"TIGHTER REGULATIONS!?" 🤔 Simon Jordan criticises owners that own multiple football clubs 🔥
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 07. 2023
- Simon Jordan and Sam Matterface are joined by the executive director of football supporters Europe Ronan Evain to discuss if multi-club ownership is ruining football and whether it needs to be stopped.
Enjoyed this CZcams video? 😍
Subscribe here: / talksport
Check out some of talkSPORT's MOST POPULAR content 🔥
⚽ HEATED DEBATE! Simon Jordan & Graeme Souness CLASH over Erik ten Hag's treatment of Man United player Cristiano Ronaldo
• JORDAN vs SOUNESS 🤬 | ...
⚽ Simon Jordan has his say on Gary Neville working for Qatar-based BeIN Sports during the 2022 World Cup
• 🥴 Simon Jordan has his...
⚽ Ben Foster says Edwin Van Der Sar would do minimal training and still be ready to play for Manchester United
• Ben Foster says Edwin ...
⚽ Simon Jordan GOES IN on Gary Neville for his Man Utd vs Liverpool commentary
• Simon Jordan RAGES Ove...
⚽ Rudiger intermediary Saif Rubie makes bombshell Chelsea claims and clashes with Simon Jordan
• 😱🔥 Rudiger intermediar...
⚽ Academy Award Winner Gary Oldman is baffled by Ryan Reynolds and Rob McElhenney's purchase of Wrexham
• Academy Award Winner G...
⚽ INCREDIBLE CLASH! Ray Parlour and Robbie Lyle get HEATED over claims AFTV want Arsenal to LOSE!
• INCREDIBLE CLASH! Ray ...
⚽ Ben Foster tells talkSPORT that the Premier League would have 'sued' him if he recorded the games he played for Watford
• Ben Foster reveals Pre...
⚽ Simon Jordan and Graeme Souness CLASH over Daniel Levy's role at Tottenham
• Simon Jordan and Graem...
⚽ Simon Jordan GOES IN on Jurgen Klopp for calling out Gabby Agbonlahor
• Simon Jordan GOES IN o...
⚽ Simon Jordan argues that Manchester City do spend FAR MORE than Liverpool and other Premier League clubs
• Simon Jordan argues th...
⚽ Simon Jordan reacts to Chelsea owner Todd Boehly's suggestion of a North vs South Premier League All-Star game
• Simon Jordan reacts to...
⚽ Is Manchester City's Erling Haaland better than Tottenham's Harry Kane? talkSPORT's Graeme Souness thinks he could be!
• Is Man City's Erling H...
⚽ Simon Jordan doesn't think Steven Gerrard has the ability to be a manager in the Premier League
• Simon Jordan doesn't t...
🖥️ talkSPORT's Website: /talksport.com/
📲 talkSPORT's Twitter: / talksport
📷 talkSPORT's Instagram: talksport?...
👤 talkSPORT's Facebook: / talksport
📱 talkSPORT's Tik Tok: / talksport
🔴 Download the talkSPORT app HERE! - talksport.com/apps/
🔎 Want to see if you feature on our CZcams channel? Check out our Best talkSPORT callers playlist: • The BEST talkSPORT Cal...
#talkSPORT
#PremierLeague
#ChampionsLeague
#FACUP
#SimonJordan
#EuropaLeague
#LauraWoods
#AllyMcCoist
#ManUtd
#ManCity
#Liverpoolfc
#Arsenalfc
#Chelseafc - Sport
Funny how city have been doing this for years and nobody said a word and as soon as Chelsea do it they’re all over them. Kind of like the 8 year contracts and the Saudi deals, people trying to find issues with that.
Isn’t it strange that as soon as Chelsea do the same as numerous other clubs have done for a while, the authorities feel the need to prevent it. City have done this for years and they’ve broken so many rules but nothing.
What rules have City broken mate regarding multi club ownership? Or you just throwing accusations around because it’s trendy to do so against City?
115 charges……
@@Graziak5 None of which relate to multi club ownership and none of which are proven!
He didn’t say they were to do with multi club ownership, he just said they broke rules. Which is technically true considering they paid a fine to uefa for breaking ffp rules. And maybe the others haven’t been proven yet but they are the only ones with anywhere near that number of charges against them. Just a coincidence?
tell me what clubs in the prem do city owners own apart from city?
Why is Chelsea and Boehly being used as a thumbnail - are theh the first club to do it? The medias constant negative narrative on Chelsea at this point is beyond shameful
Facts or narrative? Make up your mind...
@@stnbch3025the only fact is that chelsea are about the 8th club in the Prem to own multiple clubs. Yet when they do it everyone’s up in arms. Hilarious 😂
they are in the same league are you all wallys
They'll attack and criticise Chelsea for whatever decision they make regardless of clubs doing out there doing it themselves for years . This is nothing new.
oh boohoo, poor Chelsea
huge issue newcastle owners own part of chelsea they are part of the same league
Start with Manchester City
Obsessed
They own clubs on separate Continents. Nothing to do with EUFA
@@outofthetrash5925Red Bull.
Started way way before that
@Ehfhj512
Yes Napoli is in Europe and UEFA? But Manchester City don't own Napoli pal.
As a Chelsea fan I’m not keen on multi-club models, especially multiple clubs in the same continent. It’s another method of putting in a ceiling that so-called “lesser” or “smaller” clubs can’t go beyond. It’s a design to stop the likes of Leicester or Montpellier breaking up the elite.
Owning multiple clubs helps you around ffp and gives you leverage in producing younger talents at one of the clubs into their 1st team.
strangely they completely missed this point in the video, even though that's the most controversial point about multi-club ownership.
@@highnoon7097cause for all the Simon Jordan Stans what they don’t realize is that 90% of the time it’s just waffle. Makes no sense especially For a man who routinely talks about “best in class”
Hey Aryan, still no comment or reply from you, since you said Bayern and Madrid would batter City? How did you enjoy the treble?
@@tomben6180 congratulations on your treble Tom, you deserved it.
@@shaunakkulhalli "best in clarrrse"
The big problem in multi-club ownership is it basically guarentees that your club will never surpass the main club in the portfolio.... If Strasbourg produce the next Mbappe they will manoevre him to Chelsea at favourable rates.... Clubs are competetive beasts at every level... If your club is in a multi-club portfolio you are now ultimately a feeder club in perpetuity....The dream is dead... Sold its sole for the crumbs on the table rather than taking its own shot at the whole pie... Ultimately securing the Premier Leagues position...
Your club will also never be let drop below certain standards though. For a club like Strasbourg, such a deal provides them long term security and prospects. They would never agree to it if it wasn't to their benefit.
@@anthonyhiggins9799 Thats why I said... You've sold your sole for the crumbs on the table.... Strasbourg were the poor peasant... If I supported Strasbourg I'd rather have an owner that is 100 for Strasbourg and no-one else... If that means being 2nd or 3rd tier... So be it... We will build from there.... Like Brighton & Brentford did....
@@mnb9162 I disagree. These things are rarely permanent. This will allow Strasbourg to build it's infrastructure, academy, and many other aspects of the club which will forever change the structure and brand of the club in a very positive way. Then, Chelsea/Boehly will sell the club at a much increased value and move on to another club of a similar status. It's really clever business and it works out great for everyone involved. Strasbourg will be a much stronger club at the end of all this, with much more stable foundations, and free (and able) to compete at the highest levels when sold on.
@@anthonyhiggins9799 It depends on a lot of factors... But bottomline... Its Boehly who will decide the future of Strasbourg.... And the primary goal is not to see Strasbourg win ligue 1....If it happens, it's more a side note
the integrity of the game, if it has any left, will be dead
I'm a Gooner and our owners own multiple clubs but only one football club and that's us. I don't see a problem with that. I do have a problem with multi football club ownership though.
Rules exist.
Everyone: ..........
Chelsea make moves.
Everyone: We need to change the rules!!!
Rules exist with no specific consequence to breaking them most of the time. Decisions are made on the fly with favouritism the main consideration for punishment.
@@outofthetrash5925Perhaps. I'm just talking about Chelsea though, who have broken no rules. They were complying with the rules giving out long contracts and now those rules are being changed. They were complying with the rules regarding multiple club ownership and now we want to talk about changing those rules. I'm 41 so I've seen this all before. It's always been the way when it comes to Chelsea. The opposite of favouritism.
@@anthonyhiggins9799 Yeah points I've been trying to make in other threads. Clubs such as Man Utd, Liverpool, Real Madrid, Barcelona etc want a closed shop for CL football and league dominance. Being the big boys for EUFA means they have sought to protect them with the fear they could leave and create a closed shop super league.
As soon as Chelsea and then Man City dared to get above their station financially, FFP came in to prevent more.
Owners should be able to spend money as they please. Clubs should be able to offer contracts as long as they like. Players should be able to sign deals as short or as long as they like.
With no Abromavich and Chelsea, with no City, Man Utd - purchased with their own debt - by owners who have extracted every penny they can from would still be by far the richest club. They would still have made poor decisions and been as bad post Fergie but would still be winning the league most years just with lower points tallys. The whole league would be a lot weaker
Yet its billionaire owned clubs that stifle competition? Lol
Were a of that the case and it was Man Utd dishing out 8 year contracts and owning other clubs, there wouldn't be a problem. EUFA is fine with anything so long as the most watched clubs world wide are in and winning their competitions bringing in the money.
I don't mind that but the pretence of being virtuous is annoying.
@@outofthetrash5925 Agree with every word. 👍
Matterface is such an underrated pundit! Props mate!
Club world cup? Players play too much already.
Multi-club ownership? End it already.
What if two clubs in the CL group stage need a draw to go through? Almost certainly it will end in a draw if both are owned by the same people.
Var as been helping match fix in England , rules change week to week according to var .
Absolutely ok as long as owning football teams from different continents that will not meet each other. Definitely Can't b owning football from England, Belgium & Portugal which is from same continent
I find it absolutely laughable that Frenchman wants to whinge about Saudi Arabia ruining the game when American ownership literally invented the super league and owns half the premier league. Where’s the moaning about that???
Simon suggests making it 'tighter' and the genie is out of the bottle - that's true. But these clubs ALWAYS find a way to wriggle around these rules.
Chelsea started by loaning dozens of players to be able to showcase and sell. UEFA had to make moves on it.
Chelsea started the 7-year financial amortisation which UEFA are now acting on.
This will just endlessly go on, these clubs will always find a loophole or gap to exploit.
You mean like City and RedBull?
Union were sitting in the 2nd division of the Belgium league without brighton and bloom, now look at them absolutely flying, whats wrong with that??
get rid of var, get rid of the namby pamby bullshit rules otherwise all these other "interventions" just seem like more empty abuses of control.
Chelsea - "its okay when everyone does it but when i do its a problem"
Football has been governed by money since the beginning of the Premier League and all teams in the league would exploit any loophole they can find without hesitation if one becomes available !!
I honestly don't understand why we keep talking about this as though it's a new thing 😂
Please show Simon the definition of the word 'sentiment'.
Not a problem at all, as long as the clubs dont play on the same continent, thus never meeting each other in any competions and aren't allowed to loan or sell to any other clubs they own......oh wait, sorry i forgot all the people who make these decisions are corrupt and take back handers to allow all this to happen.
I've always said that no club should own another club, it needs to be completely outlawed and for clubs who own other teams to be forced to sell them off to independent parties
well, it was outlawed in the 90s when Portuguese clubs did it and had done so for decades but now, somewhow, because its anglos and middle easterners doing it its apparently no longer outlawed
How many clubs would disappear without multi club ownership?
Sir Simon = Top LAD Proper Clobber ✊
Love him or otherwise, Simon Jordan is in a league of his own.
His normal sycophantic attitude towards Boely is so annoying.
You’re right there. The league of “La La”
united started the hyper inflation Simon with sky in 1992 as sky bankrolled them to be the poster club for the new prem before 1992 united was near broke prem comes along and they can suddenly revamp OT and sign all the talent
Simon “not withstanding that” Jordan 😅
Loves that agreement 😂
Simon "I'm not in the camp"
Are you guys talking about this as soon as Chelsea bought Strasbourg ? why there was no talk about this till now ?
There was a lot of discussion over it
What’s Simon writing? 😂
Writing how he is a failed club owner and how others have more than 1 club?
Writing down Top LAD Proper Clobber 💯 Facts
Simon is just sour he didnt think of this earlier 😂
what if rb leipzig vs rb salzburg at final ucl
Wasn't a problem until the smaller guys like Villa and Brighton did it.
Like FFP wasnt a thing until smaller clubs started competing with the "legacy" clubs.
Any time smaller clubs start to leverage anything that helps them close the gap EUFA get involved and even worse they act like they are soing so for the benefit of smaller clubs. They are supposed to set rules but are corrupt to the core themselves.
Because post ffp no small club has competed with legacy clubs have they
Oh wait Man City Just won a treble
A relatively small club pre takeover
That's my point. EUFA saw Chelsea and Man City and decided to not allow it to happen again likely at the behest of the legacy clubs, who threatened to create a Superleague anytime they can't get exactly what they want from EUFA.
Barcelona and Real Madrid got so scared that they even go La liga to make rule changes. Changes that would eventually prevent Messi staying at Barcelona, so you reap what you sow in the end.
are use English asleep???... FFP was brought in by Europe to stop the Prem clubs taking over with all there money, it was ok in the 70's, 80's and 90's when Italian and Spanish clubs where buying all the best players, but soon as the prem (through Chelsea) started spending like Madrid, Europe was like no, strap the FFP chains around the Prem, UEFA is all about it being fair when prem clubs start spending big, they used Chelsea as an excuse... United can only spend 150 million or the breach FFP rules, no way is enough to catch City, but United have to except that because its the rules,... so how is that helping United aka a Legacy club, FFP is stopping united, and United in 700 million debt trying to keep up with these super oil rich "SMALL" clubs.
Nah. They have Boehly in the thumbnail for a reason. When Chelsea do something, it becomes a problem. Giving out long contracts within the rules, so we gotta change the rules. Go multi-club, we change the rules. Chelsea were interested in buying at least two clubs, with the second one likely being in Portugal or Brazil. They want to prevent that now before Chelsea and Boehly become too powerful as a financial and sporting entity.
@@anthonyhiggins9799 clubs in Portugal cant be bought. Theyre by legal definition owned by their fans. Chelsea apparently didnt know something as basic as that
the prem is already corrupted has been since its creation thats just a fact sad thing is not a single league is honest and true , international football is even worse
Another agenda... It's like this Jordan never cheated his club😂😂😂
LOL😂
Just wait till that joker Radcliffe takes over utd... If he does... He will own 2 clubs in Europe itself who can compete in the CL then we will see these scoucers talking😂😂😂
This looks the same problem as the F1 when on owner owns two teams even if nothing is actually going on conspiracies happen its wrong and always one team will be the no1 and the other team will be no2 negating the competativness of the no2 team
Here we go again , let's have a go at City. Man City ruining Football.
Why are football clubs even still owned by private individuals. With the money in football football clubs should be owned by fans. its a joke how football is going.
why dont fans pay 5 billion for a club? because they can't and historically fan owned clubs doesn't work properly
@@MrAce86Productions historically they do work pretty well. Benfica and FC Porto have historically done well
@@MrAce86Productions also, by definition a club is fan owned. You people are so brainwashed by fake privately owned clubs that youve lost sight of that
Football fans are hypocrites. The same Chelsea fans celebrating there new multiclub model after years criticising man city
115 rules broken man city we know what u are