McCabe joins the Board

[pjennings]

The SMH article called him the $1.8Billion man

 

[Sacko]

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/specials/rich_list/rich_list_2009/article6068886.ece

RESULTS FOR 2009
Ranking: 322=
Worth: 175m
Down: 25m
Source of wealth: Property

McCabe, 61, is being tipped as a potential buyer of Valad, the group that acquired his Scarborough property business for 865m in 2007. As Valads share price has fallen, McCabe has built up the 3% stake that he received in it as part payment to about 20%. He chairs Sheffield United FC and has other interests.

I swear I read 2 billion somewhere but thats still a whole lot of money.

Depends whether you include the Tevez blood money!

 

[Sacko]

because sacko's a bitter c**t over his club getting to cheat their way out of relegation and then someone actually calling them on it and having a court agree with them, even though his club got to keep the vast majority (i.e. all of it minus the damages) of the ill-gotten TV money that they received for staying up.

i don't quite get how some hammers fans whine because they did the wrong thing and were punished (barely) - it's like someone robbing your house and being pissed off at the injustice of having to give back only some of the DVDs they nicked.

[/rant]

i think it's potentially a bad thing if our development programs and player signings are hijacked in order to turn us into just a feeder club for the blades, rather than a club with its own ambitions and priorities receiving the support of a larger family of clubs.

until or if that happens, it's a bad thing. if we're simply gaining the benefits of the 'blades family' - like help on setting up the academy, tours, junior player exchanges and all - then i think it's fine.

Dibo,

For your own safety I suggest you refrain from calling me c**t in future...

 

[Blair]

because sacko's a bitter c**t over his club getting to cheat their way out of relegation and then someone actually calling them on it and having a court agree with them, even though his club got to keep the vast majority (i.e. all of it minus the damages) of the ill-gotten TV money that they received for staying up.

i don't quite get how some hammers fans whine because they did the wrong thing and were punished (barely) - it's like someone robbing your house and being pissed off at the injustice of having to give back only some of the DVDs they nicked.

[/rant]

i think it's potentially a bad thing if our development programs and player signings are hijacked in order to turn us into just a feeder club for the blades, rather than a club with its own ambitions and priorities receiving the support of a larger family of clubs.

until or if that happens, it's a bad thing. if we're simply gaining the benefits of the 'blades family' - like help on setting up the academy, tours, junior player exchanges and all - then i think it's fine.

Dibo,

For your own safety I suggest you refrain from calling me c**t in future...

I agree that word is not the best.

 

[Dutch Wives]

true, but i dont think calling Sacko names was the point of the rant
everything else in it seemed pretty accurate though

 

[Sacko]

Central coast Blades it is then

Will Sacko hand in his season ticket ?  ;D

No - as I only renewed yesterday!

For the reasons documented else where I don't like the bloke and think he is a sore loser (on that basis perhaps he could be the next captain of the Australian cricket team!), but maybe CCM need somebody like him with a bit of mongral in the boardroom to freashen the place up from the top down.

HOWEVER, having seen how the soul was ripped out of Spirit with the hun came in (1st season a seat on the board - the following season a full take over!) I hope that lessons have been learned...

Hi, I'm a Sheffield United fan found my way here after being interested in what kind of reaction McCabe would get buying into a club like this.

Have to say I've had the argument with too many people and my blood starts to come to the boil any time I see the guy called a sore loser or similar. I think the way the guy handled himself in the media, while United didn't always come out well, was very respectable. He never made petty comments or got into mud-slinging, he conducted the whole thing very professionally and kept as low a profile as he could. The arguments he left to the legal team.

Fact is, West Ham signed a player illegally, and that player is now worth tens of millions. Wham were fined 5m. It makes cheating sound like good business. Wham then went on to settle out of court because, let's face it, they were guilty as sin. But I digress.

I think if you ask Blades fans of their opinion of McCabe you'll find almost everyone agrees he's the best chairman we've had. We've seen some awful chairmen near running the club into the ground, and McCabe has turned us into one of the most financially stable and progressive clubs off the pitch.

If you check out www.bladesunited.org you'll find the official messageboard, which I don't post on as it requires a subscription. There's a lot of debate going on about the man right now as he's made a few misleading comments here and there, and because while the off the pitch running seems good, we're less than inspiring where it matters.

I'm trying to be balanced, but on the whole I think you'll find the guy does good things for you. He's a businessman and a football fan, so I wouldn't be overly worried about suddenly becoming the Central Coast Blades like he did with Chengdu. I think it's safe to say he's more understanding than to do that in a place where it would anger the fans.

He's no Abramovich to come pumping funds in and buy you to the top of the league, but expect a solid infrastructure and stability to come with him. Long term, I think you should have a lot of faith in the guy. He's done wonders for us.

Facts for the misinformed

West Ham never benefited from the sale of Tevez as he was owned by a 3rd party (including his loan sell at Manure) - hence the 3rd party ownship technicality that was breached resulting a GBP 5m fine.

Many players in Europe and South America are owned by a 3rd party so there's cheating there as far as FIFA are concerned.

Tevez was never illegible to play in for West Ham. West Ham breached the EPL 3rd party influence rules which allowed the 3rd party owner to sell Tevez without West Hams permission, this was contained in a side letter that wasnt disclosed and is what the fine was for.

The rule that West Ham broke actually worked against them as Tevez could have been sold in the January transfer window against their wishes. In addition, Tevez was played out of position and thus shite until after the transfer window closed so nobody wanted him!

The side letter was discovered when Liverpool tried to sign Mascherano in the January transfer window which is why he did couldnt play for them until the EPL were satisfied the clause had been removed.

Sheff Utd went down because they lost to Wigan on the last day of the season , even though they had beaten West Ham in the run in (when Tevez played) so IMHO have nobody to blame for their relegation but them themselves!

As well as the sour grapes issue, my dislike of McCabe stems from his hypocrisy, as Sheff Utd breached the 3rd party influence rule in far more blatant way in the same season by not allowing a player, whos name I dont recall, was transferred to Watford but prevented from playing in the game against Sheff Utd!               

 

[MagpieMariner]

As an occasional Wednesday fan (raised in Sheffield until 16)

What's the meaning of Sheffield Wednesday? Do they only play midweek?
Sorry, I know the question's off-topic, but I don't know where else to post it.

 

[clarence]

As an occasional Wednesday fan (raised in Sheffield until 16)

What's the meaning of Sheffield Wednesday? Do they only play midweek?
Sorry, I know the question's off-topic, but I don't know where else to post it.

Actually, that IS one of those questions I have had for years too?  ???  ???

Yeah, why call the club Wednesday? Is there a district in the area of Sheffield known as Wednesday or something?

 

[dibo]

wiki delivers:

The club was a cricket club when it formed in 1820 as The Wednesday Cricket Club (named after the day of the week when they played their matches).

 

[clarence]

Yeah thanx Dibo, I just went there for the answer too. Apparently formed to play Cricket on Wednesdays by Butchers, who had a half day on Wednesdays back then. Football Club formed to keep cricketers fit. Very old club - one of the originals for the FA.

 

[Paolo]

Edit ; too slow

 

[dibo]

Football Club formed to keep cricketers fit.

Parallels to Melbourne Football Club in 1858.

 

[Sacko]

wiki delivers:

The club was a cricket club when it formed in 1820 as The Wednesday Cricket Club (named after the day of the week when they played their matches).

So why are they known as the owls then oh wise one?

 

[Roy Law]

Because in the late 1890s they bought land at Owlerton...which is where they still play although ground is now called Hillsborough. The adoption of the Owl as the mascot was made in the early 1900s. They used to have the nickname of 'Blades' with Sheff Utd called the 'Cutlers' - a reference to Sheffield's position as a steel making city famous for its cutlery. Here ends this South Yorkshire history lesson.

 

[Arabmariner]

Didn't the Russians destroy Sheffield with a nuclear bomb in 1984 ? 

 

[Bladesman87]

Facts for the misinformed

West Ham never benefited from the sale of Tevez as he was owned by a 3rd party (including his loan sell at Manure) - hence the 3rd party ownship technicality that was breached resulting a GBP 5m fine.

My point was that West Ham publically admitted that they could not have signed Tevez without the third party agreement. And that taking a 5m fine for signing a player now worth several times that makes cheating good business.

Many players in Europe and South America are owned by a 3rd party so there's cheating there as far as FIFA are concerned.

It was a breach of the Premier League rules not FIFA rules. I don't see any relevance to this.

West Ham. West Ham breached the EPL 3rd party influence rules which allowed the 3rd party owner to sell Tevez without West Hams permission, this was contained in a side letter that wasnt disclosed and is what the fine was for.

The important thing being that they willingly and knowingly cheated in order to acquire one of the world's brightest prospects cut-price.

The rule that West Ham broke actually worked against them as Tevez could have been sold in the January transfer window against their wishes. In addition, Tevez was played out of position and thus shite until after the transfer window closed so nobody wanted him!

No, it worked entirely for them as they couldn't have had him at all without the breach of rules.

Sheff Utd went down because they lost to Wigan on the last day of the season , even though they had beaten West Ham in the run in (when Tevez played) so IMHO have nobody to blame for their relegation but them themselves!

If an athlete loses a 100m sprint, and then discovers that he lost the gold medal to a man on performance enhancing drugs, the fact that he was slower on the day becomes irrelevant. He did not beat the man fairly. He knowingly and willingly breached the rules to gain an advantage and he therefore loses his honours gained in said race.

As well as the sour grapes issue, my dislike of McCabe stems from his hypocrisy, as Sheff Utd breached the 3rd party influence rule in far more blatant way in the same season by not allowing a player, whos name I dont recall, was transferred to Watford but prevented from playing in the game against Sheff Utd!               

Facts for the misinformed:

No such clause existed in Steve Kabba's contract.

Steve Kabba hadn't played in games prior to playing against Sheffield United for Watford due to being injured and sh*t.

Sheffield United had asked if Watford would refrain from playing Kabba against United. Watford were under no contractual obligation to this. Sheffield United had at no stage claimed or intended to claim the right to prevent Kabba playing in any match. We didn't breach any 3rd party ownership rules on any player.

Sheffield United have at no stage lost a legal battle and West Ham decided to settle out of court for over 20m.

 

[Arabmariner]

 

[Sacko]

Didn't the Russians destroy Sheffield with a nuclear bomb in 1984 ? 

If only - no Hillsborough tragedy and no Tevezgate!

BTW - I remember watching a mockumentary about the bomb at school

 

[Arabmariner]

Didn't the Russians destroy Sheffield with a nuclear bomb in 1984 ? 

BTW - I remember watching a mockumentary about the bomb at school

"Threads".....1984

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8E9fwQ1Ylw

No well know "name" actors in it.It focused on the build up and the 10-15 years after a nuclear attack.Back then it was a real possibility and this "mockumentary" kind of gave a lot of people the willies at the time.

 

[FFC Mariner]

Personally, I think the city of Sheffield would benefit from a nuclear attack.

Maggie missed a few of them in the 80's.

Shame