| MOM 23:04 - Dec 4 with 10114 views | Swanseajill |
in my view was the referee. He kept the game flowing with an unbiased view. No strutting or giving the players verbal earbashing. Both sets of players had plenty of respect for him
How refreshing. ....Can we have him every week?  |  | | |  |
| MOM on 23:06 - Dec 4 with 5577 views | Uxbridge |
Not a fan of Webb, but he's consistent if nothing else. That's better than most  |  |
| |
| MOM on 23:14 - Dec 4 with 5555 views | SwansNZ |
Well, I've seen worse refs this season - one in particular would have given them a couple of penalties, even though they were clearly not. |  |
| |
| MOM on 23:17 - Dec 4 with 5534 views | C_jack |
Crikey the whole of SA1 must be in a great mood if even the ref is getting praised. |  |
| |
| MOM on 00:01 - Dec 5 with 5432 views | Fuggie |
| MOM on 23:17 - Dec 4 by C_jack |
Crikey the whole of SA1 must be in a great mood if even the ref is getting praised. |
I agree. Webb (if honest) gave a couple of iffy decisions that if were against the Swans would have had this website in uproar.
ie
1. |  | | |
| MOM on 00:12 - Dec 5 with 5400 views | Fuggie |
| MOM on 23:17 - Dec 4 by C_jack |
Crikey the whole of SA1 must be in a great mood if even the ref is getting praised. |
I agree. Webb was consistent but I doubt he would have left the liberty alive if he had given those decisions against the Swans.
Decision 1+2 - Handball
1st handball was definitely a penalty. Why was Ashley's hands there other than to make himself as big as possible to block the ball. He got away with it because the ball went to a Newcastle player in the middle of the penalty area.
2nd handball was a 50:50. Yes, Ben Davies hands were high but they were not there initially to stop the ball. People need to be aware the Slow-Motion is (as defined) Slow. If your hands are 5ft away from the ball and a player hit's it at you at 70mph how much reaction time have you got. My guess is 0.1 sec's (and that is before your body reacts).
Yes we have seen them given (especially against us) but today was our day and so F*ck the Magpies.
Decision 3 - Attempted Headbutt
Lets be honest, if an oppostion player did that to Shelvey we would have demanded the Red Card, however today it was one of our own. What was worse was Shelvey's comment post match, when he said that "when a player comes at you to complain you should stick your head in. (Perhaps not his exact words but near enough).
Let's just say that the Swans Media Officer needs to have a quite word with him to ensure words are not misinterpreted.
Anyway bring on Hull and lets sort out these North Eastenders. | | | |
| MOM on 00:18 - Dec 5 with 5381 views | SwansNZ |
| MOM on 00:12 - Dec 5 by Fuggie |
I agree. Webb was consistent but I doubt he would have left the liberty alive if he had given those decisions against the Swans.
Decision 1+2 - Handball
1st handball was definitely a penalty. Why was Ashley's hands there other than to make himself as big as possible to block the ball. He got away with it because the ball went to a Newcastle player in the middle of the penalty area.
2nd handball was a 50:50. Yes, Ben Davies hands were high but they were not there initially to stop the ball. People need to be aware the Slow-Motion is (as defined) Slow. If your hands are 5ft away from the ball and a player hit's it at you at 70mph how much reaction time have you got. My guess is 0.1 sec's (and that is before your body reacts).
Yes we have seen them given (especially against us) but today was our day and so F*ck the Magpies.
Decision 3 - Attempted Headbutt
Lets be honest, if an oppostion player did that to Shelvey we would have demanded the Red Card, however today it was one of our own. What was worse was Shelvey's comment post match, when he said that "when a player comes at you to complain you should stick your head in. (Perhaps not his exact words but near enough).
Let's just say that the Swans Media Officer needs to have a quite word with him to ensure words are not misinterpreted.
Anyway bring on Hull and lets sort out these North Eastenders. |
The Swans have a Media Officer?  | |
| |
| MOM on 01:06 - Dec 5 with 5325 views | SwansNZ |
| MOM on 00:12 - Dec 5 by Fuggie |
I agree. Webb was consistent but I doubt he would have left the liberty alive if he had given those decisions against the Swans.
Decision 1+2 - Handball
1st handball was definitely a penalty. Why was Ashley's hands there other than to make himself as big as possible to block the ball. He got away with it because the ball went to a Newcastle player in the middle of the penalty area.
2nd handball was a 50:50. Yes, Ben Davies hands were high but they were not there initially to stop the ball. People need to be aware the Slow-Motion is (as defined) Slow. If your hands are 5ft away from the ball and a player hit's it at you at 70mph how much reaction time have you got. My guess is 0.1 sec's (and that is before your body reacts).
Yes we have seen them given (especially against us) but today was our day and so F*ck the Magpies.
Decision 3 - Attempted Headbutt
Lets be honest, if an oppostion player did that to Shelvey we would have demanded the Red Card, however today it was one of our own. What was worse was Shelvey's comment post match, when he said that "when a player comes at you to complain you should stick your head in. (Perhaps not his exact words but near enough).
Let's just say that the Swans Media Officer needs to have a quite word with him to ensure words are not misinterpreted.
Anyway bring on Hull and lets sort out these North Eastenders. |
Quote "1st handball was definitely a penalty. Why was Ashley's hands there other than to make himself as big as possible to block the ball. He got away with it because the ball went to a Newcastle player in the middle of the penalty area."
Did I miss this handball? there was a clash (well not even a clash), but the only possible handball I can recall was the one with Ben | |
| |
| MOM on 07:58 - Dec 5 with 5221 views | JackFish |
Yeah the only potential handball I saw was the one Ben blocked that they all appealed for, but that didn't look like a pen to me.
There was the blatant dive by one of their players as well, but don't remember a penalty claim against Ash? |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| MOM on 08:48 - Dec 5 with 5142 views | Andy1300 |
| MOM on 07:58 - Dec 5 by JackFish |
Yeah the only potential handball I saw was the one Ben blocked that they all appealed for, but that didn't look like a pen to me.
There was the blatant dive by one of their players as well, but don't remember a penalty claim against Ash? |
As was on the edge of the box toward the corner flag , the ball was whipped in and to us in the east it looked like handball. |  |
| |
| MOM on 09:17 - Dec 5 with 5103 views | Uxbridge |
The Davies one was as much of a penalty as the Joe Cole one was. So that evens out. There's still nothing that comes close to the Routledge decision though. | |
| |
| MOM on 09:33 - Dec 5 with 5082 views | WarwickHunt |
| MOM on 09:17 - Dec 5 by Uxbridge |
The Davies one was as much of a penalty as the Joe Cole one was. So that evens out. There's still nothing that comes close to the Routledge decision though. |
Thought ML got it spot on when he described it as a 50/50. Some you get , some you don't and there were reasons for and against.
Ball to hand (arm) - are defenders supposed to waddle around in the area like penguins with their arms permanently tucked in?
About he only thing Owen got right all night when he said it would have been harsh.
Very good performance overall from Webb and I'm not usually a big fan. |  | | |
| MOM on 09:36 - Dec 5 with 5072 views | Shaky |
| MOM on 09:17 - Dec 5 by Uxbridge |
The Davies one was as much of a penalty as the Joe Cole one was. So that evens out. There's still nothing that comes close to the Routledge decision though. |
I think there's quite a few candidates for MOM in that outstanding performance, and one thing that strikes me is that they have all been bought in by ML.
I am delighted the much better recent results to go with the much better performances starting a few weeks earlier are starting to sway some of the IMO inexplicable dissatisfaction with his management.
However, I'm guessing your are an accountant of some sort Uxbridge, and have an idea for you; why don't you put together a player only value adjusted balance sheet under ML's reign, showing historical cost and estimated market value today (don't bother with the NBV if the cumulative depreciation is too complicated to figure out), and the resulting net change in the club's pre-tax equity value.
I think that would be a very interesting exercise to highlight the value added the guy has brought to the table.
Edit: If you're a little tech savvy you might even put something like that on Google docs so punters can plug in their own valuations [Post edited 5 Dec 2013 9:38]
|  |
| |
| MOM on 09:38 - Dec 5 with 5068 views | Uxbridge |
| MOM on 09:36 - Dec 5 by Shaky |
I think there's quite a few candidates for MOM in that outstanding performance, and one thing that strikes me is that they have all been bought in by ML.
I am delighted the much better recent results to go with the much better performances starting a few weeks earlier are starting to sway some of the IMO inexplicable dissatisfaction with his management.
However, I'm guessing your are an accountant of some sort Uxbridge, and have an idea for you; why don't you put together a player only value adjusted balance sheet under ML's reign, showing historical cost and estimated market value today (don't bother with the NBV if the cumulative depreciation is too complicated to figure out), and the resulting net change in the club's pre-tax equity value.
I think that would be a very interesting exercise to highlight the value added the guy has brought to the table.
Edit: If you're a little tech savvy you might even put something like that on Google docs so punters can plug in their own valuations [Post edited 5 Dec 2013 9:38]
|
It would. You should do it.
Agree that Laudrup's buys have been, on the whole, very good. Even those maligned by some are now showing their value. | |
| |
| MOM on 09:44 - Dec 5 with 5054 views | Shaky |
| MOM on 09:38 - Dec 5 by Uxbridge |
It would. You should do it.
Agree that Laudrup's buys have been, on the whole, very good. Even those maligned by some are now showing their value. |
I'm not an accountant though, and in any case I think it would be much more effective coming from you. Shouldn't take you more than 10 minutes. | |
| |
| MOM on 10:07 - Dec 5 with 5008 views | Uxbridge |
Aye, about that. I just couldn't be arsed though. Sorry.
Edit - Oh and, unless something has changed since last I looked, we wouldn't be changing anything on the balance sheet if a player's market value goes up or down. [Post edited 5 Dec 2013 10:12]
| |
| |
| MOM on 11:17 - Dec 5 with 4957 views | Shaky |
| MOM on 10:07 - Dec 5 by Uxbridge |
Aye, about that. I just couldn't be arsed though. Sorry.
Edit - Oh and, unless something has changed since last I looked, we wouldn't be changing anything on the balance sheet if a player's market value goes up or down. [Post edited 5 Dec 2013 10:12]
|
**[Market] Value adjusted**
If you're doing this properly and want everything to balance, you replace book value with market value, and add the difference to equity capital and a provision for tax.
For the purpose of this I would just make a list of player names, historical cost, and then an estimate of market value. Add the difference between the final two columns together and you have total pre-tax Michael Laudrup transfer market value added.
If you or indeed anybody else isn't going to take a stab at this I'll do it, but I need to set up a Shaky Google documents account and stuff first, and I have a few more pressing things on my plate right now. | |
| |
| MOM on 11:28 - Dec 5 with 4941 views | Uxbridge |
No idea why you're bringing equity or tax into it, but I think you've just volunteered yourself for the job. Good man. | |
| |
| MOM on 11:32 - Dec 5 with 4936 views | Shaky |
| MOM on 11:28 - Dec 5 by Uxbridge |
No idea why you're bringing equity or tax into it, but I think you've just volunteered yourself for the job. Good man. |
Because what you are estimating is in effect the unrecognised profit on the stock of players, were they to be sold at market.
And to turn that into the profit available to shareholders you have to tax it. | |
| |
| MOM on 11:37 - Dec 5 with 4924 views | Uxbridge |
| MOM on 11:32 - Dec 5 by Shaky |
Because what you are estimating is in effect the unrecognised profit on the stock of players, were they to be sold at market.
And to turn that into the profit available to shareholders you have to tax it. |
Then you compare the sale price against the remaining unamortised value on the balance sheet. Which, in itself, is meaningless anyway. In our case, you want to look at cashflow and reserves rather than profit to see what money they can take out of the club ... profit or loss is rather a paper concept in football. | |
| |
| MOM on 11:50 - Dec 5 with 4903 views | ScoobyWho |
Spot on Jill.
About time too ;-) we haven't faired that well recently. I thought the lot were against us ! |  |
| |
| MOM on 11:50 - Dec 5 with 4903 views | Shaky |
| MOM on 11:37 - Dec 5 by Uxbridge |
Then you compare the sale price against the remaining unamortised value on the balance sheet. Which, in itself, is meaningless anyway. In our case, you want to look at cashflow and reserves rather than profit to see what money they can take out of the club ... profit or loss is rather a paper concept in football. |
>>"Then you compare the sale price against the remaining unamortised value on the balance sheet. "
An exact restatement of what I said.
>>"In our case, you want to look at cashflow and reserves rather than profit to see what money they can take out of the club."
In the current context which is akin to what you might term a breakup valuation: Wrong, wrong, wrong.
You can't dividend out more than you have in equity reserves regardless of how much cash is in hand. And where do reserves invariably come from? Post-tax profits. Doh. | |
| |
| MOM on 12:39 - Dec 5 with 4872 views | Uxbridge |
Put the textbook and google down, champ. | |
| |
| MOM on 13:06 - Dec 5 with 4835 views | Shaky |
Don't worry Uxbridge, as I said I'm not an accountant but in my professional experience I've never come across one who is better than me, because my expertise in finance gives me such a big edge.
That said I did on one occasion learn a few arcane tricks from a specialist New York based brand/intangible asset accounting and valuation team from KPMG. | |
| |
| MOM on 13:26 - Dec 5 with 4807 views | Uxbridge |
Have you tried contacting the club? I'm sure a trifling £100m business is beneath someone with your extensive experience, but a bit of charity work always looks good. A man of your calibre could do wonders for the club. | |
| |
| MOM on 13:45 - Dec 5 with 4767 views | Shaky |
| MOM on 13:26 - Dec 5 by Uxbridge |
Have you tried contacting the club? I'm sure a trifling £100m business is beneath someone with your extensive experience, but a bit of charity work always looks good. A man of your calibre could do wonders for the club. |
Answered via PM with full CV. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
