10 responses

  1. Pete the First
    06/11/2009

    Poor old Ruskies. Watching the money-launderer extrodinaire flush their roubles into the bottomless cesspit aka Stamford Bridge.

    Maybe they should rename it Sputnik Bridge, cos Comrade A has spent the equivalent of the USSR space programme on his pet project.

  2. GunnerBe
    06/11/2009

    For those of us old enough to remember, there was a time when ‘rich’ people were taxed in excess of 90% of their income/revenue in the UK. This led to many a formerly rich person leaving and establishing a tax presence in foreign climes.
    It is oft spoke that one needs to remember the past to make smarter decisions for the future. Raising income taxes is NOT one of those smart decisions. In fact there’s a fairly solid economic argument for exactly the opposite decision.
    If one takes just a small step back, not into the drink, but just to look at the level of personal taxation our elected representatives continue to support and encourage we might wonder whether they really have our best interests at heart.
    I believe economic punditry, much like football variety, is essentially an academic pursuit not based in reality. Whatever happened to the notion of a flat tax rate that everyone pays no matter how much they earn, no deductions loopholes or anything. Calculations have been done in the US and they worked out that 18% was the magic number and they would gather more tax than ever before.
    I know this doesn’t directly relate to Beckham ruling, but unless there is consistency across the EU then there will always be countries disadvantaged by these economic insanities. Don’t ask me how one could achieve this, I’m not an economist!

  3. walter
    06/11/2009

    Well I must say in the country I live, we are in the top 3 on taxes we have to pay in the world, would love to have the 18 % tax. I think over here when you earn 60.000 euro you already are in the 50 % tax rate. And then they wonder in my country why everyone is trying to cheat on the tax man. Make fair and normal tax rates and nobody (well almost) will try to cheat.
    Couldn’t this be a case in which Europe, for once, makes the rules the same for all. Let’s say the lowest tax rate and apply this to all country’s. Well one can dream. Sorry for the moan.

    On the Chelsea stadium name it is rather strange as you say Tony. And how dare they speek of keeping themselves competitive after they have bought the other teams out of competition with money from outside the club. Is Abramovich having enough of this toy ?

    Tony, another one on the injury list ? What’s the matter with our club. Not only our players are injury prone, now the fans start having it too. 😉 Hope you recover well and soon.

  4. LRV
    06/11/2009

    Tony: As Walter stated, it looks like the perennial bane of The Arsenal has been extended to you. Now you need to show example to our boys and get well ASAP.

    Well considering that Mr AbKGBfish lost a fair bit to the credit crunch, it will not surprise me if the TOY is becoming too expensive and, therefore, boring. Noone can squander money for ever. At some point the club has to learn, like everyone else, how to sustain itself. Another example of the rest learning from The Arsenal.

    This Europe thing is equivocal to me anyway. A continent that purports to be presenting a united front turns out, at every opportunity, to undercuteach other. Very strange. Couldn’t they ensure parity by levelling their taxes accross the board? I welcome the news anyway, since it means that my club will not be disadvantaged by some underhand European tactic.

  5. LRV
    06/11/2009

    Error: “undercut each other” Not ‘undercuteach’. I don’t even know if such a word exist; unless of course I make it up using Tony’s guide.

  6. steww
    06/11/2009

    Off topic – sorry – but I just received my copy of ‘Making The Arsenal’ and I’m sufficiently excited about this to mention it here. Bravo Tony.

  7. Kevin
    06/11/2009

    On the subject of Chelsea, the CAS (Court of Arbitration for Sport) have suspended Chelsea’s punishment for the Gaël Kakuta transfer rule breach until after the appeal. The punishment was a ban on transfers for two transfer windows, which let’s face it, everyone assumed would see reduced to one on appeal. The appeal is unlikely to be held till the new year so guess what, Chelsea will almost certainly be free to buy in January, rendering the punishment virtually toothless as all Chelsea have to do is turn to Abramovich and ask “can we have next year’s money now?”. Even with his recent reluctance to bankroll extra spending he’s unlikely to deny them funds that he would eventually give them anyway, if it means jeopardising the club’s short term success.

  8. walter
    06/11/2009

    Steww, I was going to say the same. Received my book a few minutes a go so really exited. If you don’t hear from me the next weeks… I”ll be reading. 😉
    That is, if my wife lets me have it because it’s for my birthday and its another month so… Try to be nice when she comes home. 😉

  9. LRV
    06/11/2009

    Yo Walter, lucky you. I am still waiting with bated breath, well almost salivating really, for mine. Enjoy the read.

    I guess we always knew that CAS will turn everything into a joke. Another toothless UEFA punishment. Useless!!!

  10. anaconda
    06/11/2009

    LRV, actually it was a FIFA punishment, not UEFA. It makes sense that the appeal would suspend the punishment, but I seem to remember that originally the CAS said they would handle the appeal before the transfer window… Well, not a really surprising turn of events.

    I still do not think suspension of the punishment is undermining the FIFA rules. What is undermining is that should the CAS find Chelsea quilty as charged they’ll almost certainly reduce the penalty. Which is very stupid because the penalty is clearly stated in the FIFA disciplinary code.

    Chelsea has paid their way out of these troubles before, and there was some hope that with FIFA in it maybe something will finally be done. One would think that a supposedly independent court of arbitration could actually make some tough decisions.

    Interesting to see what they decide on FC Sion’s case, which is totally similar.

Back to top
mobile desktop