Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

  • Participation within this subforum is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.

ECHO Comment: "Fears of Witch-hunt Against Liverpool FC" part 3

I reckon its that cows udder or wtf it was they used to rub on injured players, they are like zombies on bath salts.
 
BlueInNZ said:
Like a few, myself included, have said if pro cyclists doped then why not pro footballers?

Compare wages earned between the two and it's a no brainer. And like you say, many teams will be at it just like the pro teams were.

With pro cyclists the EPO thing caused a few deaths. Heaven forbid we get that.

Only solution is very rigorous testing. Maybe. But as you said, how many fans don't want their hero to be found out?
Click to expand...


The EFL and EPL are both governed by the WADA code, so all athletes have to give their whereabouts via e-mail or text message for 2 hours everyday during which time they can be randomly tested. So it will normally be at the training facility. They can also be called randomly after games for blood and Urine testing.

Interestingly, my information on testing by sport is out of date and, as of April, the average premier league player will be tested nearly 4 times a year (in and out of competition), making them the most tested pool of professional athletes in the country. In the EFL it's less than twice a season.

What is interesting, however, is that football doesn't operate the "bio passport" scheme enabling testers to use long term data to map an athlete's blood values over time and detect trends indicating a pattern of doping. Testing will be a binary pass or fail... In cycling this didn't work so well. Cyclists got around this by extracting their blood when they were fresh and reinfusing it when they were at their most fatigued. You can only detect that with the passport.
 
Everton1970 said:
Seems you played around with them figures slightly. Seems we’re clear 4th in the net spend and gross spend, over 60m more net than the 6th team Chelsea. Other than the RS, where you’re over 100m out, I think you’ve just added their figures up instead of subtracting the years they made a profit. The rest of your figures, give or take 20-30m, work out about right.

www.transfermarkt.co.uk

Premier League - Transfer balance and five-year comparison

In dieser Statistik werden die Transferbilanzen der letzten fünf bzw. zehn Jahre der Vereine der Premier League miteinander verglichen.
www.transfermarkt.co.uk www.transfermarkt.co.uk


19/2018/1917/1816/17NET
Manchester CityManchester City£-89.10m£-22.04m£-203.54m£-160.34m475m
Liverpool FCLiverpool FC£29.25m£-126.99m£18.56m£4.93m75m
Chelsea FCChelsea FC£79.52m£-124.43m£-53.91m£-21.96m128m
Tottenham HotspurTottenham Hotspur£-71.10m£4.82m£-15.93m£-28.08m110m
Arsenal FCArsenal FC£-91.89m£-65.03m£3.02m£-92.42m246m
Manchester UnitedManchester United£-84.60m£-46.94m£-137.61m£-124.07m393m
Everton FCEverton FC£-35.46m£-64.04m£-69.14m£-22.59m191m
Leicester City
Click to expand...

Some of the figures for Liverpool are out, so I have corrected them.

However I am not sure it's reasonable to say we have spent a huge amount compared to teams above us. We have spent broadly speaking in line with them (and that is being very favourable in it's analysis).

You also have to factor in, we have only really fallen behind Chelsea because this summer has seen a transfer ban, that may well mean we finish the season above them.

What is fair to say though, is because of poor spending we have not progressed as much as we ought to have, and the gap has widened. That is primarily down to the first 2 seasons under Moshiri in my view.
 
catcherintherye said:
Some of the figures for Liverpool are out, so I have corrected them.

However I am not sure it's reasonable to say we have spent a huge amount compared to teams above us. We have spent broadly speaking in line with them (and that is being very favourable in it's analysis).

You also have to factor in, we have only really fallen behind Chelsea because this summer has seen a transfer ban, that may well mean we finish the season above them.

What is fair to say though, is because of poor spending we have not progressed as much as we ought to have, and the gap has widened. That is primarily down to the first 2 seasons under Moshiri in my view.
Click to expand...

Not sure how you can state that we have spent, broadly speaking, In line with them. We have spent, net, 115m more than the RS, 80m more than Spurs, 60m more than Chelsea. In line with them? We have the 4th largest gross and net spend. No amount of dressing it up will alter that. You are dressing it up and then admitting that we have been extremely poor. Trying to dress it up to make it sound better isn’t doing you any favours. We’ve failed. Massively.
 
Everton1970 said:
Not sure how you can state that we have spent, broadly speaking, In line with them. We have spent, net, 115m more than the RS, 80m more than Spurs, 60m more than Chelsea. In line with them? We have the 4th largest gross and net spend. No amount of dressing it up will alter that. You are dressing it up and then admitting that we have been extremely poor. Trying to dress it up to make it sound better isn’t doing you any favours. We’ve failed. Massively.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm
 

Everton1970 said:
Not sure how you can state that we have spent, broadly speaking, In line with them. We have spent, net, 115m more than the RS, 80m more than Spurs, 60m more than Chelsea. In line with them? We have the 4th largest gross and net spend. No amount of dressing it up will alter that. You are dressing it up and then admitting that we have been extremely poor. Trying to dress it up to make it sound better isn’t doing you any favours. We’ve failed. Massively.
Click to expand...

Well I've given you the figures that show we have spent the same amount of money as Liverpool both gross and net.

If you factor in the top 7 our spend is around half way up (or just under) for both net and gross spend. We are also a long long way behind the top end of that list. So any argument that we have massively outspent the top 6 just didn't true. Our spending is broadly consistent with them.

In terms of wage spend, our wages are about half of what Liverpools are (this will decrease further this year). It's about 60-70% of most of the teams above us. So yes we have spent a lot but relative to those guys, still some way off.
 

Everton1970 said:
Not sure how you can state that we have spent, broadly speaking, In line with them. We have spent, net, 115m more than the RS, 80m more than Spurs, 60m more than Chelsea. In line with them? We have the 4th largest gross and net spend. No amount of dressing it up will alter that. You are dressing it up and then admitting that we have been extremely poor. Trying to dress it up to make it sound better isn’t doing you any favours. We’ve failed. Massively.
Click to expand...

You remind me of someone.
 
Everton1970 said:
Not sure how you can state that we have spent, broadly speaking, In line with them. We have spent, net, 115m more than the RS, 80m more than Spurs, 60m more than Chelsea. In line with them? We have the 4th largest gross and net spend. No amount of dressing it up will alter that. You are dressing it up and then admitting that we have been extremely poor. Trying to dress it up to make it sound better isn’t doing you any favours. We’ve failed. Massively.
Click to expand...
Minimizing RS spending and criticizing the blues. Where have we seen this before?
 

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register
Back
Top