@mooneyman said:
I thought FA Cup gate money has to be split between the two clubs. If correct, surely this is going to hit Middlesbrough financially not being able to fill the away end.
@mooneyman said:
I thought FA Cup gate money has to be split between the two clubs. If correct, surely this is going to hit Middlesbrough financially not being able to fill the away end.
They'll fill it with home fans surely?
But don't they still have to split the gate receipts?
@Twizz said:
What's stopping Middlesbrough selling tickets to Chelsea fans, or am I missing something?
Surely any time a club sells tickets to an away game it's on behalf of the home club - to the extent even that they are printed on the home clubs ticket stubs?
@mooneyman said:
I thought FA Cup gate money has to be split between the two clubs. If correct, surely this is going to hit Middlesbrough financially not being able to fill the away end.
They'll fill it with home fans surely?
But don't they still have to split the gate receipts?
Yes, that’s what I don’t understand. Chelsea should receive 45% of the gate regardless of who actually buys the tickets. I’m missing something.
@mooneyman said:
I thought FA Cup gate money has to be split between the two clubs. If correct, surely this is going to hit Middlesbrough financially not being able to fill the away end.
They'll fill it with home fans surely?
But don't they still have to split the gate receipts?
Yes, that’s what I don’t understand. Chelsea should receive 45% of the gate regardless of who actually buys the tickets. I’m missing something.
Surely that split in the receipts is not allowed under the sanctions. Whether Middlesbrough would get it or it would go in to an FA shaped hole I'm not sure. If somone was smart 45% would stay with Middlesbrough and the Chelsea part going to a refugee charity.
The Chelsea stance is remarkable and unsurprising in equal measure. On a totally different planet.
@mooneyman said:
I thought FA Cup gate money has to be split between the two clubs. If correct, surely this is going to hit Middlesbrough financially not being able to fill the away end.
They'll fill it with home fans surely?
But don't they still have to split the gate receipts?
Yes, that’s what I don’t understand. Chelsea should receive 45% of the gate regardless of who actually buys the tickets. I’m missing something.
Surely that split in the receipts is not allowed under the sanctions. Whether Middlesbrough would get it or it would go in to an FA shaped hole I'm not sure. If somone was smart 45% would stay with Middlesbrough and the Chelsea part going to a refugee charity.
The Chelsea stance is remarkable and unsurprising in equal measure. On a totally different planet.
If they weren't going to be arses about the whole thing they'd offer to donate any funds from the first game or two to charity while they established a decent trust for the money to go into or continued discussions with the government. They'd also ask some of their players to defer a tiny portion of wages to cover expenses.
Suggesting Boro fans stay at home for one of their biggest games in year and shouting about integrity has backfired massively, quite right too.
@mooneyman said:
I thought FA Cup gate money has to be split between the two clubs. If correct, surely this is going to hit Middlesbrough financially not being able to fill the away end.
They'll fill it with home fans surely?
But don't they still have to split the gate receipts?
Yes, that’s what I don’t understand. Chelsea should receive 45% of the gate regardless of who actually buys the tickets. I’m missing something.
Surely that split in the receipts is not allowed under the sanctions. Whether Middlesbrough would get it or it would go in to an FA shaped hole I'm not sure. If somone was smart 45% would stay with Middlesbrough and the Chelsea part going to a refugee charity.
The Chelsea stance is remarkable and unsurprising in equal measure. On a totally different planet.
Should under normal circumstances. If, as you suggest they won't get their cut under the sanctions, what's the problem with selling them tickets?
@Twizz said:
What's stopping Middlesbrough selling tickets to Chelsea fans, or am I missing something?
Surely any time a club sells tickets to an away game it's on behalf of the home club - to the extent even that they are printed on the home clubs ticket stubs?
High Wycombe is quite a stronghold of Chelsea fans so I'm surprised rhere haven't been a few gasroomers defending them.
They're Fairly lucky the government aren't just shutting them down as an Abramhovic plaything. Am sure other types of business controlled by him have and will be shut down immediately.
@Malone said:
They're Fairly lucky the government aren't just shutting them down as an Abramhovic plaything. Am sure other types of business controlled by him have and will be shut down immediately.
Probably something to do with them being the Toriest club going
@Malone said:
High Wycombe is quite a stronghold of Chelsea fans so I'm surprised rhere haven't been a few gasroomers defending them.
They're Fairly lucky the government aren't just shutting them down as an Abramhovic plaything. Am sure other types of business controlled by him have and will be shut down immediately.
Are there lots of Chelsea fans in Wycombe? Always seemed like a Spurs/Liverpool majority.
I reckon Middlesbrough should do I of 2 things:
1) Put a request in that the game is reversed and played at the Riverside. That way, all the funds are going to them and they can then donate a percentage of their revenue to a Charity on Chelsea's behalf (Oxfam or Red Cross) that goes to helping those in need from the situation in Ukraine.
2) Middlesbrough could take Chelsea and/or the FA to court for lose of earnings. The FA Cup prize and gate receipts for some fixtures can be huge and this can make up the short-fall from what they didn't get against Derby!
@Malone said:
High Wycombe is quite a stronghold of Chelsea fans so I'm surprised rhere haven't been a few gasroomers defending them.
They're Fairly lucky the government aren't just shutting them down as an Abramhovic plaything. Am sure other types of business controlled by him have and will be shut down immediately.
Are there lots of Chelsea fans in Wycombe? Always seemed like a Spurs/Liverpool majority.
They're absolutely everywhere! Them and Arsenal - more so Arsenal for me at school.
@Otter87 said:
I reckon Middlesbrough should do I of 2 things:
1) Put a request in that the game is reversed and played at the Riverside. That way, all the funds are going to them and they can then donate a percentage of their revenue to a Charity on Chelsea's behalf (Oxfam or Red Cross) that goes to helping those in need from the situation in Ukraine.
2) Middlesbrough could take Chelsea and/or the FA to court for lose of earnings. The FA Cup prize and gate receipts for some fixtures can be huge and this can make up the short-fall from what they didn't get against Derby!
The game IS being played at Middlesbrough @Otter87
The truth is that the UK is reliant on the import of gas and oil, and oil in particular is very hard to source ethically. The long term goal of moving onto renewables and electrifying road and rail, or perhaps hydrogen fuel, needs to happen sooner rather than later but in the meantime people aren’t going to give up heating their homes and cooking with gas, nor are they going to start walking to the shops and taking public transport more often. I don’t see what Boris (or Kier after him) is to do therefore, start importing their oil and gas from Belgium?
Man made gas is already being trailed in new housing estates, and new boilers can easily be switched from natural to man made. Gas boilers are not a thing of the past.
That's pretty fair Ed. We import around 50% of our gas. That figure is expected to rise.
The point though is that it is surely hypocritical to sanction one horrible regime bombing another country and the football club it supports while feting another horribe regime bombing another country and the football clubs it supports.
@HolmerBlue I would be interested to see a little background info to understand how well these trials are progressing and what the prospects are of man made gas forming part of our future mix.
@DevC I get the point being discussed, I was making the point though that your list of trading partners is going to be extremely thin indeed if you truly don’t want to do business with countries on the basis of their policies domestic and foreign. You can also call hypocrite for trading with the US, a nation born of and born into the exploitation and annihilation of peoples indigenous and foreign who have a long inglorious list of recent war atrocities to their name and are effectively a rogue state in their self declaration of being above international law - that’s the mainstay of NATO right there and like the Saudis, they still practice execution of criminals. There are still places in the US that make it very hard for non-whites to vote, gerrymandering is rife and the whole political system is awash with money from special interest groups. That the Russians are the bogeyman at the moment is clear, but let’s not pretend that it’s just them, the Saudis and China that stink. The sooner we can become more independent in commodities that are considered basic necessities, the sooner we can act upon people’s noble conscientious objections, but right now we are hostage to our needs.
Agree with all of the above...if there was a moment for our government to start seriously exploring options and investing heavily in renewables and changing our energy infrastructure so we can be independent of these appalling regimes it is now. Sadly, we still need to deal with them and I fear the lack of skill, will or courage to actually try to achieve something for the country by our political classes of any colour means they will inevitably just cross their fingers and hope Vlad calms down a bit.
I agree Ed.
Yet we seem to be very happy to do business with Saudi - dropping bombs on Yemenis but not Russia - dropping bombs on Ukrainians. If we are happy to trade with Saudi and allow them to own our football clubs , why not with Russia too?
I'd say we're a couple of days from "Putin's by all accounts a decent guy who's made some mistakes. As a society what do we do with him? He has a right to work just like the rest of us"
Because Russia is beyond our influence and is a basket case economy which is never going to be a fertile export market for us, particularly as they make their own weapons. Moreover they are actively involve in cyber attacks against us, they interfere in our elections and they release biological hazards on our soil?
So Saudi is within our influence and we are quite happy for them to drop bombs on Yemeni civilians as long as the bombs are made here and we can make a few quid out of it?
Saudi is one of our most important allies in a region which controls the supply of the commodity which we all rely on, so yes, we content ourselves with wringing our hands when they bomb people.
Comments
They'll fill it with home fans surely?
But don't they still have to split the gate receipts?
Yes, that’s what I don’t understand. Chelsea should receive 45% of the gate regardless of who actually buys the tickets. I’m missing something.
Surely that split in the receipts is not allowed under the sanctions. Whether Middlesbrough would get it or it would go in to an FA shaped hole I'm not sure. If somone was smart 45% would stay with Middlesbrough and the Chelsea part going to a refugee charity.
The Chelsea stance is remarkable and unsurprising in equal measure. On a totally different planet.
If they weren't going to be arses about the whole thing they'd offer to donate any funds from the first game or two to charity while they established a decent trust for the money to go into or continued discussions with the government. They'd also ask some of their players to defer a tiny portion of wages to cover expenses.
Suggesting Boro fans stay at home for one of their biggest games in year and shouting about integrity has backfired massively, quite right too.
Should under normal circumstances. If, as you suggest they won't get their cut under the sanctions, what's the problem with selling them tickets?
Clubs get a share of cup tie gates.
High Wycombe is quite a stronghold of Chelsea fans so I'm surprised rhere haven't been a few gasroomers defending them.
They're Fairly lucky the government aren't just shutting them down as an Abramhovic plaything. Am sure other types of business controlled by him have and will be shut down immediately.
Probably something to do with them being the Toriest club going
Football club, anyway
Can they not 'sell' tickets and just donate the proceeds to supporting Ukrainian refugees?
Oh, wait a second.
Are there lots of Chelsea fans in Wycombe? Always seemed like a Spurs/Liverpool majority.
I reckon Middlesbrough should do I of 2 things:
1) Put a request in that the game is reversed and played at the Riverside. That way, all the funds are going to them and they can then donate a percentage of their revenue to a Charity on Chelsea's behalf (Oxfam or Red Cross) that goes to helping those in need from the situation in Ukraine.
2) Middlesbrough could take Chelsea and/or the FA to court for lose of earnings. The FA Cup prize and gate receipts for some fixtures can be huge and this can make up the short-fall from what they didn't get against Derby!
They're absolutely everywhere! Them and Arsenal - more so Arsenal for me at school.
Sandor Clegane would have had something to say about 'lots of people supporting Chelsea'
The game IS being played at Middlesbrough @Otter87
Has there ever been a headline that sums up UK hypocrisy better (including now with its football clubs)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60754163
'....Oh and a lot of our MPs offices are a little bit light of jolly old cash because of you know what, so if you could see your way clear...'
The truth is that the UK is reliant on the import of gas and oil, and oil in particular is very hard to source ethically. The long term goal of moving onto renewables and electrifying road and rail, or perhaps hydrogen fuel, needs to happen sooner rather than later but in the meantime people aren’t going to give up heating their homes and cooking with gas, nor are they going to start walking to the shops and taking public transport more often. I don’t see what Boris (or Kier after him) is to do therefore, start importing their oil and gas from Belgium?
Man made gas is already being trailed in new housing estates, and new boilers can easily be switched from natural to man made. Gas boilers are not a thing of the past.
That's pretty fair Ed. We import around 50% of our gas. That figure is expected to rise.
The point though is that it is surely hypocritical to sanction one horrible regime bombing another country and the football club it supports while feting another horribe regime bombing another country and the football clubs it supports.
@HolmerBlue I would be interested to see a little background info to understand how well these trials are progressing and what the prospects are of man made gas forming part of our future mix.
@DevC I get the point being discussed, I was making the point though that your list of trading partners is going to be extremely thin indeed if you truly don’t want to do business with countries on the basis of their policies domestic and foreign. You can also call hypocrite for trading with the US, a nation born of and born into the exploitation and annihilation of peoples indigenous and foreign who have a long inglorious list of recent war atrocities to their name and are effectively a rogue state in their self declaration of being above international law - that’s the mainstay of NATO right there and like the Saudis, they still practice execution of criminals. There are still places in the US that make it very hard for non-whites to vote, gerrymandering is rife and the whole political system is awash with money from special interest groups. That the Russians are the bogeyman at the moment is clear, but let’s not pretend that it’s just them, the Saudis and China that stink. The sooner we can become more independent in commodities that are considered basic necessities, the sooner we can act upon people’s noble conscientious objections, but right now we are hostage to our needs.
Agree with all of the above...if there was a moment for our government to start seriously exploring options and investing heavily in renewables and changing our energy infrastructure so we can be independent of these appalling regimes it is now. Sadly, we still need to deal with them and I fear the lack of skill, will or courage to actually try to achieve something for the country by our political classes of any colour means they will inevitably just cross their fingers and hope Vlad calms down a bit.
I agree Ed.
Yet we seem to be very happy to do business with Saudi - dropping bombs on Yemenis but not Russia - dropping bombs on Ukrainians. If we are happy to trade with Saudi and allow them to own our football clubs , why not with Russia too?
I'd say we're a couple of days from "Putin's by all accounts a decent guy who's made some mistakes. As a society what do we do with him? He has a right to work just like the rest of us"
Because Russia is beyond our influence and is a basket case economy which is never going to be a fertile export market for us, particularly as they make their own weapons. Moreover they are actively involve in cyber attacks against us, they interfere in our elections and they release biological hazards on our soil?
So Saudi is within our influence and we are quite happy for them to drop bombs on Yemeni civilians as long as the bombs are made here and we can make a few quid out of it?
Saudi is one of our most important allies in a region which controls the supply of the commodity which we all rely on, so yes, we content ourselves with wringing our hands when they bomb people.