Forum Klix.ba

Distortion wrote:Mozel' proci ijedna utakmica da Ronaldo ne padne u 16 i siri ruke trazeci penal. dosadio je i sudijama...

Betis iznenadio sve dobrom odbranom, svaka im cast na ovoj pobjedi. Dobit Reala na Bernabeu je bas senzacija. Prekinuli su Realov niz bez poraza i seriju sa makar jednim postignutim golom u svakoj utakmici.


Real nije imao srece sinoc. Imali su dosta suteva na gol, odlicnih prilika ali su se ispromasivali. To su te utakmice u kojim nedostaje srece...

kory_galaktikos wrote:

Distortion wrote:Mozel' proci ijedna utakmica da Ronaldo ne padne u 16 i siri ruke trazeci penal. dosadio je i sudijama...

Betis iznenadio sve dobrom odbranom, svaka im cast na ovoj pobjedi. Dobit Reala na Bernabeu je bas senzacija. Prekinuli su Realov niz bez poraza i seriju sa makar jednim postignutim golom u svakoj utakmici.


Real nije imao srece sinoc. Imali su dosta suteva na gol, odlicnih prilika ali su se ispromasivali. To su te utakmice u kojim nedostaje srece...

vala i mogao je svirat jedan penal, mislim nakon ronaldovog suta da je nekoga u ruku lopta pogodila, cini mi se jer nije bas najbolje pokazana situacija
al bolje da nije, sad se moraju bas napet i ove greske ispravit puuno se uozbiljit

What really strikes me is that the clubs here are working on utterly different models. Chelsea have for example got rid of 32 players. Manchester City have disposed of 25 – and although as with Chelsea some of the loaned out players might come back, history suggests that is a very klix number.

Arsenal on the other hand have moved nine players, Liverpool nine, Manchester United seven. The loans for Man City and Chelsea are just too numerous to mention. You can find all the details on the Guardian’s transfer site.

It is interesting that the two clubs with the massive churn rate are the two with owners who can afford anything. I think, it is more or less accurate to suggest here that these clubs are just trading in numbers to see if they happen to pick up any gems along the way.

Now of course I know the argument that says that this is a clever way of getting around FFP, but I’ve done the sums and I still don’t make them add up. Maybe that is just me, but the evidence still seems to me to suggest that there is precious little profit to be made from this loan trading that Manchester City and Chelsea are engaged in, and a whacking great loss where the salary of the player is not fully paid by the club taking the player on loan – which seems to be the case most of the time.

The problem is that when I try and get reliable figures for loan deals and resultant salaries, there simply are none. Obviously many of these matters are confidential between club and player but the rates suggested often just seem unbelievable to me in some cases, and there are just not figures in others, so I have given up on that project for the moment.