Vic Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Just an interesting comment from Leyton Orient head Barry Hearn who's side got a replay with Arsenal in the FA Cup and stands to receive a major winfall from the gate at Emirates. "Listen, why don't we go straight to penalties? We'll have more chance that way. Our annual wages budget is £1.7 million. There isn't one Arsenal player who doesn't earn that himself. "We've had £800,000 out of the FA Cup so far this year," Hearn said. "We should get another £700,000 or £800,000 from the gate at the Emirates. For a replay you only get half the TV money, but that's still £125,000. "So I'm going to be running the most profitable club in the Football League this year. That's not saying a lot because all 72 clubs in the Football League lost money last year. The industry is fundamentally flawed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundog Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Just an interesting comment from Leyton Orient head Barry Hearn who's side got a replay with Arsenal in the FA Cup and stands to receive a major winfall from the gate at Emirates. "Listen, why don't we go straight to penalties? We'll have more chance that way. Our annual wages budget is £1.7 million. There isn't one Arsenal player who doesn't earn that himself. "We've had £800,000 out of the FA Cup so far this year," Hearn said. "We should get another £700,000 or £800,000 from the gate at the Emirates. For a replay you only get half the TV money, but that's still £125,000. "So I'm going to be running the most profitable club in the Football League this year. That's not saying a lot because all 72 clubs in the Football League lost money last year. The industry is fundamentally flawed. thats where match fixing comes into play to recoupe most of the money lost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VPjr Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 The OSA could have made the decision by Feb. 25th, they just preferred to defer it until Sept. The proposed group had met all the requirements of the application process, once again a house league decision made by politicians, another case of "let's have a meeting to decide when to have the meeting" While I would prefer not to be discussing this issue in any detail at this time, I will respond to this particular comment as follows: a) while it would be nice if the OSA were able to make a decision more quickly, their rules stipulate that new leagues get approved in September and, as such, it would be inappropriate to push them to deviate from those rules, especially since the proposed new league seeks to kick off in Spring 2012. If the OSA decides that it wants a Level 1 Non-Amateur league and it can be approved in September, it still leaves alot of time to get things organized. the OSA has been completely transparent throughout this process. The decision to defer was not a surprise. The OSA is a big organization. For a proposal like this to be successful long term, it really does require the full support of the vast majority of the board. Forcing the board to make a decision last weekend could have been harmful. Taking extra time and allowing a working group to study the situation more thoroughly is not a negative. I believe that a compelling argument was made as to why a new league would be good for the growth of the sport and how it would create exciting opportunities for players, coaches, referees and clubs. However, the OSA has a lot of factors to take into consideration and they have a duty to their membership to take a cautious approach. At some point in the future, I'll be able to discuss this whole thing in more detail. What that time comes, I'll start a Q & A thread. For the next few weeks, I need to focus on getting our club ready for the summer season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 The CSL appears to be moving to address the issue of 2 levels of membership: Link The league is introducing a change in its structure to achieve an environment which brings the business side of the CSL more in line with the game – the competition, where all teams are the same, all on a level playing field. The formation of an incorporated body, CSL Association Inc. developed during 2010, is complete now so that expressions such as ‘equity owners’, ‘non-equity owners’ or ‘playing members’ will soon be terminology from the past.. CSL League Administrator Pino Jazbec, a proponent of a change that brings equalization to the status of teams, sees the new company as a step in the right direction. “It’s a very painless way over a long period of time to compensate those clubs who poured money into the CSL over the years and who presently own the league. In time, it will be everyone’s league” he said, referring to the question of league ownership. We'll have to see how this affects the growth of the proposed D3 league for Ontario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redcoatsforever Posted March 10, 2011 Author Share Posted March 10, 2011 The CSL do look like they're taking the appropriate steps to modernize the ownership of the league. That said, there's no reason that both leagues couldn't exist. Eventually one would have to become the higher ranked division D2/D3 or D3/D4, or they would have to merge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackTheBlizzard Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Question you need ask yourselves is why so many teams are rumoured to have wanted to start up a rival league to the point that two of them actually left outright and have started the process of setting something else up for 2012. Maybe the terms are not as positive as Pino Jazbec is painting them in this press release or maybe the equity owners have caved in a bit since then and circumstances have changed? Time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.