:
Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
I have just started salivating!!
Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.
[quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Holly68[/bold] wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !![/p][/quote]I have just started salivating!![/p][/quote]Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts. lutondown
  • Score: 0

2:45pm Sat 9 Feb 13

peter10531089 says...

Holloway has to look after his own and palaces interests and therefore ignoring the facts that don't fit his argument suits him. Thevwatford academy has been held up as a shining example over many years so what happens? They introduce EPPP, basically handing the largest clubs an unfair advantage in allowing to easily poach our best players - where's the fairness there? Man City, Arsenal, Chelsea, man Utd all foreign owned and either taking money out of the game (arsenal, man Utd) or distorting the transfer market and game by using third party wealth to Hoover up the best talent - not exactly fairness or good for the game.

The Pozzo's have invested in players developments and are playing within the rules (not loopholes please note) also the international loans are unlimited as there is not the same case of conflict of interests because neither the loaning or receiving club compete against each other - human or European rights have nothing to do with it!

Palace were excellent and their manager is very good but I think he is talking about stuff that he doesn't understand
Holloway has to look after his own and palaces interests and therefore ignoring the facts that don't fit his argument suits him. Thevwatford academy has been held up as a shining example over many years so what happens? They introduce EPPP, basically handing the largest clubs an unfair advantage in allowing to easily poach our best players - where's the fairness there? Man City, Arsenal, Chelsea, man Utd all foreign owned and either taking money out of the game (arsenal, man Utd) or distorting the transfer market and game by using third party wealth to Hoover up the best talent - not exactly fairness or good for the game. The Pozzo's have invested in players developments and are playing within the rules (not loopholes please note) also the international loans are unlimited as there is not the same case of conflict of interests because neither the loaning or receiving club compete against each other - human or European rights have nothing to do with it! Palace were excellent and their manager is very good but I think he is talking about stuff that he doesn't understand peter10531089
  • Score: 0

2:47pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Holly68 wrote:
Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
I have just started salivating!!
Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.
I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....
[quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Holly68[/bold] wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !![/p][/quote]I have just started salivating!![/p][/quote]Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.[/p][/quote]I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice.... Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

2:48pm Sat 9 Feb 13

dorothyparker12 says...

I know what you are saying in that Udinese are only a mid-table Serie A team but hold on....that is a little insulting to them! The way I see it is that by a quirk of fate we have acquired what have turned out to be "real players" as you put it. They were probably underestimated at Udinese, especially Abdi, and also Vydra who had not much earlier come out an injury period and probably had not been tested enough.”

Only too glad to see Udinese players are doing well at Watford, especially Vydra who did not have too many chances to show his talent by us. Abdi is probably simply more suitable for the English football, as some other players may be more comfortable with the Spanish football. That is why I do not think any of them will ever come back.
I know what you are saying in that Udinese are only a mid-table Serie A team but hold on....that is a little insulting to them! The way I see it is that by a quirk of fate we have acquired what have turned out to be "real players" as you put it. They were probably underestimated at Udinese, especially Abdi, and also Vydra who had not much earlier come out an injury period and probably had not been tested enough.” Only too glad to see Udinese players are doing well at Watford, especially Vydra who did not have too many chances to show his talent by us. Abdi is probably simply more suitable for the English football, as some other players may be more comfortable with the Spanish football. That is why I do not think any of them will ever come back. dorothyparker12
  • Score: 0

3:04pm Sat 9 Feb 13

a1derek says...

c'wood wrote:
A rather confused, jealous and slightly xenophobic ramble from Holloway. "I'm not having a go" "Zola is fantastic" etc. "....but if we don't stop it they will do really well" was the gist of it. Add in "my local boys" (well one of them is Welsh but that's appears to be the same thing!) and you see how confused it is.

I wonder if he really thinks it is wrong for us have a fantastic foreign player like Vydra but that it's OK for Southampton to bid and possibly buy the same fantastic and foreign Vydra? This is the club that built an fantastic ground and then went bankrupt leaving people like St John's Ambulance unpaid. (Leicester are another fine example of this type of club we have to compete with.)

Watford never left debts like that, even after ITV Digtial, Vialli etc. We have never had an owner like Forest had who put apparently put in £100m before he died either. We are simply trying to compete as best we can against bigger budgets and with clubs who have acted a lot less scrupulously.

Oh, and we had two academy players start last night plus one on the bench. That suggests we are not killing English talent. We are merely making it better by surrounding the best of it with great foreign talent that raises the overall level.

Maybe it's all a smokescreen to cover for the rather obviously pre-planned rota to kick Chalobah out of the match.

Managers really do not talk straight do they?
Spot on - well said that person.
[quote][p][bold]c'wood[/bold] wrote: A rather confused, jealous and slightly xenophobic ramble from Holloway. "I'm not having a go" "Zola is fantastic" etc. "....but if we don't stop it they will do really well" was the gist of it. Add in "my local boys" (well one of them is Welsh but that's appears to be the same thing!) and you see how confused it is. I wonder if he really thinks it is wrong for us have a fantastic foreign player like Vydra but that it's OK for Southampton to bid and possibly buy the same fantastic and foreign Vydra? This is the club that built an fantastic ground and then went bankrupt leaving people like St John's Ambulance unpaid. (Leicester are another fine example of this type of club we have to compete with.) Watford never left debts like that, even after ITV Digtial, Vialli etc. We have never had an owner like Forest had who put apparently put in £100m before he died either. We are simply trying to compete as best we can against bigger budgets and with clubs who have acted a lot less scrupulously. Oh, and we had two academy players start last night plus one on the bench. That suggests we are not killing English talent. We are merely making it better by surrounding the best of it with great foreign talent that raises the overall level. Maybe it's all a smokescreen to cover for the rather obviously pre-planned rota to kick Chalobah out of the match. Managers really do not talk straight do they?[/p][/quote]Spot on - well said that person. a1derek
  • Score: 0

3:21pm Sat 9 Feb 13

lutondown says...

Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Holly68 wrote:
Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
I have just started salivating!!
Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.
I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....
Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.
[quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Holly68[/bold] wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !![/p][/quote]I have just started salivating!![/p][/quote]Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.[/p][/quote]I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....[/p][/quote]Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you. lutondown
  • Score: 0

3:22pm Sat 9 Feb 13

lutondown says...

lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Holly68 wrote:
Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
I have just started salivating!!
Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.
I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....
Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.
Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.
[quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Holly68[/bold] wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !![/p][/quote]I have just started salivating!![/p][/quote]Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.[/p][/quote]I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....[/p][/quote]Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.[/p][/quote]Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you. lutondown
  • Score: 0

3:54pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

lutondown wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Holly68 wrote:
Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
I have just started salivating!!
Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.
I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....
Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.
Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.
Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?
[quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Holly68[/bold] wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !![/p][/quote]I have just started salivating!![/p][/quote]Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.[/p][/quote]I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....[/p][/quote]Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.[/p][/quote]Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.[/p][/quote]Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest? Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

3:57pm Sat 9 Feb 13

lutondown says...

Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Holly68 wrote:
Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
I have just started salivating!!
Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.
I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....
Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.
Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.
Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?
Come on that'd be boring! Anyway I wouldn't know which one of your opinions I was agreeing or disagreeing to!
I did actually concur with one of your posts earlier, you must of missed it.
And mate, half of me is banter! The other half, I'm still working out!
[quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Holly68[/bold] wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !![/p][/quote]I have just started salivating!![/p][/quote]Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.[/p][/quote]I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....[/p][/quote]Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.[/p][/quote]Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.[/p][/quote]Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?[/p][/quote]Come on that'd be boring! Anyway I wouldn't know which one of your opinions I was agreeing or disagreeing to! I did actually concur with one of your posts earlier, you must of missed it. And mate, half of me is banter! The other half, I'm still working out! lutondown
  • Score: 0

4:00pm Sat 9 Feb 13

KeithMercer says...

LD why was Red Lion closed ?
LD why was Red Lion closed ? KeithMercer
  • Score: 0

4:06pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Boosey says...

lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Holly68 wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
I have just started salivating!!
Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.
If we did have to play them again Holloway has done us a massive favour.
OUR SUPPORT WOULD BE VERY LOUD!
[quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Holly68[/bold] wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !![/p][/quote]I have just started salivating!![/p][/quote]Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.[/p][/quote]If we did have to play them again Holloway has done us a massive favour. OUR SUPPORT WOULD BE VERY LOUD! Boosey
  • Score: 0

4:06pm Sat 9 Feb 13

lutondown says...

KeithMercer wrote:
LD why was Red Lion closed ?
Think that may unfold very soon. Whisper being not just because of a few caravan dwelling South Londoners
[quote][p][bold]KeithMercer[/bold] wrote: LD why was Red Lion closed ?[/p][/quote]Think that may unfold very soon. Whisper being not just because of a few caravan dwelling South Londoners lutondown
  • Score: 0

4:09pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Holly68 wrote:
Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
I have just started salivating!!
Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.
I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....
Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.
Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.
Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?
Come on that'd be boring! Anyway I wouldn't know which one of your opinions I was agreeing or disagreeing to!
I did actually concur with one of your posts earlier, you must of missed it.
And mate, half of me is banter! The other half, I'm still working out!
Ok, fair enough, as long as it's banter and nothing else. I sailed close to wind with you once but, I would point out, I regretted it BEFORE the WO removed it - the first time it's happened to me - didn't know whether to be proud or ashamed.

There you are, plenty of ammunition there! Anyway, Soccer Saturday now so you'll have a free run for an hour.....
[quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Holly68[/bold] wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !![/p][/quote]I have just started salivating!![/p][/quote]Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.[/p][/quote]I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....[/p][/quote]Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.[/p][/quote]Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.[/p][/quote]Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?[/p][/quote]Come on that'd be boring! Anyway I wouldn't know which one of your opinions I was agreeing or disagreeing to! I did actually concur with one of your posts earlier, you must of missed it. And mate, half of me is banter! The other half, I'm still working out![/p][/quote]Ok, fair enough, as long as it's banter and nothing else. I sailed close to wind with you once but, I would point out, I regretted it BEFORE the WO removed it - the first time it's happened to me - didn't know whether to be proud or ashamed. There you are, plenty of ammunition there! Anyway, Soccer Saturday now so you'll have a free run for an hour..... Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

4:37pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Bedshornet says...

So why didn't he say no thanks Fergie I don't want Zaha on loan thank you
So why didn't he say no thanks Fergie I don't want Zaha on loan thank you Bedshornet
  • Score: 0

5:05pm Sat 9 Feb 13

jasonwatford says...

Leicester lost !!!! Holloway is a pub football team manager got lucky. SHUT your cakehole ollie and stick it
Leicester lost !!!! Holloway is a pub football team manager got lucky. SHUT your cakehole ollie and stick it jasonwatford
  • Score: 0

6:04pm Sat 9 Feb 13

lutondown says...

Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Holly68 wrote:
Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
I have just started salivating!!
Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.
I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....
Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.
Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.
Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?
Come on that'd be boring! Anyway I wouldn't know which one of your opinions I was agreeing or disagreeing to!
I did actually concur with one of your posts earlier, you must of missed it.
And mate, half of me is banter! The other half, I'm still working out!
Ok, fair enough, as long as it's banter and nothing else. I sailed close to wind with you once but, I would point out, I regretted it BEFORE the WO removed it - the first time it's happened to me - didn't know whether to be proud or ashamed.

There you are, plenty of ammunition there! Anyway, Soccer Saturday now so you'll have a free run for an hour.....
There you go again! Is your fav record rambling rose? Hee hee hee
[quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Holly68[/bold] wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !![/p][/quote]I have just started salivating!![/p][/quote]Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.[/p][/quote]I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....[/p][/quote]Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.[/p][/quote]Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.[/p][/quote]Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?[/p][/quote]Come on that'd be boring! Anyway I wouldn't know which one of your opinions I was agreeing or disagreeing to! I did actually concur with one of your posts earlier, you must of missed it. And mate, half of me is banter! The other half, I'm still working out![/p][/quote]Ok, fair enough, as long as it's banter and nothing else. I sailed close to wind with you once but, I would point out, I regretted it BEFORE the WO removed it - the first time it's happened to me - didn't know whether to be proud or ashamed. There you are, plenty of ammunition there! Anyway, Soccer Saturday now so you'll have a free run for an hour.....[/p][/quote]There you go again! Is your fav record rambling rose? Hee hee hee lutondown
  • Score: 0

6:05pm Sat 9 Feb 13

lutondown says...

jasonwatford wrote:
Leicester lost !!!! Holloway is a pub football team manager got lucky. SHUT your cakehole ollie and stick it
Yeah!
[quote][p][bold]jasonwatford[/bold] wrote: Leicester lost !!!! Holloway is a pub football team manager got lucky. SHUT your cakehole ollie and stick it[/p][/quote]Yeah! lutondown
  • Score: 0

7:30pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Mohandas says...

napoleorn wrote:
I've never understood why he's apparently so highly thought of. Personaly, i've aways thought that he's a half wit that thinks he's a manager come stand up comedian..
He hasn't achieved anything as either a player or manager and shown a distinct lack of class with his comments last night.
Look Hull, Leicester and Boro all lost. We should done Palace to make it just sweet.
[quote][p][bold]napoleorn[/bold] wrote: I've never understood why he's apparently so highly thought of. Personaly, i've aways thought that he's a half wit that thinks he's a manager come stand up comedian.. He hasn't achieved anything as either a player or manager and shown a distinct lack of class with his comments last night.[/p][/quote]Look Hull, Leicester and Boro all lost. We should done Palace to make it just sweet. Mohandas
  • Score: 0

7:39pm Sat 9 Feb 13

lutondown says...

Mohandas wrote:
napoleorn wrote:
I've never understood why he's apparently so highly thought of. Personaly, i've aways thought that he's a half wit that thinks he's a manager come stand up comedian..
He hasn't achieved anything as either a player or manager and shown a distinct lack of class with his comments last night.
Look Hull, Leicester and Boro all lost. We should done Palace to make it just sweet.
But we are looking healthy. Hull 4 games in 11 days. Wobbles everywhere. Look out for Blackburn.
[quote][p][bold]Mohandas[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]napoleorn[/bold] wrote: I've never understood why he's apparently so highly thought of. Personaly, i've aways thought that he's a half wit that thinks he's a manager come stand up comedian.. He hasn't achieved anything as either a player or manager and shown a distinct lack of class with his comments last night.[/p][/quote]Look Hull, Leicester and Boro all lost. We should done Palace to make it just sweet.[/p][/quote]But we are looking healthy. Hull 4 games in 11 days. Wobbles everywhere. Look out for Blackburn. lutondown
  • Score: 0

8:23pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Skully84 says...

As stoneyhornet said, how many loanees did Palace have?
As stoneyhornet said, how many loanees did Palace have? Skully84
  • Score: 0

8:25pm Sat 9 Feb 13

lutondown says...

Skully84 wrote:
As stoneyhornet said, how many loanees did Palace have?
6 to our 7
Academy players on show? Us 4 them 2.
Stats Mr Holloway would not like publicised no doubt. Horrible thick bumpkin
[quote][p][bold]Skully84[/bold] wrote: As stoneyhornet said, how many loanees did Palace have?[/p][/quote]6 to our 7 Academy players on show? Us 4 them 2. Stats Mr Holloway would not like publicised no doubt. Horrible thick bumpkin lutondown
  • Score: 0

9:59pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Bully73 says...

Can anyone taste sour grapes? Liked Holloway before his display last night. Thought he was above comments like that. Ok, so we charter private jets to get our players back on time! Get us, eh? There are pluses and minuses to any situation and we can't get too carried away, who knows where it'll end? Shall we just enjoy the ride?
Can anyone taste sour grapes? Liked Holloway before his display last night. Thought he was above comments like that. Ok, so we charter private jets to get our players back on time! Get us, eh? There are pluses and minuses to any situation and we can't get too carried away, who knows where it'll end? Shall we just enjoy the ride? Bully73
  • Score: 0

10:32pm Sat 9 Feb 13

akureyri says...

If Ian Holloway wwas Watford manager when the Pozzos arrived and had kept him would he resign his job as a protest being given access to football players who are much better than the usual at Vicarage Road?

I think he would not, and he would not think it wrong either.
If Ian Holloway wwas Watford manager when the Pozzos arrived and had kept him would he resign his job as a protest being given access to football players who are much better than the usual at Vicarage Road? I think he would not, and he would not think it wrong either. akureyri
  • Score: 0

10:48pm Sat 9 Feb 13

stewbyhorn says...

I love the quote that " Watford's loanees are world class". Thanks Ian because we don't hear that often at the Vic so we'll take that all day long. As previous people have said he is under pressure because if they don't go up he will go, if we get promoted I we can all toast our world class team!
I love the quote that " Watford's loanees are world class". Thanks Ian because we don't hear that often at the Vic so we'll take that all day long. As previous people have said he is under pressure because if they don't go up he will go, if we get promoted I we can all toast our world class team! stewbyhorn
  • Score: 0

10:59pm Sat 9 Feb 13

kingofpop says...

He's a kenny lunt!!! have never liked him and last seasons home game where he was moaning the whole time...just wanted dyche to slap him!!
He's a kenny lunt!!! have never liked him and last seasons home game where he was moaning the whole time...just wanted dyche to slap him!! kingofpop
  • Score: 0

12:43am Sun 10 Feb 13

Yardy says...

Eastsussexhornet wrote:
c'wood wrote:
A rather confused, jealous and slightly xenophobic ramble from Holloway. "I'm not having a go" "Zola is fantastic" etc. "....but if we don't stop it they will do really well" was the gist of it. Add in "my local boys" (well one of them is Welsh but that's appears to be the same thing!) and you see how confused it is.

I wonder if he really thinks it is wrong for us have a fantastic foreign player like Vydra but that it's OK for Southampton to bid and possibly buy the same fantastic and foreign Vydra? This is the club that built an fantastic ground and then went bankrupt leaving people like St John's Ambulance unpaid. (Leicester are another fine example of this type of club we have to compete with.)

Watford never left debts like that, even after ITV Digtial, Vialli etc. We have never had an owner like Forest had who put apparently put in £100m before he died either. We are simply trying to compete as best we can against bigger budgets and with clubs who have acted a lot less scrupulously.

Oh, and we had two academy players start last night plus one on the bench. That suggests we are not killing English talent. We are merely making it better by surrounding the best of it with great foreign talent that raises the overall level.

Maybe it's all a smokescreen to cover for the rather obviously pre-planned rota to kick Chalobah out of the match.

Managers really do not talk straight do they?
Yes, agreed. I am not necessarily they are right but the rules are the same for everyone. Why didn't he exploit them as well then? We may have the advantage that it only needs one phone call instead of several but that's all.

It annoys me when clubs get taken over by completely out of touch mega-rich mafia men or oil sheikhs who either want to hide money or want clubs as trophies, who don't care one jot about running it like a business and can lose a £100 million without even blinking, giving them a gob-smackingly unfair advantage and we can't field an extra 4 loan players than Holloway!
There are now rules in place to stop clubs losing millions of pounds. It's called FFP. I don't have a problem with the Holloway rant, I think it's a reasonable argument. There are rules in place to prevent English clubs having too many loan players from another English club. I'm pretty sure there will be a similar change for European teams too. Especially if we get to the not nots.

Yes Leicester did go into administration and benefited from it. But the FA quickly changed the rules to counter that.

If the rules don't change. I still think we'll see a very different team next season though.

The pozzo's completely overhauled their teams last from last season and I think we'll be no exception.
[quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]c'wood[/bold] wrote: A rather confused, jealous and slightly xenophobic ramble from Holloway. "I'm not having a go" "Zola is fantastic" etc. "....but if we don't stop it they will do really well" was the gist of it. Add in "my local boys" (well one of them is Welsh but that's appears to be the same thing!) and you see how confused it is. I wonder if he really thinks it is wrong for us have a fantastic foreign player like Vydra but that it's OK for Southampton to bid and possibly buy the same fantastic and foreign Vydra? This is the club that built an fantastic ground and then went bankrupt leaving people like St John's Ambulance unpaid. (Leicester are another fine example of this type of club we have to compete with.) Watford never left debts like that, even after ITV Digtial, Vialli etc. We have never had an owner like Forest had who put apparently put in £100m before he died either. We are simply trying to compete as best we can against bigger budgets and with clubs who have acted a lot less scrupulously. Oh, and we had two academy players start last night plus one on the bench. That suggests we are not killing English talent. We are merely making it better by surrounding the best of it with great foreign talent that raises the overall level. Maybe it's all a smokescreen to cover for the rather obviously pre-planned rota to kick Chalobah out of the match. Managers really do not talk straight do they?[/p][/quote]Yes, agreed. I am not necessarily they are right but the rules are the same for everyone. Why didn't he exploit them as well then? We may have the advantage that it only needs one phone call instead of several but that's all. It annoys me when clubs get taken over by completely out of touch mega-rich mafia men or oil sheikhs who either want to hide money or want clubs as trophies, who don't care one jot about running it like a business and can lose a £100 million without even blinking, giving them a gob-smackingly unfair advantage and we can't field an extra 4 loan players than Holloway![/p][/quote]There are now rules in place to stop clubs losing millions of pounds. It's called FFP. I don't have a problem with the Holloway rant, I think it's a reasonable argument. There are rules in place to prevent English clubs having too many loan players from another English club. I'm pretty sure there will be a similar change for European teams too. Especially if we get to the not nots. Yes Leicester did go into administration and benefited from it. But the FA quickly changed the rules to counter that. If the rules don't change. I still think we'll see a very different team next season though. The pozzo's completely overhauled their teams last from last season and I think we'll be no exception. Yardy
  • Score: 0

1:06am Sun 10 Feb 13

Bush Hornet says...

Well I didn't bother listening to this audio cos he's too annoying, but was subjected to his ill-informed drivel from the football league show and...what a thick idiot. Ignorant little showman. No class. So glad he's not our manager.
Well I didn't bother listening to this audio cos he's too annoying, but was subjected to his ill-informed drivel from the football league show and...what a thick idiot. Ignorant little showman. No class. So glad he's not our manager. Bush Hornet
  • Score: 0

1:12am Sun 10 Feb 13

Jamie McDougall says...

http://www.watfordob
server.co.uk/yoursay
/features/10218519.A
re_you_sure_Mr_Hollo
way_/

read my response to Holloway's comments on my blog.
http://www.watfordob server.co.uk/yoursay /features/10218519.A re_you_sure_Mr_Hollo way_/ read my response to Holloway's comments on my blog. Jamie McDougall
  • Score: 0

9:30am Sun 10 Feb 13

Travelling Hornet says...

Think his point was that we could field a team of players from one club, he mentioned Barcelona befriending Palace and playing their reserves .... as if!
No one has pointed out that Cardiff field a side made up entirely of players from one club.........Watford !
Think his point was that we could field a team of players from one club, he mentioned Barcelona befriending Palace and playing their reserves .... as if! No one has pointed out that Cardiff field a side made up entirely of players from one club.........Watford ! Travelling Hornet
  • Score: 0

9:45am Sun 10 Feb 13

northofwatfordpete says...

Who instructed Palace to 'stop' Chalobah? Surely not Ian! I can still remember a few years back watching his Leicester side kick us off the park at Vicarage Road. I think Ian has finally realised that we are genuine promotion candidates and is getting his excuses out early. Funny man from Bristol - only when he is winning.
Who instructed Palace to 'stop' Chalobah? Surely not Ian! I can still remember a few years back watching his Leicester side kick us off the park at Vicarage Road. I think Ian has finally realised that we are genuine promotion candidates and is getting his excuses out early. Funny man from Bristol - only when he is winning. northofwatfordpete
  • Score: 0

11:13am Sun 10 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Holly68 wrote:
Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
I have just started salivating!!
Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.
I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....
Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.
Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.
Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?
Come on that'd be boring! Anyway I wouldn't know which one of your opinions I was agreeing or disagreeing to!
I did actually concur with one of your posts earlier, you must of missed it.
And mate, half of me is banter! The other half, I'm still working out!
Ok, fair enough, as long as it's banter and nothing else. I sailed close to wind with you once but, I would point out, I regretted it BEFORE the WO removed it - the first time it's happened to me - didn't know whether to be proud or ashamed.

There you are, plenty of ammunition there! Anyway, Soccer Saturday now so you'll have a free run for an hour.....
There you go again! Is your fav record rambling rose? Hee hee hee
No. My musical tastes change depending on the mood I am in. When I am responding to your posts it is usually "The Road to Hell" by Chris Rea.
[quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Holly68[/bold] wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !![/p][/quote]I have just started salivating!![/p][/quote]Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.[/p][/quote]I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....[/p][/quote]Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.[/p][/quote]Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.[/p][/quote]Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?[/p][/quote]Come on that'd be boring! Anyway I wouldn't know which one of your opinions I was agreeing or disagreeing to! I did actually concur with one of your posts earlier, you must of missed it. And mate, half of me is banter! The other half, I'm still working out![/p][/quote]Ok, fair enough, as long as it's banter and nothing else. I sailed close to wind with you once but, I would point out, I regretted it BEFORE the WO removed it - the first time it's happened to me - didn't know whether to be proud or ashamed. There you are, plenty of ammunition there! Anyway, Soccer Saturday now so you'll have a free run for an hour.....[/p][/quote]There you go again! Is your fav record rambling rose? Hee hee hee[/p][/quote]No. My musical tastes change depending on the mood I am in. When I am responding to your posts it is usually "The Road to Hell" by Chris Rea. Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

11:18am Sun 10 Feb 13

Poppet Bear says...

I used to have a lot of time for I.H. but not any longer. He is just a whining, whingeing git. If a money rich Arab or Russian gave him millions of pounds to spend, he wouldn't complain, would he ? All that has happened at Watford is we have loaned the players instead of being given the money to buy them. No difference at all. Watford up, Palace out the top six.
I used to have a lot of time for I.H. but not any longer. He is just a whining, whingeing git. If a money rich Arab or Russian gave him millions of pounds to spend, he wouldn't complain, would he ? All that has happened at Watford is we have loaned the players instead of being given the money to buy them. No difference at all. Watford up, Palace out the top six. Poppet Bear
  • Score: 0

11:27am Sun 10 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

Poppet Bear wrote:
I used to have a lot of time for I.H. but not any longer. He is just a whining, whingeing git. If a money rich Arab or Russian gave him millions of pounds to spend, he wouldn't complain, would he ? All that has happened at Watford is we have loaned the players instead of being given the money to buy them. No difference at all. Watford up, Palace out the top six.
Precisely. All clubs must manage their affairs within the rules. We have done just that, unlike Crystal Palace when they were docked points for going into administration. I don't like this constant reference to "loopholes" either - there are no loopholes, their are rules, and we have complied with them.
[quote][p][bold]Poppet Bear[/bold] wrote: I used to have a lot of time for I.H. but not any longer. He is just a whining, whingeing git. If a money rich Arab or Russian gave him millions of pounds to spend, he wouldn't complain, would he ? All that has happened at Watford is we have loaned the players instead of being given the money to buy them. No difference at all. Watford up, Palace out the top six.[/p][/quote]Precisely. All clubs must manage their affairs within the rules. We have done just that, unlike Crystal Palace when they were docked points for going into administration. I don't like this constant reference to "loopholes" either - there are no loopholes, their are rules, and we have complied with them. Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

12:49pm Sun 10 Feb 13

lutondown says...

Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Poppet Bear wrote:
I used to have a lot of time for I.H. but not any longer. He is just a whining, whingeing git. If a money rich Arab or Russian gave him millions of pounds to spend, he wouldn't complain, would he ? All that has happened at Watford is we have loaned the players instead of being given the money to buy them. No difference at all. Watford up, Palace out the top six.
Precisely. All clubs must manage their affairs within the rules. We have done just that, unlike Crystal Palace when they were docked points for going into administration. I don't like this constant reference to "loopholes" either - there are no loopholes, their are rules, and we have complied with them.
Yep dead right, anything that's seen as a beneficial aid is then a loophole? We are with in the rules, we are no less immoral than Palace and in fact have secured the future of several more homegrown players than they have this season.
I think our coach oozes class where the unfunny Hollowhead is just plain crass.
[quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Poppet Bear[/bold] wrote: I used to have a lot of time for I.H. but not any longer. He is just a whining, whingeing git. If a money rich Arab or Russian gave him millions of pounds to spend, he wouldn't complain, would he ? All that has happened at Watford is we have loaned the players instead of being given the money to buy them. No difference at all. Watford up, Palace out the top six.[/p][/quote]Precisely. All clubs must manage their affairs within the rules. We have done just that, unlike Crystal Palace when they were docked points for going into administration. I don't like this constant reference to "loopholes" either - there are no loopholes, their are rules, and we have complied with them.[/p][/quote]Yep dead right, anything that's seen as a beneficial aid is then a loophole? We are with in the rules, we are no less immoral than Palace and in fact have secured the future of several more homegrown players than they have this season. I think our coach oozes class where the unfunny Hollowhead is just plain crass. lutondown
  • Score: 0

12:50pm Sun 10 Feb 13

lutondown says...

Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Holly68 wrote:
Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
I have just started salivating!!
Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.
I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....
Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.
Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.
Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?
Come on that'd be boring! Anyway I wouldn't know which one of your opinions I was agreeing or disagreeing to!
I did actually concur with one of your posts earlier, you must of missed it.
And mate, half of me is banter! The other half, I'm still working out!
Ok, fair enough, as long as it's banter and nothing else. I sailed close to wind with you once but, I would point out, I regretted it BEFORE the WO removed it - the first time it's happened to me - didn't know whether to be proud or ashamed.

There you are, plenty of ammunition there! Anyway, Soccer Saturday now so you'll have a free run for an hour.....
There you go again! Is your fav record rambling rose? Hee hee hee
No. My musical tastes change depending on the mood I am in. When I am responding to your posts it is usually "The Road to Hell" by Chris Rea.
Well I've yet to take you to the dark side of the moon, get your space helmet ready for the trip!
[quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Holly68[/bold] wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !![/p][/quote]I have just started salivating!![/p][/quote]Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.[/p][/quote]I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....[/p][/quote]Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.[/p][/quote]Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.[/p][/quote]Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?[/p][/quote]Come on that'd be boring! Anyway I wouldn't know which one of your opinions I was agreeing or disagreeing to! I did actually concur with one of your posts earlier, you must of missed it. And mate, half of me is banter! The other half, I'm still working out![/p][/quote]Ok, fair enough, as long as it's banter and nothing else. I sailed close to wind with you once but, I would point out, I regretted it BEFORE the WO removed it - the first time it's happened to me - didn't know whether to be proud or ashamed. There you are, plenty of ammunition there! Anyway, Soccer Saturday now so you'll have a free run for an hour.....[/p][/quote]There you go again! Is your fav record rambling rose? Hee hee hee[/p][/quote]No. My musical tastes change depending on the mood I am in. When I am responding to your posts it is usually "The Road to Hell" by Chris Rea.[/p][/quote]Well I've yet to take you to the dark side of the moon, get your space helmet ready for the trip! lutondown
  • Score: 0

1:21pm Sun 10 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Holly68 wrote:
Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
I have just started salivating!!
Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.
I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....
Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.
Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.
Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?
Come on that'd be boring! Anyway I wouldn't know which one of your opinions I was agreeing or disagreeing to!
I did actually concur with one of your posts earlier, you must of missed it.
And mate, half of me is banter! The other half, I'm still working out!
Ok, fair enough, as long as it's banter and nothing else. I sailed close to wind with you once but, I would point out, I regretted it BEFORE the WO removed it - the first time it's happened to me - didn't know whether to be proud or ashamed.

There you are, plenty of ammunition there! Anyway, Soccer Saturday now so you'll have a free run for an hour.....
There you go again! Is your fav record rambling rose? Hee hee hee
No. My musical tastes change depending on the mood I am in. When I am responding to your posts it is usually "The Road to Hell" by Chris Rea.
Well I've yet to take you to the dark side of the moon, get your space helmet ready for the trip!
Very cryptic, very poetical. Perhaps I have been understimating you. Rambling Rose, Dark Side of the Moon? You are also a lot older than I thought you were. I thought you were a school kid judging by your posts...
[quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Holly68[/bold] wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !![/p][/quote]I have just started salivating!![/p][/quote]Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.[/p][/quote]I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....[/p][/quote]Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.[/p][/quote]Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.[/p][/quote]Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?[/p][/quote]Come on that'd be boring! Anyway I wouldn't know which one of your opinions I was agreeing or disagreeing to! I did actually concur with one of your posts earlier, you must of missed it. And mate, half of me is banter! The other half, I'm still working out![/p][/quote]Ok, fair enough, as long as it's banter and nothing else. I sailed close to wind with you once but, I would point out, I regretted it BEFORE the WO removed it - the first time it's happened to me - didn't know whether to be proud or ashamed. There you are, plenty of ammunition there! Anyway, Soccer Saturday now so you'll have a free run for an hour.....[/p][/quote]There you go again! Is your fav record rambling rose? Hee hee hee[/p][/quote]No. My musical tastes change depending on the mood I am in. When I am responding to your posts it is usually "The Road to Hell" by Chris Rea.[/p][/quote]Well I've yet to take you to the dark side of the moon, get your space helmet ready for the trip![/p][/quote]Very cryptic, very poetical. Perhaps I have been understimating you. Rambling Rose, Dark Side of the Moon? You are also a lot older than I thought you were. I thought you were a school kid judging by your posts... Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

2:50pm Sun 10 Feb 13

Watford-James says...

What beggars belief is Holloway's comment that Ferguson should be using his political weight to make sure that we don't keep growing. Presumably it would be unethical for a smaller club to upset the balance of power? I could have imagined that rubbish coming from someone with cash at stake in the prem's top 6, but he's effectively demanding that Palace never have any opportunity to grow unless it's through cash. What a load of rubbish!
What beggars belief is Holloway's comment that Ferguson should be using his political weight to make sure that we don't keep growing. Presumably it would be unethical for a smaller club to upset the balance of power? I could have imagined that rubbish coming from someone with cash at stake in the prem's top 6, but he's effectively demanding that Palace never have any opportunity to grow unless it's through cash. What a load of rubbish! Watford-James
  • Score: 0

2:53pm Sun 10 Feb 13

JohnnyHornet says...

How many more times do we have to listen to this sh1te from the likes of Holloway, FFS move on it's old news, it's boring and there is nothing wrong with it. What about the Zaha issue, now that's more cheating as it circumvents the pre-contract agreement for a player who is under contract for longer than the end of the season, so morally Holloway get your own house in order first.


Football League loan rules

Maximum of five loan players (standard, emergency or youth) in a matchday squad
Maximum of four players under 23 and four over 23 on a standard loan in one season
Maximum of two players over 23 from the same club on a standard loan
Players signed on loan deals from abroad (including Scotland) are registered as transfers, not loans
How many more times do we have to listen to this sh1te from the likes of Holloway, FFS move on it's old news, it's boring and there is nothing wrong with it. What about the Zaha issue, now that's more cheating as it circumvents the pre-contract agreement for a player who is under contract for longer than the end of the season, so morally Holloway get your own house in order first. Football League loan rules Maximum of five loan players (standard, emergency or youth) in a matchday squad Maximum of four players under 23 and four over 23 on a standard loan in one season Maximum of two players over 23 from the same club on a standard loan Players signed on loan deals from abroad (including Scotland) are registered as transfers, not loans JohnnyHornet
  • Score: 0

3:02pm Sun 10 Feb 13

JohnnyHornet says...

Holly68 wrote:
Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
He'd need sectioning if that happened.
[quote][p][bold]Holly68[/bold] wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !![/p][/quote]He'd need sectioning if that happened. JohnnyHornet
  • Score: 0

3:11pm Sun 10 Feb 13

JohnnyHornet says...

Only 2 Ross Jenkins wrote:
On one hand he critisizes the fact we can have all these 'loans'. Then he says he's going to get his chairman to do the same thing. If he has only just realised what the rules are he can't be very bright. But by his own admission, he's from Bristol so I guess there is your answer.
Not having a go at Ross....but this is where the problem lies...THEY ARE NOT LOANS, they are 1 year international transfers, no loophole, no dodgy dealings all above board and legit.
[quote][p][bold]Only 2 Ross Jenkins[/bold] wrote: On one hand he critisizes the fact we can have all these 'loans'. Then he says he's going to get his chairman to do the same thing. If he has only just realised what the rules are he can't be very bright. But by his own admission, he's from Bristol so I guess there is your answer.[/p][/quote]Not having a go at Ross....but this is where the problem lies...THEY ARE NOT LOANS, they are 1 year international transfers, no loophole, no dodgy dealings all above board and legit. JohnnyHornet
  • Score: 0

3:26pm Sun 10 Feb 13

lutondown says...

Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Holly68 wrote:
Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
I have just started salivating!!
Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.
I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....
Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.
Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.
Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?
Come on that'd be boring! Anyway I wouldn't know which one of your opinions I was agreeing or disagreeing to!
I did actually concur with one of your posts earlier, you must of missed it.
And mate, half of me is banter! The other half, I'm still working out!
Ok, fair enough, as long as it's banter and nothing else. I sailed close to wind with you once but, I would point out, I regretted it BEFORE the WO removed it - the first time it's happened to me - didn't know whether to be proud or ashamed.

There you are, plenty of ammunition there! Anyway, Soccer Saturday now so you'll have a free run for an hour.....
There you go again! Is your fav record rambling rose? Hee hee hee
No. My musical tastes change depending on the mood I am in. When I am responding to your posts it is usually "The Road to Hell" by Chris Rea.
Well I've yet to take you to the dark side of the moon, get your space helmet ready for the trip!
Very cryptic, very poetical. Perhaps I have been understimating you. Rambling Rose, Dark Side of the Moon? You are also a lot older than I thought you were. I thought you were a school kid judging by your posts...
And I thought you was president of Saga. Oh you are and very sanctimonious. Truce over
[quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Holly68[/bold] wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !![/p][/quote]I have just started salivating!![/p][/quote]Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.[/p][/quote]I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....[/p][/quote]Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.[/p][/quote]Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.[/p][/quote]Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?[/p][/quote]Come on that'd be boring! Anyway I wouldn't know which one of your opinions I was agreeing or disagreeing to! I did actually concur with one of your posts earlier, you must of missed it. And mate, half of me is banter! The other half, I'm still working out![/p][/quote]Ok, fair enough, as long as it's banter and nothing else. I sailed close to wind with you once but, I would point out, I regretted it BEFORE the WO removed it - the first time it's happened to me - didn't know whether to be proud or ashamed. There you are, plenty of ammunition there! Anyway, Soccer Saturday now so you'll have a free run for an hour.....[/p][/quote]There you go again! Is your fav record rambling rose? Hee hee hee[/p][/quote]No. My musical tastes change depending on the mood I am in. When I am responding to your posts it is usually "The Road to Hell" by Chris Rea.[/p][/quote]Well I've yet to take you to the dark side of the moon, get your space helmet ready for the trip![/p][/quote]Very cryptic, very poetical. Perhaps I have been understimating you. Rambling Rose, Dark Side of the Moon? You are also a lot older than I thought you were. I thought you were a school kid judging by your posts...[/p][/quote]And I thought you was president of Saga. Oh you are and very sanctimonious. Truce over lutondown
  • Score: 0

4:50pm Sun 10 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Holly68 wrote:
Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !!
I have just started salivating!!
Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.
I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....
Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.
Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.
Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?
Come on that'd be boring! Anyway I wouldn't know which one of your opinions I was agreeing or disagreeing to!
I did actually concur with one of your posts earlier, you must of missed it.
And mate, half of me is banter! The other half, I'm still working out!
Ok, fair enough, as long as it's banter and nothing else. I sailed close to wind with you once but, I would point out, I regretted it BEFORE the WO removed it - the first time it's happened to me - didn't know whether to be proud or ashamed.

There you are, plenty of ammunition there! Anyway, Soccer Saturday now so you'll have a free run for an hour.....
There you go again! Is your fav record rambling rose? Hee hee hee
No. My musical tastes change depending on the mood I am in. When I am responding to your posts it is usually "The Road to Hell" by Chris Rea.
Well I've yet to take you to the dark side of the moon, get your space helmet ready for the trip!
Very cryptic, very poetical. Perhaps I have been understimating you. Rambling Rose, Dark Side of the Moon? You are also a lot older than I thought you were. I thought you were a school kid judging by your posts...
And I thought you was president of Saga. Oh you are and very sanctimonious. Truce over
Oh come on! I was only just getting into it! Don't get like that. I thought you wanted to carry this on. I didn't even know there was a truce. Ok, I promise I won't be so rude in the future.
[quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Holly68[/bold] wrote: Imagine the fuss if we have to play him again in Play Offs or if we went up !![/p][/quote]I have just started salivating!![/p][/quote]Knew it ESH has rabies, explains his posts.[/p][/quote]I wondered when you'd perk up again. The chip's still there I notice....[/p][/quote]Just for you my old Grammar checker, just for you.[/p][/quote]Oh and I'm always quite perky thank you.[/p][/quote]Glad to hear it. We have something in common then. I know it's amusing but why don't we stop this childish stuff and concentrate on what should be our mutual interest?[/p][/quote]Come on that'd be boring! Anyway I wouldn't know which one of your opinions I was agreeing or disagreeing to! I did actually concur with one of your posts earlier, you must of missed it. And mate, half of me is banter! The other half, I'm still working out![/p][/quote]Ok, fair enough, as long as it's banter and nothing else. I sailed close to wind with you once but, I would point out, I regretted it BEFORE the WO removed it - the first time it's happened to me - didn't know whether to be proud or ashamed. There you are, plenty of ammunition there! Anyway, Soccer Saturday now so you'll have a free run for an hour.....[/p][/quote]There you go again! Is your fav record rambling rose? Hee hee hee[/p][/quote]No. My musical tastes change depending on the mood I am in. When I am responding to your posts it is usually "The Road to Hell" by Chris Rea.[/p][/quote]Well I've yet to take you to the dark side of the moon, get your space helmet ready for the trip![/p][/quote]Very cryptic, very poetical. Perhaps I have been understimating you. Rambling Rose, Dark Side of the Moon? You are also a lot older than I thought you were. I thought you were a school kid judging by your posts...[/p][/quote]And I thought you was president of Saga. Oh you are and very sanctimonious. Truce over[/p][/quote]Oh come on! I was only just getting into it! Don't get like that. I thought you wanted to carry this on. I didn't even know there was a truce. Ok, I promise I won't be so rude in the future. Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

5:38pm Sun 10 Feb 13

llloydwithathirdl says...

Compare this clown's comments to Malky's on sky.

Holloway has admittedly only just figured out what's going on (despite us being one of his biggest rivals), still doesn't actually understand it, moans like a drunk tramp anyway, then fields his own side full of loan players because he's a ****.

In comparison Malky was not only extremely knowledgable about what we are doing (even knew how much Udinese paid for Vydra), he said there is nothing wrong with it, then went on to talk about how good we are.
Compare this clown's comments to Malky's on sky. Holloway has admittedly only just figured out what's going on (despite us being one of his biggest rivals), still doesn't actually understand it, moans like a drunk tramp anyway, then fields his own side full of loan players because he's a ****. In comparison Malky was not only extremely knowledgable about what we are doing (even knew how much Udinese paid for Vydra), he said there is nothing wrong with it, then went on to talk about how good we are. llloydwithathirdl
  • Score: 0

5:43pm Sun 10 Feb 13

lutondown says...

llloydwithathirdl wrote:
Compare this clown's comments to Malky's on sky.

Holloway has admittedly only just figured out what's going on (despite us being one of his biggest rivals), still doesn't actually understand it, moans like a drunk tramp anyway, then fields his own side full of loan players because he's a ****.

In comparison Malky was not only extremely knowledgable about what we are doing (even knew how much Udinese paid for Vydra), he said there is nothing wrong with it, then went on to talk about how good we are.
That's nice, still a pillaging pie eater.
Probably knows what Pozzo paid for Vydra after making a silly bid for him!
[quote][p][bold]llloydwithathirdl[/bold] wrote: Compare this clown's comments to Malky's on sky. Holloway has admittedly only just figured out what's going on (despite us being one of his biggest rivals), still doesn't actually understand it, moans like a drunk tramp anyway, then fields his own side full of loan players because he's a ****. In comparison Malky was not only extremely knowledgable about what we are doing (even knew how much Udinese paid for Vydra), he said there is nothing wrong with it, then went on to talk about how good we are.[/p][/quote]That's nice, still a pillaging pie eater. Probably knows what Pozzo paid for Vydra after making a silly bid for him! lutondown
  • Score: 0

5:49pm Sun 10 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

lutondown wrote:
llloydwithathirdl wrote:
Compare this clown's comments to Malky's on sky.

Holloway has admittedly only just figured out what's going on (despite us being one of his biggest rivals), still doesn't actually understand it, moans like a drunk tramp anyway, then fields his own side full of loan players because he's a ****.

In comparison Malky was not only extremely knowledgable about what we are doing (even knew how much Udinese paid for Vydra), he said there is nothing wrong with it, then went on to talk about how good we are.
That's nice, still a pillaging pie eater.
Probably knows what Pozzo paid for Vydra after making a silly bid for him!
I agree with you LD...
[quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]llloydwithathirdl[/bold] wrote: Compare this clown's comments to Malky's on sky. Holloway has admittedly only just figured out what's going on (despite us being one of his biggest rivals), still doesn't actually understand it, moans like a drunk tramp anyway, then fields his own side full of loan players because he's a ****. In comparison Malky was not only extremely knowledgable about what we are doing (even knew how much Udinese paid for Vydra), he said there is nothing wrong with it, then went on to talk about how good we are.[/p][/quote]That's nice, still a pillaging pie eater. Probably knows what Pozzo paid for Vydra after making a silly bid for him![/p][/quote]I agree with you LD... Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

5:55pm Sun 10 Feb 13

WOReader says...

Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford.

I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.
Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford. I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change. WOReader
  • Score: 0

6:03pm Sun 10 Feb 13

lutondown says...

WOReader wrote:
Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford.

I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.
Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking
[quote][p][bold]WOReader[/bold] wrote: Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford. I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.[/p][/quote]Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking lutondown
  • Score: 0

6:05pm Sun 10 Feb 13

llloydwithathirdl says...

There's a bit of Keegan's "I'd love it if we'd beat em" about it all. He's clearly rattled because he's worried we're gonna beat him to second place.

You wouldn't see GFZ commenting on another club like that. No class. No brains.
There's a bit of Keegan's "I'd love it if we'd beat em" about it all. He's clearly rattled because he's worried we're gonna beat him to second place. You wouldn't see GFZ commenting on another club like that. No class. No brains. llloydwithathirdl
  • Score: 0

6:11pm Sun 10 Feb 13

lutondown says...

llloydwithathirdl wrote:
There's a bit of Keegan's "I'd love it if we'd beat em" about it all. He's clearly rattled because he's worried we're gonna beat him to second place.

You wouldn't see GFZ commenting on another club like that. No class. No brains.
Spot on. And very unfunny wannabe comedian.
A male appendage
[quote][p][bold]llloydwithathirdl[/bold] wrote: There's a bit of Keegan's "I'd love it if we'd beat em" about it all. He's clearly rattled because he's worried we're gonna beat him to second place. You wouldn't see GFZ commenting on another club like that. No class. No brains.[/p][/quote]Spot on. And very unfunny wannabe comedian. A male appendage lutondown
  • Score: 0

6:16pm Sun 10 Feb 13

Ronny oh Ronny Ronny says...

lutondown wrote:
WOReader wrote:
Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford.

I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.
Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking
Who decides open market value?? A player is only worth how much someone will pay for him. Don't think that's an issue at all.
[quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WOReader[/bold] wrote: Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford. I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.[/p][/quote]Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking[/p][/quote]Who decides open market value?? A player is only worth how much someone will pay for him. Don't think that's an issue at all. Ronny oh Ronny Ronny
  • Score: 0

6:31pm Sun 10 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

Ronny oh Ronny Ronny wrote:
lutondown wrote:
WOReader wrote:
Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford.

I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.
Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking
Who decides open market value?? A player is only worth how much someone will pay for him. Don't think that's an issue at all.
I haven't heard of this eother but I suspect it is something to do with this.

The only issue is the tax payable and tax is only payable on profits. There is profit at the selling end, and then profit at the UK end at some time in the future. So whilst I don't think the value the Pozzos put on players matters in isolation, it is the tax implications in Italy (say) and the UK that they would consider before putting the value on the player(s), or to be more specific, the tax differential. Since I don't know what the tas situation is in Italy, I wouldn't know whether it is better to over value or under value them.
[quote][p][bold]Ronny oh Ronny Ronny[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WOReader[/bold] wrote: Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford. I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.[/p][/quote]Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking[/p][/quote]Who decides open market value?? A player is only worth how much someone will pay for him. Don't think that's an issue at all.[/p][/quote]I haven't heard of this eother but I suspect it is something to do with this. The only issue is the tax payable and tax is only payable on profits. There is profit at the selling end, and then profit at the UK end at some time in the future. So whilst I don't think the value the Pozzos put on players matters in isolation, it is the tax implications in Italy (say) and the UK that they would consider before putting the value on the player(s), or to be more specific, the tax differential. Since I don't know what the tas situation is in Italy, I wouldn't know whether it is better to over value or under value them. Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

8:21pm Sun 10 Feb 13

lutondown says...

Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Ronny oh Ronny Ronny wrote:
lutondown wrote:
WOReader wrote:
Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford.

I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.
Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking
Who decides open market value?? A player is only worth how much someone will pay for him. Don't think that's an issue at all.
I haven't heard of this eother but I suspect it is something to do with this.

The only issue is the tax payable and tax is only payable on profits. There is profit at the selling end, and then profit at the UK end at some time in the future. So whilst I don't think the value the Pozzos put on players matters in isolation, it is the tax implications in Italy (say) and the UK that they would consider before putting the value on the player(s), or to be more specific, the tax differential. Since I don't know what the tas situation is in Italy, I wouldn't know whether it is better to over value or under value them.
The tas situation is unknown to me too ESH, but I thank you for your in depth monologue, you work better than Ovaltine!
And I'm sure as king of Grammar and spelling you did mean tax!!!
;-)
[quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ronny oh Ronny Ronny[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WOReader[/bold] wrote: Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford. I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.[/p][/quote]Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking[/p][/quote]Who decides open market value?? A player is only worth how much someone will pay for him. Don't think that's an issue at all.[/p][/quote]I haven't heard of this eother but I suspect it is something to do with this. The only issue is the tax payable and tax is only payable on profits. There is profit at the selling end, and then profit at the UK end at some time in the future. So whilst I don't think the value the Pozzos put on players matters in isolation, it is the tax implications in Italy (say) and the UK that they would consider before putting the value on the player(s), or to be more specific, the tax differential. Since I don't know what the tas situation is in Italy, I wouldn't know whether it is better to over value or under value them.[/p][/quote]The tas situation is unknown to me too ESH, but I thank you for your in depth monologue, you work better than Ovaltine! And I'm sure as king of Grammar and spelling you did mean tax!!! ;-) lutondown
  • Score: 0

9:01pm Sun 10 Feb 13

bushey tales says...

It IS a loophole, whether we choose to acknowledge the fact or not. Cleverly spotted by Duxbury (or whoever took the Business Plan to the Pozzo's in the first place) and brilliantly exploited. The loophole will be closed at a point, just as you'd hope the cynical Zaha ploy of 'selling and loaning back' (and what's to stop United loaning him back to Palace for the whole of next season as well?) will also be closed. Holloway and the others are clearly jealous as hell, but I do worry that the potential looming points deduction could be used as a strategic device to clip our wings. Hopefully not, but we'll hear very soon.
It IS a loophole, whether we choose to acknowledge the fact or not. Cleverly spotted by Duxbury (or whoever took the Business Plan to the Pozzo's in the first place) and brilliantly exploited. The loophole will be closed at a point, just as you'd hope the cynical Zaha ploy of 'selling and loaning back' (and what's to stop United loaning him back to Palace for the whole of next season as well?) will also be closed. Holloway and the others are clearly jealous as hell, but I do worry that the potential looming points deduction could be used as a strategic device to clip our wings. Hopefully not, but we'll hear very soon. bushey tales
  • Score: 0

9:05pm Sun 10 Feb 13

lutondown says...

bushey tales wrote:
It IS a loophole, whether we choose to acknowledge the fact or not. Cleverly spotted by Duxbury (or whoever took the Business Plan to the Pozzo's in the first place) and brilliantly exploited. The loophole will be closed at a point, just as you'd hope the cynical Zaha ploy of 'selling and loaning back' (and what's to stop United loaning him back to Palace for the whole of next season as well?) will also be closed. Holloway and the others are clearly jealous as hell, but I do worry that the potential looming points deduction could be used as a strategic device to clip our wings. Hopefully not, but we'll hear very soon.
How can it be a loop hole if it legit? I imagine your rubbing your hands at the prospect of a points deduction. Happily, I don't think it will happen and if it does it's because of your fallen hellish angel from Stanmore.
[quote][p][bold]bushey tales[/bold] wrote: It IS a loophole, whether we choose to acknowledge the fact or not. Cleverly spotted by Duxbury (or whoever took the Business Plan to the Pozzo's in the first place) and brilliantly exploited. The loophole will be closed at a point, just as you'd hope the cynical Zaha ploy of 'selling and loaning back' (and what's to stop United loaning him back to Palace for the whole of next season as well?) will also be closed. Holloway and the others are clearly jealous as hell, but I do worry that the potential looming points deduction could be used as a strategic device to clip our wings. Hopefully not, but we'll hear very soon.[/p][/quote]How can it be a loop hole if it legit? I imagine your rubbing your hands at the prospect of a points deduction. Happily, I don't think it will happen and if it does it's because of your fallen hellish angel from Stanmore. lutondown
  • Score: 0

10:43pm Sun 10 Feb 13

gilesy97 says...

It's a loophole as much as the Starbucks loophole in not paying tax ( or all their tax) in this country. Within the law ,but upsetting everyone that doesn't benefit from it. Hopefully this loophole will be closed by next season , as I certainly don't want to see other clubs " palling up " with foreign clubs and loaning 11 players each etc.Let's be honest , if we do go up .it'll be know "outside of Watford " as tainted ..just like Blackburn buying the Premiership title a few years back...but I suppose at least their players were signed on for Blackburn.:) Still most Watford fans won't care , as winning is more important , than how it actually is achieved ..like most football fans .The Zaha loophole should be closed too...and of course Butland at Birmingham/Stoke ..so Holloway isn't the only manager doing it !!!
It's a loophole as much as the Starbucks loophole in not paying tax ( or all their tax) in this country. Within the law ,but upsetting everyone that doesn't benefit from it. Hopefully this loophole will be closed by next season , as I certainly don't want to see other clubs " palling up " with foreign clubs and loaning 11 players each etc.Let's be honest , if we do go up .it'll be know "outside of Watford " as tainted ..just like Blackburn buying the Premiership title a few years back...but I suppose at least their players were signed on for Blackburn.:) Still most Watford fans won't care , as winning is more important , than how it actually is achieved ..like most football fans .The Zaha loophole should be closed too...and of course Butland at Birmingham/Stoke ..so Holloway isn't the only manager doing it !!! gilesy97
  • Score: 0

11:12pm Sun 10 Feb 13

lutondown says...

gilesy97 wrote:
It's a loophole as much as the Starbucks loophole in not paying tax ( or all their tax) in this country. Within the law ,but upsetting everyone that doesn't benefit from it. Hopefully this loophole will be closed by next season , as I certainly don't want to see other clubs " palling up " with foreign clubs and loaning 11 players each etc.Let's be honest , if we do go up .it'll be know "outside of Watford " as tainted ..just like Blackburn buying the Premiership title a few years back...but I suppose at least their players were signed on for Blackburn.:) Still most Watford fans won't care , as winning is more important , than how it actually is achieved ..like most football fans .The Zaha loophole should be closed too...and of course Butland at Birmingham/Stoke ..so Holloway isn't the only manager doing it !!!
Sorry, rubbish. Everyone buys their success to some degree. You pinpoint Blackburn, whose chairman Jack Walker a life long fan spent money realising his dream, yet omit Man City, Chelsea etc both bought by foreign wealth.
So why should smaller clubs like us be penalised when the so called bigger clubs can do as they please?
If we were languishing near the bottom of the league no one would take issue, so in my eyes this is all about envy.
I would pose to you, what would you rather have manage your club a Bas or a Pozzo? This our chance to secure our clubs immediate future and I for one embrace it, I don't think we had a future had the Italians not rescued us.
I would say, we will have to put up from a lot of sniping from other clubs as we progress, but lets not swell their numbers with our own so called fans.
[quote][p][bold]gilesy97[/bold] wrote: It's a loophole as much as the Starbucks loophole in not paying tax ( or all their tax) in this country. Within the law ,but upsetting everyone that doesn't benefit from it. Hopefully this loophole will be closed by next season , as I certainly don't want to see other clubs " palling up " with foreign clubs and loaning 11 players each etc.Let's be honest , if we do go up .it'll be know "outside of Watford " as tainted ..just like Blackburn buying the Premiership title a few years back...but I suppose at least their players were signed on for Blackburn.:) Still most Watford fans won't care , as winning is more important , than how it actually is achieved ..like most football fans .The Zaha loophole should be closed too...and of course Butland at Birmingham/Stoke ..so Holloway isn't the only manager doing it !!![/p][/quote]Sorry, rubbish. Everyone buys their success to some degree. You pinpoint Blackburn, whose chairman Jack Walker a life long fan spent money realising his dream, yet omit Man City, Chelsea etc both bought by foreign wealth. So why should smaller clubs like us be penalised when the so called bigger clubs can do as they please? If we were languishing near the bottom of the league no one would take issue, so in my eyes this is all about envy. I would pose to you, what would you rather have manage your club a Bas or a Pozzo? This our chance to secure our clubs immediate future and I for one embrace it, I don't think we had a future had the Italians not rescued us. I would say, we will have to put up from a lot of sniping from other clubs as we progress, but lets not swell their numbers with our own so called fans. lutondown
  • Score: 0

11:26pm Sun 10 Feb 13

gilesy97 says...

lutondown wrote:
gilesy97 wrote:
It's a loophole as much as the Starbucks loophole in not paying tax ( or all their tax) in this country. Within the law ,but upsetting everyone that doesn't benefit from it. Hopefully this loophole will be closed by next season , as I certainly don't want to see other clubs " palling up " with foreign clubs and loaning 11 players each etc.Let's be honest , if we do go up .it'll be know "outside of Watford " as tainted ..just like Blackburn buying the Premiership title a few years back...but I suppose at least their players were signed on for Blackburn.:) Still most Watford fans won't care , as winning is more important , than how it actually is achieved ..like most football fans .The Zaha loophole should be closed too...and of course Butland at Birmingham/Stoke ..so Holloway isn't the only manager doing it !!!
Sorry, rubbish. Everyone buys their success to some degree. You pinpoint Blackburn, whose chairman Jack Walker a life long fan spent money realising his dream, yet omit Man City, Chelsea etc both bought by foreign wealth.
So why should smaller clubs like us be penalised when the so called bigger clubs can do as they please?
If we were languishing near the bottom of the league no one would take issue, so in my eyes this is all about envy.
I would pose to you, what would you rather have manage your club a Bas or a Pozzo? This our chance to secure our clubs immediate future and I for one embrace it, I don't think we had a future had the Italians not rescued us.
I would say, we will have to put up from a lot of sniping from other clubs as we progress, but lets not swell their numbers with our own so called fans.
Agree with adding Man City & Chelsea to the list.
I put it that if we were languishing at the bottom of the league our attitude to the loans would be different.
We do have a great chance of securing our immediate future and for that we should be grateful....but I do hope we sign these players after this transitional season , and can call the team "ours" as opposed to a loaned bunch from somewhere else. Interesting that we didn't sign "the four" players , after being told by the owners that we would ..especially as one ( to my knowledge) wasn't offered a contract . I would feel a lot happier if we weren't engulfed by another ten loans from Udinese again at the start of next season whatever division we're in.
[quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilesy97[/bold] wrote: It's a loophole as much as the Starbucks loophole in not paying tax ( or all their tax) in this country. Within the law ,but upsetting everyone that doesn't benefit from it. Hopefully this loophole will be closed by next season , as I certainly don't want to see other clubs " palling up " with foreign clubs and loaning 11 players each etc.Let's be honest , if we do go up .it'll be know "outside of Watford " as tainted ..just like Blackburn buying the Premiership title a few years back...but I suppose at least their players were signed on for Blackburn.:) Still most Watford fans won't care , as winning is more important , than how it actually is achieved ..like most football fans .The Zaha loophole should be closed too...and of course Butland at Birmingham/Stoke ..so Holloway isn't the only manager doing it !!![/p][/quote]Sorry, rubbish. Everyone buys their success to some degree. You pinpoint Blackburn, whose chairman Jack Walker a life long fan spent money realising his dream, yet omit Man City, Chelsea etc both bought by foreign wealth. So why should smaller clubs like us be penalised when the so called bigger clubs can do as they please? If we were languishing near the bottom of the league no one would take issue, so in my eyes this is all about envy. I would pose to you, what would you rather have manage your club a Bas or a Pozzo? This our chance to secure our clubs immediate future and I for one embrace it, I don't think we had a future had the Italians not rescued us. I would say, we will have to put up from a lot of sniping from other clubs as we progress, but lets not swell their numbers with our own so called fans.[/p][/quote]Agree with adding Man City & Chelsea to the list. I put it that if we were languishing at the bottom of the league our attitude to the loans would be different. We do have a great chance of securing our immediate future and for that we should be grateful....but I do hope we sign these players after this transitional season , and can call the team "ours" as opposed to a loaned bunch from somewhere else. Interesting that we didn't sign "the four" players , after being told by the owners that we would ..especially as one ( to my knowledge) wasn't offered a contract . I would feel a lot happier if we weren't engulfed by another ten loans from Udinese again at the start of next season whatever division we're in. gilesy97
  • Score: 0

12:03am Mon 11 Feb 13

Bush Hornet says...

gilesy97 wrote:
lutondown wrote:
gilesy97 wrote:
It's a loophole as much as the Starbucks loophole in not paying tax ( or all their tax) in this country. Within the law ,but upsetting everyone that doesn't benefit from it. Hopefully this loophole will be closed by next season , as I certainly don't want to see other clubs " palling up " with foreign clubs and loaning 11 players each etc.Let's be honest , if we do go up .it'll be know "outside of Watford " as tainted ..just like Blackburn buying the Premiership title a few years back...but I suppose at least their players were signed on for Blackburn.:) Still most Watford fans won't care , as winning is more important , than how it actually is achieved ..like most football fans .The Zaha loophole should be closed too...and of course Butland at Birmingham/Stoke ..so Holloway isn't the only manager doing it !!!
Sorry, rubbish. Everyone buys their success to some degree. You pinpoint Blackburn, whose chairman Jack Walker a life long fan spent money realising his dream, yet omit Man City, Chelsea etc both bought by foreign wealth.
So why should smaller clubs like us be penalised when the so called bigger clubs can do as they please?
If we were languishing near the bottom of the league no one would take issue, so in my eyes this is all about envy.
I would pose to you, what would you rather have manage your club a Bas or a Pozzo? This our chance to secure our clubs immediate future and I for one embrace it, I don't think we had a future had the Italians not rescued us.
I would say, we will have to put up from a lot of sniping from other clubs as we progress, but lets not swell their numbers with our own so called fans.
Agree with adding Man City & Chelsea to the list.
I put it that if we were languishing at the bottom of the league our attitude to the loans would be different.
We do have a great chance of securing our immediate future and for that we should be grateful....but I do hope we sign these players after this transitional season , and can call the team "ours" as opposed to a loaned bunch from somewhere else. Interesting that we didn't sign "the four" players , after being told by the owners that we would ..especially as one ( to my knowledge) wasn't offered a contract . I would feel a lot happier if we weren't engulfed by another ten loans from Udinese again at the start of next season whatever division we're in.
Gilesy, maybe your point about the loans not being made permanent is valid. I agree it'd have been better to get them on Watford contracts. But only because it'd give the ignorant and envious less ammunition.

BUT... Starbucks? They're a global giant who cynically avoid paying their dues out of pure greed. We are Watford. A small club in comparison to the giants out there. The big players are ManU, Chelski, MCity, Real Madrid, Barca etc etc. They are Starbucks or Costa. They have dubious integrity and infinite greed. We are part of a small band of small clubs (udinese, granada) who invest in young talent and sell it on.

And Blackburn of the Jack Walker years? Nah mate. Our model is SO different from all that. It's better and more sustainable.

Don't believe what the haters say.

And I'd say to anyone who wants to admire Ian Hollowhead and somehow agree with his pathetic rant: Don't. Be. Stupid. 

He is VERY stupid, but he does have a motive.
[quote][p][bold]gilesy97[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilesy97[/bold] wrote: It's a loophole as much as the Starbucks loophole in not paying tax ( or all their tax) in this country. Within the law ,but upsetting everyone that doesn't benefit from it. Hopefully this loophole will be closed by next season , as I certainly don't want to see other clubs " palling up " with foreign clubs and loaning 11 players each etc.Let's be honest , if we do go up .it'll be know "outside of Watford " as tainted ..just like Blackburn buying the Premiership title a few years back...but I suppose at least their players were signed on for Blackburn.:) Still most Watford fans won't care , as winning is more important , than how it actually is achieved ..like most football fans .The Zaha loophole should be closed too...and of course Butland at Birmingham/Stoke ..so Holloway isn't the only manager doing it !!![/p][/quote]Sorry, rubbish. Everyone buys their success to some degree. You pinpoint Blackburn, whose chairman Jack Walker a life long fan spent money realising his dream, yet omit Man City, Chelsea etc both bought by foreign wealth. So why should smaller clubs like us be penalised when the so called bigger clubs can do as they please? If we were languishing near the bottom of the league no one would take issue, so in my eyes this is all about envy. I would pose to you, what would you rather have manage your club a Bas or a Pozzo? This our chance to secure our clubs immediate future and I for one embrace it, I don't think we had a future had the Italians not rescued us. I would say, we will have to put up from a lot of sniping from other clubs as we progress, but lets not swell their numbers with our own so called fans.[/p][/quote]Agree with adding Man City & Chelsea to the list. I put it that if we were languishing at the bottom of the league our attitude to the loans would be different. We do have a great chance of securing our immediate future and for that we should be grateful....but I do hope we sign these players after this transitional season , and can call the team "ours" as opposed to a loaned bunch from somewhere else. Interesting that we didn't sign "the four" players , after being told by the owners that we would ..especially as one ( to my knowledge) wasn't offered a contract . I would feel a lot happier if we weren't engulfed by another ten loans from Udinese again at the start of next season whatever division we're in.[/p][/quote]Gilesy, maybe your point about the loans not being made permanent is valid. I agree it'd have been better to get them on Watford contracts. But only because it'd give the ignorant and envious less ammunition. BUT... Starbucks? They're a global giant who cynically avoid paying their dues out of pure greed. We are Watford. A small club in comparison to the giants out there. The big players are ManU, Chelski, MCity, Real Madrid, Barca etc etc. They are Starbucks or Costa. They have dubious integrity and infinite greed. We are part of a small band of small clubs (udinese, granada) who invest in young talent and sell it on. And Blackburn of the Jack Walker years? Nah mate. Our model is SO different from all that. It's better and more sustainable. Don't believe what the haters say. And I'd say to anyone who wants to admire Ian Hollowhead and somehow agree with his pathetic rant: Don't. Be. Stupid.  He is VERY stupid, but he does have a motive. Bush Hornet
  • Score: 0

9:07am Mon 11 Feb 13

Travelling Hornet says...

It amuses me that every one is harping on about loopholes and that the FA will close it for next season.
If this changes then it'll have to come from FIFA not the FA , then there is all the implications of EU regulations reguarding free movement of labour within Europe. Won't happen .
Wasn't there the same noises in Spain from the El Holloways over there when Granada were marching through the divisions with the help of the Pozzos ?
What happened about the 'loophole' absolouty NOTHING!
It amuses me that every one is harping on about loopholes and that the FA will close it for next season. If this changes then it'll have to come from FIFA not the FA , then there is all the implications of EU regulations reguarding free movement of labour within Europe. Won't happen . Wasn't there the same noises in Spain from the El Holloways over there when Granada were marching through the divisions with the help of the Pozzos ? What happened about the 'loophole' absolouty NOTHING! Travelling Hornet
  • Score: 0

9:14am Mon 11 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

bushey tales wrote:
It IS a loophole, whether we choose to acknowledge the fact or not. Cleverly spotted by Duxbury (or whoever took the Business Plan to the Pozzo's in the first place) and brilliantly exploited. The loophole will be closed at a point, just as you'd hope the cynical Zaha ploy of 'selling and loaning back' (and what's to stop United loaning him back to Palace for the whole of next season as well?) will also be closed. Holloway and the others are clearly jealous as hell, but I do worry that the potential looming points deduction could be used as a strategic device to clip our wings. Hopefully not, but we'll hear very soon.
5 loan players are allowed within the UK (England?) and 9 if they are from outside of the UK leagues. Is there anything ambiguous there? Anything not clear? Anything that could be misunderstood? Not for me there isn't? Why is that a loophole?
[quote][p][bold]bushey tales[/bold] wrote: It IS a loophole, whether we choose to acknowledge the fact or not. Cleverly spotted by Duxbury (or whoever took the Business Plan to the Pozzo's in the first place) and brilliantly exploited. The loophole will be closed at a point, just as you'd hope the cynical Zaha ploy of 'selling and loaning back' (and what's to stop United loaning him back to Palace for the whole of next season as well?) will also be closed. Holloway and the others are clearly jealous as hell, but I do worry that the potential looming points deduction could be used as a strategic device to clip our wings. Hopefully not, but we'll hear very soon.[/p][/quote]5 loan players are allowed within the UK (England?) and 9 if they are from outside of the UK leagues. Is there anything ambiguous there? Anything not clear? Anything that could be misunderstood? Not for me there isn't? Why is that a loophole? Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

9:25am Mon 11 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Ronny oh Ronny Ronny wrote:
lutondown wrote:
WOReader wrote:
Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford.

I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.
Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking
Who decides open market value?? A player is only worth how much someone will pay for him. Don't think that's an issue at all.
I haven't heard of this eother but I suspect it is something to do with this.

The only issue is the tax payable and tax is only payable on profits. There is profit at the selling end, and then profit at the UK end at some time in the future. So whilst I don't think the value the Pozzos put on players matters in isolation, it is the tax implications in Italy (say) and the UK that they would consider before putting the value on the player(s), or to be more specific, the tax differential. Since I don't know what the tas situation is in Italy, I wouldn't know whether it is better to over value or under value them.
The tas situation is unknown to me too ESH, but I thank you for your in depth monologue, you work better than Ovaltine!
And I'm sure as king of Grammar and spelling you did mean tax!!!
;-)
Pleasure. I'm glad you appreciate my immense worldly knowledge!
[quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ronny oh Ronny Ronny[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WOReader[/bold] wrote: Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford. I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.[/p][/quote]Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking[/p][/quote]Who decides open market value?? A player is only worth how much someone will pay for him. Don't think that's an issue at all.[/p][/quote]I haven't heard of this eother but I suspect it is something to do with this. The only issue is the tax payable and tax is only payable on profits. There is profit at the selling end, and then profit at the UK end at some time in the future. So whilst I don't think the value the Pozzos put on players matters in isolation, it is the tax implications in Italy (say) and the UK that they would consider before putting the value on the player(s), or to be more specific, the tax differential. Since I don't know what the tas situation is in Italy, I wouldn't know whether it is better to over value or under value them.[/p][/quote]The tas situation is unknown to me too ESH, but I thank you for your in depth monologue, you work better than Ovaltine! And I'm sure as king of Grammar and spelling you did mean tax!!! ;-)[/p][/quote]Pleasure. I'm glad you appreciate my immense worldly knowledge! Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

10:46am Mon 11 Feb 13

lutondown says...

Eastsussexhornet wrote:
bushey tales wrote:
It IS a loophole, whether we choose to acknowledge the fact or not. Cleverly spotted by Duxbury (or whoever took the Business Plan to the Pozzo's in the first place) and brilliantly exploited. The loophole will be closed at a point, just as you'd hope the cynical Zaha ploy of 'selling and loaning back' (and what's to stop United loaning him back to Palace for the whole of next season as well?) will also be closed. Holloway and the others are clearly jealous as hell, but I do worry that the potential looming points deduction could be used as a strategic device to clip our wings. Hopefully not, but we'll hear very soon.
5 loan players are allowed within the UK (England?) and 9 if they are from outside of the UK leagues. Is there anything ambiguous there? Anything not clear? Anything that could be misunderstood? Not for me there isn't? Why is that a loophole?
Absolutely right. In a nutshell. Today ESH you are a cup of coffee, I rebuke my Ovaltine remark.
;-)
[quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bushey tales[/bold] wrote: It IS a loophole, whether we choose to acknowledge the fact or not. Cleverly spotted by Duxbury (or whoever took the Business Plan to the Pozzo's in the first place) and brilliantly exploited. The loophole will be closed at a point, just as you'd hope the cynical Zaha ploy of 'selling and loaning back' (and what's to stop United loaning him back to Palace for the whole of next season as well?) will also be closed. Holloway and the others are clearly jealous as hell, but I do worry that the potential looming points deduction could be used as a strategic device to clip our wings. Hopefully not, but we'll hear very soon.[/p][/quote]5 loan players are allowed within the UK (England?) and 9 if they are from outside of the UK leagues. Is there anything ambiguous there? Anything not clear? Anything that could be misunderstood? Not for me there isn't? Why is that a loophole?[/p][/quote]Absolutely right. In a nutshell. Today ESH you are a cup of coffee, I rebuke my Ovaltine remark. ;-) lutondown
  • Score: 0

10:47am Mon 11 Feb 13

lutondown says...

Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Ronny oh Ronny Ronny wrote:
lutondown wrote:
WOReader wrote:
Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford.

I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.
Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking
Who decides open market value?? A player is only worth how much someone will pay for him. Don't think that's an issue at all.
I haven't heard of this eother but I suspect it is something to do with this.

The only issue is the tax payable and tax is only payable on profits. There is profit at the selling end, and then profit at the UK end at some time in the future. So whilst I don't think the value the Pozzos put on players matters in isolation, it is the tax implications in Italy (say) and the UK that they would consider before putting the value on the player(s), or to be more specific, the tax differential. Since I don't know what the tas situation is in Italy, I wouldn't know whether it is better to over value or under value them.
The tas situation is unknown to me too ESH, but I thank you for your in depth monologue, you work better than Ovaltine!
And I'm sure as king of Grammar and spelling you did mean tax!!!
;-)
Pleasure. I'm glad you appreciate my immense worldly knowledge!
I appreciate your ever so worldly typo even more! Sort of makes you human...well maybe a little bit!
[quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ronny oh Ronny Ronny[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WOReader[/bold] wrote: Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford. I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.[/p][/quote]Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking[/p][/quote]Who decides open market value?? A player is only worth how much someone will pay for him. Don't think that's an issue at all.[/p][/quote]I haven't heard of this eother but I suspect it is something to do with this. The only issue is the tax payable and tax is only payable on profits. There is profit at the selling end, and then profit at the UK end at some time in the future. So whilst I don't think the value the Pozzos put on players matters in isolation, it is the tax implications in Italy (say) and the UK that they would consider before putting the value on the player(s), or to be more specific, the tax differential. Since I don't know what the tas situation is in Italy, I wouldn't know whether it is better to over value or under value them.[/p][/quote]The tas situation is unknown to me too ESH, but I thank you for your in depth monologue, you work better than Ovaltine! And I'm sure as king of Grammar and spelling you did mean tax!!! ;-)[/p][/quote]Pleasure. I'm glad you appreciate my immense worldly knowledge![/p][/quote]I appreciate your ever so worldly typo even more! Sort of makes you human...well maybe a little bit! lutondown
  • Score: 0

10:49am Mon 11 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
bushey tales wrote:
It IS a loophole, whether we choose to acknowledge the fact or not. Cleverly spotted by Duxbury (or whoever took the Business Plan to the Pozzo's in the first place) and brilliantly exploited. The loophole will be closed at a point, just as you'd hope the cynical Zaha ploy of 'selling and loaning back' (and what's to stop United loaning him back to Palace for the whole of next season as well?) will also be closed. Holloway and the others are clearly jealous as hell, but I do worry that the potential looming points deduction could be used as a strategic device to clip our wings. Hopefully not, but we'll hear very soon.
5 loan players are allowed within the UK (England?) and 9 if they are from outside of the UK leagues. Is there anything ambiguous there? Anything not clear? Anything that could be misunderstood? Not for me there isn't? Why is that a loophole?
Absolutely right. In a nutshell. Today ESH you are a cup of coffee, I rebuke my Ovaltine remark.
;-)
Thank you. And on that note, I will now have one...
[quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bushey tales[/bold] wrote: It IS a loophole, whether we choose to acknowledge the fact or not. Cleverly spotted by Duxbury (or whoever took the Business Plan to the Pozzo's in the first place) and brilliantly exploited. The loophole will be closed at a point, just as you'd hope the cynical Zaha ploy of 'selling and loaning back' (and what's to stop United loaning him back to Palace for the whole of next season as well?) will also be closed. Holloway and the others are clearly jealous as hell, but I do worry that the potential looming points deduction could be used as a strategic device to clip our wings. Hopefully not, but we'll hear very soon.[/p][/quote]5 loan players are allowed within the UK (England?) and 9 if they are from outside of the UK leagues. Is there anything ambiguous there? Anything not clear? Anything that could be misunderstood? Not for me there isn't? Why is that a loophole?[/p][/quote]Absolutely right. In a nutshell. Today ESH you are a cup of coffee, I rebuke my Ovaltine remark. ;-)[/p][/quote]Thank you. And on that note, I will now have one... Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

10:54am Mon 11 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Ronny oh Ronny Ronny wrote:
lutondown wrote:
WOReader wrote:
Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford.

I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.
Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking
Who decides open market value?? A player is only worth how much someone will pay for him. Don't think that's an issue at all.
I haven't heard of this eother but I suspect it is something to do with this.

The only issue is the tax payable and tax is only payable on profits. There is profit at the selling end, and then profit at the UK end at some time in the future. So whilst I don't think the value the Pozzos put on players matters in isolation, it is the tax implications in Italy (say) and the UK that they would consider before putting the value on the player(s), or to be more specific, the tax differential. Since I don't know what the tas situation is in Italy, I wouldn't know whether it is better to over value or under value them.
The tas situation is unknown to me too ESH, but I thank you for your in depth monologue, you work better than Ovaltine!
And I'm sure as king of Grammar and spelling you did mean tax!!!
;-)
Pleasure. I'm glad you appreciate my immense worldly knowledge!
I appreciate your ever so worldly typo even more! Sort of makes you human...well maybe a little bit!
Not a typo....

Many definitions of worldly but I particularly like this one, I don't know why...

Experienced in human affairs; sophisticated or worldly-wise: "an experienced and worldly man"
[quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ronny oh Ronny Ronny[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WOReader[/bold] wrote: Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford. I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.[/p][/quote]Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking[/p][/quote]Who decides open market value?? A player is only worth how much someone will pay for him. Don't think that's an issue at all.[/p][/quote]I haven't heard of this eother but I suspect it is something to do with this. The only issue is the tax payable and tax is only payable on profits. There is profit at the selling end, and then profit at the UK end at some time in the future. So whilst I don't think the value the Pozzos put on players matters in isolation, it is the tax implications in Italy (say) and the UK that they would consider before putting the value on the player(s), or to be more specific, the tax differential. Since I don't know what the tas situation is in Italy, I wouldn't know whether it is better to over value or under value them.[/p][/quote]The tas situation is unknown to me too ESH, but I thank you for your in depth monologue, you work better than Ovaltine! And I'm sure as king of Grammar and spelling you did mean tax!!! ;-)[/p][/quote]Pleasure. I'm glad you appreciate my immense worldly knowledge![/p][/quote]I appreciate your ever so worldly typo even more! Sort of makes you human...well maybe a little bit![/p][/quote]Not a typo.... Many definitions of worldly but I particularly like this one, I don't know why... Experienced in human affairs; sophisticated or worldly-wise: "an experienced and worldly man" Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

10:57am Mon 11 Feb 13

lutondown says...

Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Ronny oh Ronny Ronny wrote:
lutondown wrote:
WOReader wrote:
Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford.

I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.
Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking
Who decides open market value?? A player is only worth how much someone will pay for him. Don't think that's an issue at all.
I haven't heard of this eother but I suspect it is something to do with this.

The only issue is the tax payable and tax is only payable on profits. There is profit at the selling end, and then profit at the UK end at some time in the future. So whilst I don't think the value the Pozzos put on players matters in isolation, it is the tax implications in Italy (say) and the UK that they would consider before putting the value on the player(s), or to be more specific, the tax differential. Since I don't know what the tas situation is in Italy, I wouldn't know whether it is better to over value or under value them.
The tas situation is unknown to me too ESH, but I thank you for your in depth monologue, you work better than Ovaltine!
And I'm sure as king of Grammar and spelling you did mean tax!!!
;-)
Pleasure. I'm glad you appreciate my immense worldly knowledge!
I appreciate your ever so worldly typo even more! Sort of makes you human...well maybe a little bit!
Not a typo....

Many definitions of worldly but I particularly like this one, I don't know why...

Experienced in human affairs; sophisticated or worldly-wise: "an experienced and worldly man"
No won't have that, you just don't get out enough! Simples
[quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ronny oh Ronny Ronny[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WOReader[/bold] wrote: Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford. I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.[/p][/quote]Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking[/p][/quote]Who decides open market value?? A player is only worth how much someone will pay for him. Don't think that's an issue at all.[/p][/quote]I haven't heard of this eother but I suspect it is something to do with this. The only issue is the tax payable and tax is only payable on profits. There is profit at the selling end, and then profit at the UK end at some time in the future. So whilst I don't think the value the Pozzos put on players matters in isolation, it is the tax implications in Italy (say) and the UK that they would consider before putting the value on the player(s), or to be more specific, the tax differential. Since I don't know what the tas situation is in Italy, I wouldn't know whether it is better to over value or under value them.[/p][/quote]The tas situation is unknown to me too ESH, but I thank you for your in depth monologue, you work better than Ovaltine! And I'm sure as king of Grammar and spelling you did mean tax!!! ;-)[/p][/quote]Pleasure. I'm glad you appreciate my immense worldly knowledge![/p][/quote]I appreciate your ever so worldly typo even more! Sort of makes you human...well maybe a little bit![/p][/quote]Not a typo.... Many definitions of worldly but I particularly like this one, I don't know why... Experienced in human affairs; sophisticated or worldly-wise: "an experienced and worldly man"[/p][/quote]No won't have that, you just don't get out enough! Simples lutondown
  • Score: 0

11:01am Mon 11 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
lutondown wrote:
Eastsussexhornet wrote:
Ronny oh Ronny Ronny wrote:
lutondown wrote:
WOReader wrote:
Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford.

I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.
Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking
Who decides open market value?? A player is only worth how much someone will pay for him. Don't think that's an issue at all.
I haven't heard of this eother but I suspect it is something to do with this.

The only issue is the tax payable and tax is only payable on profits. There is profit at the selling end, and then profit at the UK end at some time in the future. So whilst I don't think the value the Pozzos put on players matters in isolation, it is the tax implications in Italy (say) and the UK that they would consider before putting the value on the player(s), or to be more specific, the tax differential. Since I don't know what the tas situation is in Italy, I wouldn't know whether it is better to over value or under value them.
The tas situation is unknown to me too ESH, but I thank you for your in depth monologue, you work better than Ovaltine!
And I'm sure as king of Grammar and spelling you did mean tax!!!
;-)
Pleasure. I'm glad you appreciate my immense worldly knowledge!
I appreciate your ever so worldly typo even more! Sort of makes you human...well maybe a little bit!
Not a typo....

Many definitions of worldly but I particularly like this one, I don't know why...

Experienced in human affairs; sophisticated or worldly-wise: "an experienced and worldly man"
No won't have that, you just don't get out enough! Simples
....if only you knew!
[quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eastsussexhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ronny oh Ronny Ronny[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lutondown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WOReader[/bold] wrote: Holloway's comments are junk. Watford are complying with the rules and whether players are owned by Udinese or Watford is purely cosmetic. Holloway's comments appear to me to be an attempt at mischief making and an indication about how worried he is by the superiority of Watford. I am not certain, but I do wonder that if players have to be transferred from Udinese to Watford, wouldn't they have to be transferred at open market value for tax purposes? If so that might be a disincentive and a potential problem if the rules change.[/p][/quote]Open market value? Never heard that one before, how does that explain free transfers? Just asking[/p][/quote]Who decides open market value?? A player is only worth how much someone will pay for him. Don't think that's an issue at all.[/p][/quote]I haven't heard of this eother but I suspect it is something to do with this. The only issue is the tax payable and tax is only payable on profits. There is profit at the selling end, and then profit at the UK end at some time in the future. So whilst I don't think the value the Pozzos put on players matters in isolation, it is the tax implications in Italy (say) and the UK that they would consider before putting the value on the player(s), or to be more specific, the tax differential. Since I don't know what the tas situation is in Italy, I wouldn't know whether it is better to over value or under value them.[/p][/quote]The tas situation is unknown to me too ESH, but I thank you for your in depth monologue, you work better than Ovaltine! And I'm sure as king of Grammar and spelling you did mean tax!!! ;-)[/p][/quote]Pleasure. I'm glad you appreciate my immense worldly knowledge![/p][/quote]I appreciate your ever so worldly typo even more! Sort of makes you human...well maybe a little bit![/p][/quote]Not a typo.... Many definitions of worldly but I particularly like this one, I don't know why... Experienced in human affairs; sophisticated or worldly-wise: "an experienced and worldly man"[/p][/quote]No won't have that, you just don't get out enough! Simples[/p][/quote]....if only you knew! Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

11:11am Mon 11 Feb 13

mkhornet says...

Holloway hasn't been the same since he gave up presenting "Crystal Maze!"
Holloway hasn't been the same since he gave up presenting "Crystal Maze!" mkhornet
  • Score: 0

11:18am Mon 11 Feb 13

lutondown says...

mkhornet wrote:
Holloway hasn't been the same since he gave up presenting "Crystal Maze!"
Or didn't get cast in bad Elf?
[quote][p][bold]mkhornet[/bold] wrote: Holloway hasn't been the same since he gave up presenting "Crystal Maze!"[/p][/quote]Or didn't get cast in bad Elf? lutondown
  • Score: 0

1:10pm Mon 11 Feb 13

bushey tales says...

Just to be clear.......a loophole is completely legit. That's the point. Wikipedia (yes, I know, the lavatory wall of the internet, but it's easily available) defines it as 'an ambiguity in a system which can be used to circumvent or otherwise avoid the intent, implied or explicitly stated, of the system.' So I repeat, Duxbury and Co have identified and cleverly exploited a loophole. No misunderstanding, no confusion, no illegality, nothing untoward ......just a loophole.
Just to be clear.......a loophole is completely legit. That's the point. Wikipedia (yes, I know, the lavatory wall of the internet, but it's easily available) defines it as 'an ambiguity in a system which can be used to circumvent or otherwise avoid the intent, implied or explicitly stated, of the system.' So I repeat, Duxbury and Co have identified and cleverly exploited a loophole. No misunderstanding, no confusion, no illegality, nothing untoward ......just a loophole. bushey tales
  • Score: 0

1:29pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Ronny oh Ronny Ronny says...

bushey tales wrote:
Just to be clear.......a loophole is completely legit. That's the point. Wikipedia (yes, I know, the lavatory wall of the internet, but it's easily available) defines it as 'an ambiguity in a system which can be used to circumvent or otherwise avoid the intent, implied or explicitly stated, of the system.' So I repeat, Duxbury and Co have identified and cleverly exploited a loophole. No misunderstanding, no confusion, no illegality, nothing untoward ......just a loophole.
Yes but there is no 'system', nothing to be implied by the way it is now as nothing to suggest it can't happen whatsoever, no intent into season long foreign loans, therefore no loophole.
This has been going on for years anyway, Manchester United have been sending players over to Antwerp for god knows how long, who cares!
We should all be getting behind the team and the Pozzo's and if we do meet Hollowhead in the playoffs (which I don't think is likely) god help him, as he has given us plenty of ammunition.
[quote][p][bold]bushey tales[/bold] wrote: Just to be clear.......a loophole is completely legit. That's the point. Wikipedia (yes, I know, the lavatory wall of the internet, but it's easily available) defines it as 'an ambiguity in a system which can be used to circumvent or otherwise avoid the intent, implied or explicitly stated, of the system.' So I repeat, Duxbury and Co have identified and cleverly exploited a loophole. No misunderstanding, no confusion, no illegality, nothing untoward ......just a loophole.[/p][/quote]Yes but there is no 'system', nothing to be implied by the way it is now as nothing to suggest it can't happen whatsoever, no intent into season long foreign loans, therefore no loophole. This has been going on for years anyway, Manchester United have been sending players over to Antwerp for god knows how long, who cares! We should all be getting behind the team and the Pozzo's and if we do meet Hollowhead in the playoffs (which I don't think is likely) god help him, as he has given us plenty of ammunition. Ronny oh Ronny Ronny
  • Score: 0

2:19pm Mon 11 Feb 13

KeithMercer says...

Just been a good little piece on TalkSport with Jeff Peters their "Championship Expert" and must add fervent Leicester supporter. Talking about Hollowheads comments in a nutshell he said exactly what we have all been saying on hear and that the muppet was probably trying to deflect from his poor record over the last 15 games of which he has only won 3(ok he didnt call him a muppet but we know what he was thinking)
Just been a good little piece on TalkSport with Jeff Peters their "Championship Expert" and must add fervent Leicester supporter. Talking about Hollowheads comments in a nutshell he said exactly what we have all been saying on hear and that the muppet was probably trying to deflect from his poor record over the last 15 games of which he has only won 3(ok he didnt call him a muppet but we know what he was thinking) KeithMercer
  • Score: 0

3:01pm Mon 11 Feb 13

lutondown says...

KeithMercer wrote:
Just been a good little piece on TalkSport with Jeff Peters their "Championship Expert" and must add fervent Leicester supporter. Talking about Hollowheads comments in a nutshell he said exactly what we have all been saying on hear and that the muppet was probably trying to deflect from his poor record over the last 15 games of which he has only won 3(ok he didnt call him a muppet but we know what he was thinking)
Apparently a few experts have been digging out Hollowtool for some of his own treatment.
I agree he took over a well managed side, and are they starting to hiccup? His career is varied in result to say the least.
Little man syndrome, no, ugly little man syndrome.
[quote][p][bold]KeithMercer[/bold] wrote: Just been a good little piece on TalkSport with Jeff Peters their "Championship Expert" and must add fervent Leicester supporter. Talking about Hollowheads comments in a nutshell he said exactly what we have all been saying on hear and that the muppet was probably trying to deflect from his poor record over the last 15 games of which he has only won 3(ok he didnt call him a muppet but we know what he was thinking)[/p][/quote]Apparently a few experts have been digging out Hollowtool for some of his own treatment. I agree he took over a well managed side, and are they starting to hiccup? His career is varied in result to say the least. Little man syndrome, no, ugly little man syndrome. lutondown
  • Score: 0

3:44pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Bush Hornet says...

if I meet him one day I'd like to tap his empty head and find out what sound it makes
if I meet him one day I'd like to tap his empty head and find out what sound it makes Bush Hornet
  • Score: 0

5:04pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Eastsussexhornet says...

Bush Hornet wrote:
if I meet him one day I'd like to tap his empty head and find out what sound it makes
It would probably go..."Ooooooh aarrrrh".
[quote][p][bold]Bush Hornet[/bold] wrote: if I meet him one day I'd like to tap his empty head and find out what sound it makes[/p][/quote]It would probably go..."Ooooooh aarrrrh". Eastsussexhornet
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

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