http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/image...s02_786.gr.gif
There's only one Syd Puddefoot!!
Printable View
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/image...s02_786.gr.gif
There's only one Syd Puddefoot!!
the man that paid that for Denilson should be beaten senseless
Looks like an exponential curve. It would be interesting to plot it and see at what point it will exceed the GDP (inflation-adjusted) of, say, Ireland.
Great name.Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan
One interesting thing from that (well, in my eyes at least), despite all the money swimming around in the Premiership, they've only had one record since it's inception (Shearer).
I was just thinking that until I seen your post.Quote:
Originally Posted by superfrank
Real are a crazy club the money they are willing to spend on getting players is unreal!!!
They don't seem to have learnt from the mistakes of their past.
Surely investing in youth and providing a stable bass would be the way to build it back up(I know they won the league two years in a row but they are seriously poor in key positions).
No matter how much money they spend they will still never have the five best players in the game. Messi, Henry, Eto'o, Iniesta and Xavi you can't but they understanding the last two have.
Most interesting for me is that the Zidane record stood for 8 years. Inflation adjusted that's probably still most expensive signing?
Shows how British based my football upbringing was that I always thought Trevor Francis was the worlds first million pounds player
Ridiculous to work this out based on sterling as both transfers happen between italian and spanish clubs whos national currency is the euro. and if you study the attached link you will note that zidane's transfer was for €76m and kaka is for €65m.
http://sports.yahoo.com/sow/news?slu...goal&type=lgns
could lead to much debate in table quiz's
I was just going to make this point. Zidane's is still the record in my eyes.Quote:
Originally Posted by wexfordman
I'd have Kaka well ahead of Eto'o and Henry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Axe Man
From what I saw of Crespo, he didn't remotely look like value for money.
Yeah; I always thought John Charles (or was it Jimmy Greaves?) signed for someone for £99,999 to avoid the pressure of being the world's first £100,000 signing, but he doesn't appear either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
Some memories there alright
Lentini - what ever happened to him, I know he picked up a dreadful injury but after that i dont know........
Papin - wasnt a bad player but wasnt in the same league as previous Ac Milan players
Denilison - a strange one for Betis - I mean I liked Denilision but he could only play one good game for every 20, you know its hard stuff to play football when you have partied all night:)
Still playing in the lower leagues according to wikipediaQuote:
Originally Posted by bennocelt
16 goals in 89 games for an attacking midfielder hardly warranted a breaking of the world transfer record.
Well he was more an out and out winger so he probably created tons. IIRC he broke his leg in 3 or 4 places in that crash and missed pretty much the whole year
Pretty sure it was Spurs who signed Greaves back from Milan for £99,999.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Twas, yeah. Though wikipedia just says that it was to avoid him being the first £100,000 player, which would imply that he was a record of sorts. Luis Suarez moved the same summer, although his transfer was in lira, which is probably the distinction. But that just brings me back to Dodge's point about Anglo-centric football history.
That's also what John Foot quotes in Calcio.
"After a bidding war, Tottenham finally got their man for a record £99,999. Bill Nicholson, famously, didn't want Greaves to be known as the 'first £100,000 player'."
The words in bold show how Anglo-centric the English were/are themselves.
Suppose in fairness 1961 was a different era; continental Europe was a long way away, and a player moving for 240,000,000 Lira (how much is that anyway?) wouldn't have had anywhere near as much attention as today. So Greaves was the first £100,000 player as far as the English League was concerned. You can reproduce that centrism if you want to give a feel for the world back then.
£106,842.50 according to this.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
It was a rhetorical question, indicating the Brits mulling over strange foreign currencies and in the end deciding to ignore them.
(It was L250m, and the OP equated that to £152k)
Real looking to smash their own record yet again if their £80 million bid for Ronaldo goes though.