Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In Sign Up
Text:  A  A  A
The Mail Bag

Trigger-happy owners

Comments (73)

For all the criticism levelled at Bill Kenwright, at least we know he isn't a trigger-happy, sulking, spoilt child like Abramovich. Moyes would certainly have gone several times before now on that basis.

I have to say that Grant has impressed me more as a decent man than a football coach, although the situation he inherited does say wonders for what he very nearly achieved. A man who goes straight to Auschwitz straight after reaching the Champions League Final and speaks about real sacrifice showed his real mettle.

I worry with all this talk of another Russian oligarch takeover ? will we become a club dominated by the whims and sulks just as Chelsea are? Who will become the hitman like the odious Peter Kenyon [what a sight seeing that slimeball being given the first medal in Moscow at the final].

This is not just a case of "better the devil you know". In the 1980s when Murdoch was trying to get a grip of a really big club, the shareholders at EFC set up methods to stop such a buy out, but that failed with Peter Johnson and we have only recently shaken off the full signs of removing his influence at the club.

Please do not be seduced by Russian money or for Avram Grant read David Moyes, when the width of the woodwork separates success from failure!
Trevor Powell, Wales     Posted 26/05/2008 at 10:10:50

back Return to the Mail Bag


Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer

Adam Doyle
1   Posted 26/05/2008 at 00:03:04

Report abuse

As an Evertonian easily influenced by whispers and non-truths, it's safe to say this talk of a takeover has made me foaming at the mouth. It's one thing saying Arshavin's already signed, it's another thing to suggest Kenwright selling up for a billionaire. A Russian billionaire at that (well, they are the best).

What made this stand out to me among all the other rumours there have been about takeovers is the detail about it all. That entry in the Rumour Mill might as well be an article, it's packed with lots of information. Or make-believe, whichever way you think about it.

Anyway, I'd just like to see what you all think. I may be getting ahead of myself envisioning us winning the 09-10 Premier League title, and there might not even be anything solid to back up these reports.

But second thoughts, do we really want to become Chelsea?

Dawson Boyle
2   Posted 26/05/2008 at 13:47:21

Report abuse

I hope it's the ususal tabloid nonsense, but if the stories are true that Kenwright is willing to sell to foreign investors I'm off.

How can a club parading the moniker of 'the people's club' flog the family jewels to the highest bidder? Especially during the summer when we are unable to get the collective masses together for a protest to show our disgust at such a move.

The recent Champions League Final brought two foreign-owned franchises together with a combined debt of £1.5 billion. If proof were ever needed that the free market politics of the Premier League were a failure just look at the balance sheet of the two most 'succesful' teams in the league.

We don't want their money, we don't need their money and should they ever (God forbid) take control of our beloved club, they shouldn't get any of our money.

With a heavy heart I say this... AFC Everton anyone?

Jay Harris
3   Posted 26/05/2008 at 15:25:42

Report abuse

I think we need to calm down a little bit first... although, as a major critic of BK, I ought to be excited.

First of all, we don't know if there?s any truth in these rumours; and secondly, if they are true, we don't know anything about the people concerned. Using Chelsea as an example I think that creep Kenyon is the root of all evil at Chelsea, not Abramovic and who is to say all Russians are the same anyway? Are all Englishmen the same for that matter are all Evertonians the same?

All I know is to return Everton to its former glory, playing in a stadium that?s fit for us, is beyond Kenwright and for me anybody that's got the financial clout to enable us to compete at the top level is a better option.

Matthew Lovekin
4   Posted 26/05/2008 at 15:19:26

Report abuse

After reading this site for a long time now, I am surprised at the amount of criticism that Bill Kenwright gets. This led me to write an article a couple of weeks ago ’In Defence of Blue Bill’.

If this speculation is true today about the Russian billionaire takeover, it seems that BK can’t win. He gets criticised for not getting investment, then when an Abrahamovich comes looking, he gets criticised for looking at selling.

I wouldn’t want to be in Chelsea’s position where we would be sacking our manager every summer and no stability with favourite players moving on every couple of years, but unfortunately we need something as we are being left behind in terms of finances. Moyes is also putting pressure on to find money. If BK doesn’t find the money then Moyes will walk and BK gets criticised. If BK sells to a ’Abrahamovich’ and it goes pear shaped like Chelsea or we end up with huge debts like Man Utd & Liverpool (could we sustain a debt like them???) then BK will get criticised.

Bill has stated many times that he is looking for investment but it has to be right for Everton football club. This is a massive job trying to find that elusive person. Anyone who comes in with that huge amount of money would want control of the club.

In an ideal world blue Bill would still run the club with an investor happy to take a back seat. The only crime against Bill Kenwright is that he is not a billionaire. If he were, I’m sure that he would be more than happy to invest in EFC.
Ashley Wukelic
5   Posted 26/05/2008 at 15:40:33

Report abuse

You know I don't usually post on this site, but I wanted to post here....

Can i ask what you guys really want? do you want success? I'm guessing most of you will answer yes... if you do, the sad fact of reality is money talks; we don't have to like it, but its reality. We all admit we can't go further without proper investment, so where will that investment come from? The tooth fairy? Be realistic ? we need money to kick on.

Now who would be the right investor? I can,t answer that, I'm just a fan who enjoys going to the games. Are you guys really saying that if someone, whoever it is, comes in and invests big time, brings us in the type of players we want and helps us be successful, we would walk away? I don't believe anyone who says they would, we all want to see success ? else why do we go? It's not for the pies or beer, that's for sure!

I just think we all need to step back, think for a bit and believe the right investor will come along and we will sign the players we all crave.
Matthew Morgan
6   Posted 26/05/2008 at 15:45:56

Report abuse

I?m sure that this looking for investment also means turning away Randy Learner, who would have been the right man to take over.
Alan Clarke
7   Posted 26/05/2008 at 15:51:47

Report abuse

The defence of Kenwright on here is astounding considering this man wants to take us to Kirkby!

How much have Chelsea won since Abramovich took over?

How much have Everton won under Kenwright?

For all the bickering at Chelsea, I would swap it for all the bickering at Everton right now. Chelsea will still finish top 2 next season even if they are in turmoil. Unless we get some investment we all know we won?t move up to that next level and we all know if Kenwright keeps hold of the reigns, we?re moving to Kirkby.
Keith Glazzard
8   Posted 26/05/2008 at 15:46:07

Report abuse

Don?t forget pretty much the same thing is happening to Sven over at Man City. Five year plan - my arse.

We can be justifiably proud of the progress our club has made under Moyes?s plan. Can the ?next step? only be achieved by a massive, fundamental change not many of us would welcome?
Ashley Wukelic
9   Posted 26/05/2008 at 16:02:32

Report abuse

If the next step isn't by investment, how would we achieve it? Answer that and you should be running the club!
Paul Thompson
10   Posted 26/05/2008 at 16:21:47

Report abuse

We do need to calm down a bit, but this rumour brings into focus a number of the underlying arguments on this site. The ultimate logic of what one contributor called the ?nil satis brigade? is that a billionaire takeover is the way forward. Jay Harris said as much in the earlier post, ?anybody that?s got the financial clout to enable us to compete at the top level is a better option?. If you want to take on the top four you need virtually unlimited investment. Yet, is ?anybody? a better bet? The very people who rant about the People's Club and its historic identity, and lash out at the (supposed) greed and asset stripping of Kenwright and co would appear to be willing to put us at the mercy of financial (and in the case of Thaksin, real) dictators who hire and fire (good managers) at will, pile up debts and could walk away as easily as they arrived.

I don?t make these observations out of any sense of moral superiority. We are all desperate for more success. Part of me wants ?anybody?. But you can?t have it both ways. Russian (or other) billionaire does not = People's Club. If we don?t want to become a potentially disposable asset of such a person, then we have to get used to something less than ?nil satis?. Of course, we can hope for a middle way ? substantially increased external investment and re-configuring of ownership without some of the above risks. I hope and trust that this is what the current board is trying for. But we have to get real - there is no pain or risk free option. Be careful what you wish for.
Jay Harris
11   Posted 26/05/2008 at 16:25:49

Report abuse

All this crap about "be careful what you wish for"...

Everybody keeps quoting Leeds as an example but everything goes in cycles, success and failure, but give me a few CL finals and/or a league title and I?ll take a few years in the doldrums.

No Premier League club will go out of business (although I wish that wasnt true across the road). There?s far too much money in the game now and with globalisation and new markets opening all the time the Premier League is where it?s at right now.
Now that may well change and Serie A or La Liga could take prime spot but can anybody see that happening soon.

Mathew, your defence of "Blue Bill" is commendable but despite his "blueness" he has done nothing commercially to take this club forward. Without the sale of Rooney and Moyes's success on the pitch the man would have been run out of office long ago. And as for the constant stream of lies, that is something that NO chairman of the People?s Club should do.
Antony Matthews
12   Posted 26/05/2008 at 17:00:15

Report abuse

I hope I win the Euro lottery. I promise I'd put half of it into a world class player. If not me I hope an Evertonian wins it and wants to plough it into the team. That's how strongly I and many others feel........ I think.
Rich Jones
13   Posted 26/05/2008 at 16:51:51

Report abuse

In my eyes, a move to take us out of the city is treachery of the highest order, so I don't by the blue Bill thing, bring in the Russians!!!
Adam Cunliffe
14   Posted 26/05/2008 at 17:12:54

Report abuse

I don?t think that Kenwright is the main man behind the move to Kirkby. Wyness is the one who is doing all the work to process it. Now on to the Russians.

I?ve enver heard of any of them and I think we should be EXTREMELY cautious. However, if they are prepared to invest without looking for short-term financial gain then perhaps they are the way forward.
Tony Waring
15   Posted 26/05/2008 at 17:27:17

Report abuse

If it has to be a Russian and if it?s Khodorkovsky I?d be reasonably happy. He?s got the cash and he also had the guts to stand up to Putin ? quite a guy IMHO. It?s also pretty obvious that we just cannot break into the Sky 4 with our present resources.
Glen Anderson
16   Posted 26/05/2008 at 15:24:22

Report abuse

I am quite happy with the steady progress that we are making and would not welcome a Sugar Daddy to my beloved club.

Call me a romanticist but I would rather we mix homegrown talent and bargain finds with the topclass players, which is exactly what Moyes is trying to do.

Not saying we do not need money, of course we do, but I just would not want EFC to become a team of mercenaries as has happened to Chelsea.

Frank Duffy
17   Posted 26/05/2008 at 17:36:36

Report abuse

Sorry guys but must have been on Planet ZOG but missed all this ?Russian Takeover?. What?s it all about?

Have we here before with other suiters or is this the real thing?

Michael Kenrick
18   Posted 26/05/2008 at 18:03:37

Report abuse

Frank, it?s currently a rumour doing the rounds.

Click this link...

Alex Quigley
19   Posted 26/05/2008 at 17:47:30

Report abuse

Kenwright is full of it, just like the actors he employs and I'm sick of it. He will never have the money to win us the title or get us a decent ground...full stop. Yeah, Moyes has done well and we have kicked on in the last few years I'Il grant Kenwright praise on that appointment), but we have hit the glass ceiling, let's face it.

We wanted Kings Dock, we look like getting Kirby, we want class like Arshavin, we get hoofarses like Hibbert!

As for Bill?s true blue credentials ? utter balls! He is willing to sell us to Tesco if it means he gets to stay centre of the Everton stage. Like the world we live in, all that he cares about is making a profit - hence Kirkby ? no different to every Russian/Yank billionaire who wants a Premier League play thing.

I've backed Moyes for a while on the basis he doesn't have a level playing field financially... well, I'm getting fed up of falling behind the kopite idiots, and I'm willing to risk a billionaire (if one who is interested does indeed exist), and give Moyes the money that he wants, and needs, to be fairly judged on simple trophy winning.

The question is: Are we happy to be celebrated also-rans or risk the chance of becoming winners by inviting a foreign/billionaire owner?? As for the fears of becoming a ?foreign franchise? it really any different to getting a ground move to Kirkby to simply get more private boxes and a supermarket; or being co-owned by Mr Planet Hollywood and being loaned to by a professed Tottenham fan?? Anyone who cringed watching Sly Stallone walk onto the Goodison pitch waving our flag (not having the first clue who we are no doubt!) knows that our soul and that of Premier League football has already been sold down the river to Rupert Murdoch and his beloved ?Sky four?!

Bring on the billionaire! (If it isn?t just a rumour as usual...)

John Andrews
20   Posted 26/05/2008 at 18:08:12

Report abuse

Matthew, Bill Kenwright gets all of the criticism because he has been economical with the truth. The "Fortress Fund" and Kings Dock to name just two examples.

He is now presiding over our move to Kirkby and to save face gave the fans a vote. Unfortunately the voting slips did not give all of the details of the deal, just the idea that this was "The Deal of the Century". Sadly this has since been shown to be untrue in that we are looking, allegedly, at debt of £78M.

Keith Wyness is equally complicit in this and one only has to look at his dealings at Aberdeen to show how unscrupulous this man is. The only time he lies is when his lips move!

I am not sure I would welcome foreign investment, Russian or otherwise, but if it is not to be then we will just have to struggle on manfully. I have also read somewhere that Abramovic has not given Chelsea the money ? he has lent it to them. Should he decide to leave, they have 18 months to give the money back... All £578M of it!

Keith Glazzard
21   Posted 26/05/2008 at 18:06:50

Report abuse

If ... if ... we did have a Russian oligarch owner, I wonder what his attitude to ground relocation/development would be?

No doubt, as a committed democrat, he would immediately order a new ballot, inviting anyone who wanted to vote to come in and have their say. Or then again, he might sack the manager for only making 2nd in the PL and the ECL.

Who knows?
Bob Turner
22   Posted 26/05/2008 at 18:43:38

Report abuse

Jay, how can you say that "no Premier League club will go out of business"? Have you forgotten how our biggest creditor i.e the bank forced us to sell Duncan Ferguson? I dread to think about how close we must have been to going into administration.

Yes, the very same administration which Leeds went into when their gamble failed. I bet if you asked the Leeds supporters yesterday if they accepted their current position as payment for the joys of a CL semi final (and what did they win when they were throwing money around??), I think they’d prefer to have done what Everton have done over the last few years instead.

But if this is the risk you’re prepared to take, then clearly what this club should be doing is borrowing to the hilt, investing £100m in players, £250m+ in a shiny new stadium, and it will undoubtedly all come good (after all, the Sky gravy train is guaranteed, isn’t it??)

Alex, I don’t see how you can, on the one hand state that all BK cares about is making a profit, and at the same time state that he wants to stay at the centre of the Everton stage. He will only get his profit if he sells up, then he will no longer be in control of Everton. He can’t do both at the same time. Oh, and in order for him to make this profit, which is supposedly all he’s interested in, he needs to increase the value of the club, which in terms of the stadium move, means a successful move to Kirkby (which I guess would mean he was right all along, wouldn’t it??). If the move to Kirkby fails, he won’t get his profit. He will only make his profit if he does what’s best for the club, why can’t people see and understand this??
Alan Clarke
23   Posted 26/05/2008 at 19:25:32

Report abuse

Could this be put to a poll? It would be interesting to see how people would vote on this matter:

Would Evertonians prefer to stick with Kenwright or would they welcome a billionaire Russian?
Nick Entwistle
24   Posted 26/05/2008 at 19:31:53

Report abuse

I?ve yet to see one of these billionaire owners walk away from a club, like Chlesea-haters would like to see Abramovich do, just so they can say "I told you so". Roman may have been ?trigger happy? with Avram, but Newcastle have a billionaire and Big Sam was given the sack by the Geordie in charge, so was that just a sacking or trigger happy?

However, I?m not a big fan of Bill though at least we?re still a club of tradition retaining that institution tag many others have sold off. If it's success under our current ownership or success that is bought with no sense of acheivement, I?ll go for Bill everytime. I do believe though that investment doesn?t mean selling out, rather like the Villa.
Michael Hunt
25   Posted 26/05/2008 at 19:53:11

Report abuse

Villa’s Randy Lerner is seen (rightly I believe) as an example of a good foreign owner/Chairman. However ’Deadly Doug Ellis was for many years criticised for not letting go of his ’train set’. Perhaps, like ’Deadly’, BK will sell up but only if he is happy with the buyer’s motives and there are safeguards put in place to protect the local heritage of that which is entering foreign ownership.
Jay Campbell
26   Posted 26/05/2008 at 19:31:11

Report abuse

What a joke this is.

Kenwright or Abramovich??? Some Evertonians are absolute dopes honest to god.

Chelsea are going for players the calibre ov Kaka, Ronaldinho etc and Evertonians are doing cartwheels coz Kenwright has borrowed another favour off one ov his mates to sign a lazy centre forward(Yakubu) who only plays when he’s arsed and doesn’t show up when the top 4 sides play us.

Chelsea are going for the worlds best players and are in contention for every competition they play in and are in a different league to Everton end ov story all because ov Abramovich. But some EFC fans want a skint, story tellin buffoon who sings "it’s the grand old team to play for" in the directors box to all his showbiz mates instead ov a billonaire businessman, who doesn’t fuck about and puts his money where his mouth is.

Don’t believe what i read sometimes.

Michael Hunt
27   Posted 26/05/2008 at 19:59:17

Report abuse

Just one caveat re Randy it not true that Villa?s squad is the smallest in the prem?? Given our lack of depth already (which was key in us relinquishing 4th spot this season I believe) that is one aspect we obviously need to avoid. That said, I suspect it is a temporary anomaly at the Villa and expect O?Neill will get the funds to add what he wishes to their squad this summer. If Bill gets the cash to back DM and build a fitting ground then more power to him and not need to sell out.
I don?t see why he would struggle too much given the massive revenues for last season and next: TV money, merit payments etc. (as I believe the biggest part of our debt is a loan against ticket sales rather than other sources, which are bigger i.e. £50-60million plus per annum.)
Player?s wages are a massive drain though I?d imagine :-(
Andy Rannard
28   Posted 26/05/2008 at 20:15:26

Report abuse

Jay Campbell-

Yakubu? Lazy? How many did he score again? Just remind me? I?d rather have a ?lazy? striker who bags that many goals, than and ?industrious? striker...say a Johnson / Radzinski who runs all day but can?t hit double figures...

By the way, it's spelt OF... TIT
Steve Hogan
29   Posted 26/05/2008 at 20:59:10

Report abuse

Jay Campbell, how desperate you sound!

So you wanna be just like Chelski and be able to bid for the world?s best players?

Do you want the ?baggage? that goes with it as well, you know the 40,000 plastic flags the club had issued to all their supporters (I describe loosely) at their recent CL home game, or how about if we pay your train fare to the next away game for fear of having only 500 fans turn up at Goodison.

You must be quite shallow if you crave that sort of club to support, absolute mercenaries with no heart or soul.

You're welcome to it, please take all the wanabees with you and do us all a favour.
Jay Campbell
30   Posted 26/05/2008 at 20:52:06

Report abuse

Andy Rannard, Yakubu is lazy and there is no excuse for not working hard week in week out for the money he?s on. How many did score against the sides above us?? How many times did he break sweat against those sides??? It?s all very well banging in a few against Fulham, Reading etc but you need to be doing it against the best sides with the best defenders and he doesn?t do that, and that was there for all to see this season.

My point was that people are making the comparison between Everton and Chelsea and the men that run them and fact of the matter is that Chelsea are in the market for the top end players and we are in the market for the middle ov the road players and Yakubu is one ov those. He is not a Kaka or Ronaldinho all players that Chelsea are chasing and if you think he would get into Chelsea?s team then you are a total nugget who should follow snooker or something.

There is no comparison between Everton and Chelsea at this moment in time.
Jay Campbell
31   Posted 26/05/2008 at 21:17:47

Report abuse

Steve Hogan so what would you do if someone like Abramovich wanted to buy Everton and promised to sign the world greatest players?? Tell him to do one would ya??? Let?s just persist with not winning anything shall we and look forward to signing mediocre players year-in, year-out, all because our chairman is a "BLUE". Forget the fact that?s he?s totally inept and can?t back a talented manager in the transfer market and is full of empty promises ? he?s a Evertonian so nothing else matters.

It makes me laugh people mentioning "our heritage and history" and being a "proper football club" when our chairman is turning his back on all that and sticking two fingers up to the fans to locate Everton at a second rate stadium in a toilet like Kirkby!!!
Stuart Mitchell
32   Posted 26/05/2008 at 21:42:14

Report abuse

I hate everything Chelsea stand for and would be sickened to see russian billions coming in and making us the new most hated team in the country.

We have built up gradually and shown you do not to break the bank each season to compete.

I am not saying I do not want us to splash out on a few stars here and there, but if we welcomed a new russian owner, would you be happy to see the likes of Lescott, Cahill, Arteta, Vaughan kicked to one side in favour of big money signings.

Full credit to Moyes and BK, and lets just hope we can push on this summer and bring in a few quality signings to compliment our already strong side, not replace it.
Andy Rannard
33   Posted 26/05/2008 at 21:53:18

Report abuse

Jay Campbell-

?There is no comparison between Everton and Chelsea at this moment in time?

You said it lad... so what?s your arguement?

I agree, who would get in the Chelsea side at the moment? it?s a fuckin monopoly! The fact of the matter is, you work with what you have (you?ll realise this when you reach working age) and as our funds go, Yak was one of the best strikers we could have signed. I would love to be signing £30+ million signings, but lets live in the real world for five minutes eh?? That ain?t gonna happen... forgive me for taking umbrage, but to my mind calling a player lazy is out of order, especially considering the service he received during the last third of the season.... If we spent £30+ mil, then yeah I would expect a player who can create goals from nothing, but pound for pound (signing fee alone) who would you have signed? You get what you pay for in today's market...

I really don?t think laziness has anything to do with it. If you had ever played the game, you would realise that, as long as there are players around you who can provide the balls you are waiting for, then you don?t need to run your arse off for no reason... that's why your value increases...

and it is still spelt....OF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Andy Rannard
34   Posted 26/05/2008 at 22:06:25

Report abuse

Well said, Stuart Mitchell!
We are building towards something, maybe more slowly than the new ?Jay Campbell, Sky Sports, nothing existed before the Premier League and Sky Sports? fan existed, but as dissapointing as the arse end of last season was, progress it is.

If someone came in tomorrow and bankrolled us to buy anyone Moyes wanted to sign, and we won the league next season it would be amazing and I?d love being along for the ride... But for me, for the club, and our history, I personally would find that a bit of a hollow league title... Such a pity that there are so many ?fans? like Jay Campbell, who don?t care how we win it, as long as we do. For me, lad, you sum up everything that is wrong with the game today...

Jay Campbell
35   Posted 26/05/2008 at 22:19:29

Report abuse

Andy I?ve been following Everton for over 50 years; see what Chelsea are doing today ? that?s what we used to do years ago. If a top player was available, we fucking got them. Alan Ball was going to Leeds until Everton said "Is he my arse" and nabbed him.

Under John Moores NSNO meant something. Nowadays that motto is laughable under Kenwright. "SKY SPORTS FAN" I am you say, well as the song goes "if you know your history" you would know that anything but sucess for Everton is failure.

Have you got a touch ov the Mike Baldwin or have you been a fan since this Sky Sports, Premier League bollocks???
Richard Goddard
36   Posted 26/05/2008 at 22:54:55

Report abuse

I am not an Everton fan but certainly prefer you over the red franchise of Merseyside. And I can’t fault a section of there support who are developing AFC Liverpool for the reasons given. I don’t think they will be the last "rebel" club initiative. Foreign owners or the move to Kirkby? If you feel there is sufficient interest don’t be afraid to follow suit.
Jay Harris
37   Posted 27/05/2008 at 00:29:53

Report abuse

Jay Campbell and I may have the same first names but we are not the same person so please dont confuse us people. Having said that I totally agree with Jay Campbell.

When we had John Moores bankrolling the club and winning trophies I didn't see anybody complain that we would go bankrupt. The stakes are much higher now due to the amount of money flying around.

I don't like what is happening to the sport but having enjoyed the 60s,70s and 80s, give me a bit of success and top quality players for a time rather than a second rate stadium and a constant stream of lies.
Michael Kenrick
38   Posted 27/05/2008 at 02:12:31

Report abuse

Okay, children (that would be Jay Campbell and Andy Rannard), less of the personal stuff please.

And Jay Campbell, I know we can?t teach an old dog new tricks but Andy?s right ? it really is "of", not "ov". I thought when I saw that you must be a txting teenager! And Nick, it?s not a typo. He does it in every post and I have been quietly fixing his little faux pas... but if he?s that old he really should know better.

While we?re on the subject, if you like we can start a list:

Connor ? it?s not "your" when you mean "you?re"; also "alot" is a verb... you mean "a lot" ? two seperate words.

Jay Harris: please explain this business of signing yerself as "jayharris" ? no space... no big letters? You?re also old enough to know better surely?

Other things people have trouble with: they?re, there, their ? do you know the difference?

60?s, 70?s, 80?s? ? what is possessive about them? They?re plurals, just add the letter s ? no apostrophe: 60s, 70s, 80s...

But when it comes to Moyes's team, it's apostrophe-s because "Moyes" is his name ? not the plural form of Moye!

It?s quite quiet here init? So endeth the lesson!

Jason Lam
39   Posted 27/05/2008 at 03:13:31

Report abuse

After a lengthy time, we get used to our surroundings and change becomes painful. Especially when things seem to be going alright and everybody?s generally comfortable and rosy. David Moyes. Top 6 finishes. People?s Club. And (dare I say it) Goodison Park.

There are things that should never change, say ?tradition?. Lads, we will always have tradition. We will always have Dixie having scored 60 goals and first player to wear the number 9. We will always have Alan Ball having played for us. These won?t ever change as they are our history.

The only thing that will never change - is change itself. The times are changing, as Bob Dylan sings it. There will ALWAYS be change.

What won?t change is our motto. Nil Satis Nisi Optium. It defines us as Evertonians. Not some 5 good years under Moyes "remember the dark days of Walter Smith and be grateful!". Not even ?The People?s Club? which only came into existence since 2002 (and the preceding years losing to the shite). The league has changed, the pool of players have changed, the competition has changed, the stadiums have changed, the investors have changed - but our motto doesn?t change.

We should strive to do anything to become champions. We need to follow and EMBRACE change. To stay where we are and enjoy the pitiful fruits of Moyes and Kenright is without ambition and an insult to the champions before us who brought us fans silverware and PRIDE.

Come in, Russian investors and world class players.
Paul Marsh
40   Posted 27/05/2008 at 04:06:07

Report abuse

Remember folks the "People?s Club" nickname is relatively new and what place this has in a discussion about a Russian takeover I don't know. I much prefer the 1960s nickname "the Bank of England". When the midfleld needed more quality we went out and brought the recent World Cup winner Ball. Wouldn?t it be great to go back to being in a position like that? But only if the investor can confirm he is there for the long term with a sensible business plan, not just totally relient on hand outs a la Chelsea or borrowing the money like certain other clubs have had.

Overall I'm 75% in favour of it. Just please dont let it drag on Kenwright. If the decision has been made then get it signed so Moyes (or whoever the new guy may fancy bringing in!) has time to use some of this new found wealth.

Jay Harris
41   Posted 27/05/2008 at 05:29:51

Report abuse

Sorry headmaster
it comes up as an automatic entry on here.
Now corrected.
Lyndon Lloyd
Editorial Team
42   Posted 27/05/2008 at 03:14:27

Report abuse

Ooo, me, sir! Me, sir!

And it?s "Liverpool are losing 1-0", not Liverpool are "loosing".

Thank you :)
Jason Lam
43   Posted 27/05/2008 at 07:11:34

Report abuse

Sir, how come it’s St. James’ Park, and not St. James’s Park, according to the Geordies’ official website? Plural James?

Um.. er.. COYBs (or should it be COYB?)
Ade Senior
44   Posted 27/05/2008 at 08:49:19

Report abuse

Sir, how come it?s St. James? Park, and not St. James?s Park, according to the Geordies? official website? Plural James?


When names end with an s either s’ or s’s can be used, if the ground was named after several saints called James then it would s’.

Just like being back at school when I chiselled essays on to granite... :)
Mike Bates
45   Posted 27/05/2008 at 09:08:42

Report abuse

It's St. James? Park...and it should be Moyes? team. If putting an apostraphe after an ?s? you leave out the ?s? afterwards.

I think.

Carry on!
Paul O'Hanlon
46   Posted 27/05/2008 at 09:13:56

Report abuse

It?s amazing how one rumour can grow so rapidly. We?re now spending hours debating foreign ownership as if we know for a fact that it?s going to happen.

I?ve seen headline new stories on the back of the Echo claiming various millionaires/billionaires were wanting to buy Everton and in the end the stories were bollocks, yet this time we?re getting excited about a story that cropped up in The Daily Post gossip pages?? Gimme a break.

What if...this rumour?s been ?leaked? by sources at the club to keep us off their backs for a few weeks regarding new signings and Moyes?s new contract? Wouldn?t be the first time they?d fed us garbage about a supposed takeover.
Gerard May
47   Posted 27/05/2008 at 09:45:30

Report abuse

In reality, we can talk/discuss/argue about this until the cows come home (or should it be cow’s) but until I see said Russian billionaire standing on the terraces with a shirt and a scarf its all rubbish, the same goes for the myriad of players we have been linked with. Silly season has truly begun.
Stan Mullin
48   Posted 27/05/2008 at 09:50:35

Report abuse

Much as I dislike Rogan Taylor, and everything he stands for, why can?t we look at buying the club ourselves? Surely having control amogst the supporters would be a good thing?
Ray Lupton
49   Posted 27/05/2008 at 10:41:00

Report abuse

I?d take the way Everton are at the moment over Chelsea any day of the week, success or not. I don?t expect us to win the Premier League but what I do expect and luckily what we have got is a team that plays together with fans that have spirit and devotion. Chelsea as a club are ridiculous, fickle and devoid of any notion of class, spirit of fair play and loyalty.
Buying your way to the top is to me worse than going down fighting.
Chris James
50   Posted 27/05/2008 at 11:02:16

Report abuse


It is ’separate’ not ’seperate’ ;-)
Simple Simon
51   Posted 27/05/2008 at 11:20:50

Report abuse

"But when it comes to Moyes’s team, it’s apostrophre-s because "Moyes" is his name ? not the plural form of Moye!"

Two points Michael:

(1) It’s apostrophe-s not apostrophre-s.
(2) It’s much kinder to the eye to drop the "s" when a name ends in that letter. Thus, use the phrase "Moyes’ team", rather than Moyes’s team. I believe the adding of this unnecessary "s" is a modern practice, although I might be wrong.
John Hughes
52   Posted 27/05/2008 at 11:21:09

Report abuse

The one thing you can guarentee if a Billionnaire took over the club is that we would have no say in anything to do with the club. So I ask you now, with an Evertonian in charge... What is the difference? We have no say now so why will it be different if it happens?

You have to remember that these people (Billionnaires in general) are obviously very successful people. They will not "buy" anything which does not make them money. Billionnaires surround themselves with the most talented people they can find. Why? because these people make them money. Whether that be a CEO or a Manager or a player worth £50million.

Do you really think LA Galaxy would pay David Beckham £26million over the 5 years he?ll be there if they didn?t think they would make more money than that in the same period because of him being there? No, they wouldn?t and you are niave to the extreme if you think otherwise.

Chelsea?s turnover was about £170M last year. Without Ambamovich?s money. £120M better than ours. Their losses are because of the huge transfer fees they pay. Their turnover can easily sustain their wage bill. Now how is that bad?

Chelsea shirts are being worn on Merseyside by kids who should be supporting Everton (or the shite). Were kids around here wearing Chelsea shirts 20 years ago? No they weren?t.

If this billionnaire stuff is true and IF it happens, I will be made up. As already mentioned in this post about being the "Mersey Millionnaires" in our history or should that be "Billionnaires"? should this kick start the cycle of success as in those halcyon day?s of the glory-ridden past which accompanies Everton Football Club. Do you really not want this to happen?

Some of you don?t.... just remember when the Premier League started. Our "business model" couldn?t cope with the change. Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool and Man Utd, Tottenham and even Blackburn all had sound business models to help them. Ours let us down. Taking 12 years (ok 1 cup win in between) for us to get back close to those clubs. I for one don?t want to miss another opportunity to be the number one club in the land.

Another example of the debt for you before I go. Man Utd, proft of £68million last year. Debts of £60million to be serviced by the profit. (before their Champions League & Prem win). Net profit of £8million. As long as your turnover can adequtely cover the debts you incur then what is the problem?

George Akdkwngo
53   Posted 27/05/2008 at 11:47:15

Report abuse

I have it on good authority that all this talk of a Russian buyout of EFC actually revolves around Bill Kenwright receiving a Nigerian scam email, taking it seriously, and getting carried away because he thinks that might finally be way he can get Everton to the stage where we can bring our all time hero to Goodison Park, the player who will score 35 goals a season, who will propel us into the upper echelons of the top four on a regular basis, the man, the myth, the living legend.... JOEY BARTON!
Michael Kenrick
54   Posted 27/05/2008 at 12:01:55

Report abuse

Thanks, Chris; I admit there?s a good few I still have trouble with... desperate but separate??? It?s probably a Latin thing...

Simon, regarding the apostrophr)e-s on names (that was a typo, to which I am always vulnerable), I think there was a book written on the topic a few years back... anyway, I say "Moyeses team", not "Moyes team", so writing it "Moyes?s team" is much easier on my eye ? and ear!

There may have been something in that book about things like "St James Park" ? I think it should be "St James?s Park" as that?s how I say it but it has been written without the second s for so long, it looks weird!

Just don?t get me started on the Champions? League... which it strictly isn?t anyway!
Phil Bellis
55   Posted 27/05/2008 at 12:13:25

Report abuse

I think the worst have all grammatical errors is where posters use the relational preposition ’of’’ to talk about past events that did not happen or, indeed, to speculate about events that may or may not of happened.
Have course, these posters could of just been badly educated or must of been taught by a bunch have lazy teachers.
Michael Kenrick
56   Posted 27/05/2008 at 13:11:19

Report abuse

Hehe Phil... nice one.

I thought the same but I can understand that one a little more because "should’ve, would’ve, could’ve" sounds too much like "should of, would of, could of"...

And folks, it’s now the "Premier League" once again ? The Premiership is dead and gone!
Simple Simon
57   Posted 27/05/2008 at 13:33:56

Report abuse

Michael: I know that it’s perfectly acceptable to use "s’s". Similarly, it is also acceptable, although sometimes frowned at, to begin a sentence with "and". For example, there is nothing grammatically wrong with the following:

And folks, it?s now the "Premier League" once again ? The Premiership is dead and gone!

I believe, however, that outside the world of literature, individuals tend to avoid using a conjunction at the beginning of a sentence.

Sorry, I couldn’t resist it! ;-)

James Marshall
58   Posted 27/05/2008 at 14:15:58

Report abuse

Provided that all the above information is indeed correct, it would appear that some people have too much time on their hands’s.

And the above sentence begins of course with an idiomatic phrase that behaves as a unit with the same function as a single-word conjunction as previously mentioned in another response.

As you were gentlemen.
Franny Porterski, The Kremlin
59   Posted 27/05/2008 at 14:13:43

Report abuse

I've got it on good authority that the ground move is going ahead, but to Kharkiv!!!

I now have to kill you....
Andy Willox
60   Posted 27/05/2008 at 14:36:36

Report abuse

Sir shouldn?t there be an apostrophe before 60s 70s and 80s as they are abbreviated from the prefix 19..? Or is there an authority of assumption that prevents this?
Simple Simon
61   Posted 27/05/2008 at 15:13:16

Report abuse

Andy: I do believe that there should be an apostrophe before the decade. Thus:

In the mid ’80s, Everton dominated the English first division.

On another matter, there would also be a colon or comma between "Sir" and "should" in your first sentence.
Michael Kenrick
62   Posted 27/05/2008 at 16:34:35

Report abuse

Sir, shouldn?t there be an apostrophe before 60s 70s and 80s as they are abbreviated from the prefix 19..?

A gold star for you, Willox. ?Tis correct; however, that leading apostrophe offends me visually.

Simon... "English first division" ... there's a trend for dropping the capitalization of Proper Nouns that I think is wrong... but lots are doing it!

Simple Simon
63   Posted 27/05/2008 at 16:49:27

Report abuse

You say capitalization and I say capitalisation;
capitalization, capitalisation, capitalization, capitalisation,
Let’s call the whole thing off!
Albert Dock
64   Posted 27/05/2008 at 17:51:02

Report abuse

Just checked out our new saviour (spellings of his name differ) and guess what he?s not really that well off.

He is currently ranked at seventy fifth in Russia (his brother is seventy sixth) .

At a push he can only scrape together 300 million. Compared to second placed Abramovitch he?s a pauper.

He also looks a lot like Howard Kendall!
Phil Bellis
65   Posted 27/05/2008 at 18:50:12

Report abuse

Speaking as one who had grammar and senstivity to other people’s feelings beaten into me by Jesuits, I am gladdened by the diversity and humour in some of these posts. This thread started off humbly and has become the reading equivalent of an out-of-body experience. Gold stars to all!
John de Frece
66   Posted 27/05/2008 at 20:47:52

Report abuse

the Second world War wrecked the championship winning team of 1939. After that we were absolutely shite - and got relegated - until john moores came along. Moores put money into the club in a way in which no other 1st division team even dreamt of. He was the Abromvich of his day> and he got for us the players who won the title in 1963/ We even got the nickname " the millionaires"
It was much much more preferable than being the paupers club .

Personally I can’t stand the oligarchs. They ripped off the Russian people with complete impunity and because they are clever capitalists we are expected to actually admire them . sticks in my throat to be honest ---but -- and it is a big but -- we want the effing cash to amongst other things, fuck over our charming neigbours and win a title or two .. And we all know perfectly well that that is not going to happen unless we get a huge investor .

Personally i think the whole story is bollocks anyway - this is after all Everton and if we can find a way to cock it up. we will
Anyway I’m off now to try and sell a prime piece of land in Tel Aviv to ......Abramovich . If I did’nt need the readies i"d tell the bugger to p..s off .Imagine us firing Kendall after finishing second to the shite and losing a final to them . ?Just goes to show what a nasty world we live in
Jeff Spiers
67   Posted 27/05/2008 at 21:07:51

Report abuse

Is it for fucks sake or fuck?s sake?
Lyndon Lloyd
Editorial Team
68   Posted 27/05/2008 at 22:56:11

Report abuse

I believe it is a contraction of "for the sake of fuck", therefore, it should be "for fuck’s sake".

Jay Harris
69   Posted 27/05/2008 at 23:27:25

Report abuse

Michael and Lyndon I know its silly season and we need a blowout but for the sake of fuck do we really need and English class on Toffeeweb?
Can’t we kindov have russki lessons instead?
Lyndon Lloyd
Editorial Team
70   Posted 27/05/2008 at 23:55:28

Report abuse

Jay, if you had to edit the stuff we receive day in, day out, you’d want to give people a few pointers too. No harm in that concession being consigned to one thread. And the "ski" suffix is a Polish linguistic trait, not a Russian one. You were closer with "kindov".

Oh, now, see. You’ve gone and set me offski again.
Jay Harris
71   Posted 28/05/2008 at 00:29:19

Report abuse

Sorry headmaster,
must be the Vladivar from Vorrington.
Tom Davies
72   Posted 29/05/2008 at 11:24:11

Report abuse

A big money take over would ruin our club, we wouldn’t be the people’s club any more, the average fan would suffer.

Be carefull what you wish for
Karl Masters
73   Posted 30/05/2008 at 21:44:43

Report abuse

I?ve been in New York this week (couldn?t resist typing that! :)) and missed all this Russian takeover stuff. But, reading up on it, something struck me:

Didn?t this story originate from a local journalist who could not keep it to himself after hearing it from...... Bill Kenwright.

Now, if Kenwright wanted to deflect attention from say, Moyes not signing his contract, or perhaps that Kirkby could get called in soon and what that might mean, what better way than this?

Fortress Sports Fund or a Russian billionaire Paper magnate, anyone?! He has form...

By the way, New York was lovely!! :)

© ToffeeWeb

We use cookies to enhance your experience on ToffeeWeb and to enable certain features. By using the website you are consenting to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.