by Sarah Star » 31 May 2008 19:59
by Arch » 31 May 2008 22:54
by working class hero » 31 May 2008 23:19
Arch Let's hope it's not the Virgin Stadium. We'll be the laughing stock of the league.
by Denver Royal » 01 Jun 2008 00:28
Royal Rother Madejski is quite obviously a complete oxf*rd for rescuing the club, supporting it financially for more than a decade, establishing a solid infrastructure from which it can continue to build, and for seeing the result of his investments and vision take us to the Premier League because actually he was only ever in it for his own personal gain and everything he has ever said was actually complete bollocks.
The man is a complete and utter oxf*rd and I wish he'd never got involved as I was more than happy at Elm Park hovering around the Brentfords, Bournemouths and Rochdales of this world.
PEARCEY Leaving aside the arguments about our chairmain...but what happens when he sells up? Does the ground still stay named The Madejski or would it be re-named?
by Ian Royal » 01 Jun 2008 01:19
by Royal Rother » 01 Jun 2008 10:18
Denver RoyalRoyal Rother Madejski is quite obviously a complete oxf*rd for rescuing the club, supporting it financially for more than a decade, establishing a solid infrastructure from which it can continue to build, and for seeing the result of his investments and vision take us to the Premier League because actually he was only ever in it for his own personal gain and everything he has ever said was actually complete bollocks.
The man is a complete and utter oxf*rd and I wish he'd never got involved as I was more than happy at Elm Park hovering around the Brentfords, Bournemouths and Rochdales of this world.
Oh dear. What was a train wreck of a post that was. Come on, you can do a lot better than that. A lot better. I'll chalk that one up to you just having a 'moment', or maybe you were just trashed.
by brendywendy » 02 Jun 2008 09:59
Southbank Old Boybrendywendy howe said wages did rise slightly for last season, so will probably be at or above 30million
which is about the level of the money we wont be getting this season
so its clear to see why they feel the need to sell a few players
What you're forgetting there is that our wage bill is reportedly being slashed by 40% because of the relegation.
So the Prem money being there or not in terms of this years wages shouldn't be an issue.
by Thaumagurist* » 02 Jun 2008 10:08
by Royal Rother » 02 Jun 2008 11:18
by Deadlock » 02 Jun 2008 12:43
Thaumagurist*Royal Rother
pompous.
by North Somerset Royal » 02 Jun 2008 12:51
brendywendySouthbank Old Boybrendywendy howe said wages did rise slightly for last season, so will probably be at or above 30million
which is about the level of the money we wont be getting this season
so its clear to see why they feel the need to sell a few players
What you're forgetting there is that our wage bill is reportedly being slashed by 40% because of the relegation.
So the Prem money being there or not in terms of this years wages shouldn't be an issue.
ive not seen that anywhere else other than the evening post-and it wasnt clear there whether it was in the contracts of everyone, or a ball park figure the club have set, or a ball park figure the newspaper has set-
if we get it down by 40% its still going to be a fair bit more than our wage bill the last time in the championship where we still made a significant loss, despite winning the damn thing and having the fullest stadium average we'd ever had
by Hoop Blah » 02 Jun 2008 13:08
brendywendy
if we get it down by 40% its still going to be a fair bit more than our wage bill the last time in the championship where we still made a significant loss, despite winning the damn thing and having the fullest stadium average we'd ever had
by BR2 » 02 Jun 2008 13:19
by Millsy » 02 Jun 2008 13:52
BR2 So for about an extra 3% effort ON the pitch we would have got the extra point that would have meant no 40% wage reductions.
A pity somebody didn't spell out hard facts such as those before the Fulham game.
by Mr Angry » 02 Jun 2008 13:53
by Rev Algenon Stickleback H » 02 Jun 2008 13:55
who knows? Maybe it's possible that the defeat to Fulham wasn't a result of the players not trying.BR2 So for about an extra 3% effort ON the pitch we would have got the extra point that would have meant no 40% wage reductions.
A pity somebody didn't spell out hard facts such as those before the Fulham game.
by SpaceCruiser » 02 Jun 2008 13:56
by Platypuss » 02 Jun 2008 14:00
SpaceCruiser But, Mr A, the Stadium is owned by RFC Holdings Ltd - i.e. the club, not Mr M, I always thought that.....
by Hoop Blah » 02 Jun 2008 14:32
2 world wars, 1 world cupBR2 So for about an extra 3% effort ON the pitch we would have got the extra point that would have meant no 40% wage reductions.
A pity somebody didn't spell out hard facts such as those before the Fulham game.
Maybe they did and it made them more nervous.
It's a tough one. If only we had a sports scientist....
Oh hang on we do.
by SpaceCruiser » 02 Jun 2008 14:37
PlatypussSpaceCruiser But, Mr A, the Stadium is owned by RFC Holdings Ltd - i.e. the club, not Mr M, I always thought that.....
But I think that company also owns Reading Football Club Limited ie "the football club".
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 183 guests