Ah yes, the good old Shels-esque "There's no news, so it hasn't happened" approach.
The problem with SF is that the league has seen it all before. Throwing money at a squad doesn't mean people will turn out. A club wholly reliant on one individual is utterly unhealthy. Nobody's saying Fingal aren't entitled to do what they're doing, but they are entitled to be worried that it's utterly unsustainable, could lead to renewed wage inflation at a time when we appear to be getting on top of it and will quite likely lead to another high profile implosion down the line, which no-one wants.
If Fingal lived within their means without their backer - i.e. spent what an average crowd of 500 could sustain - then no-one'd complain about them.[/QUOTE]
Completely agree, but if is not SFs fault, its the fault of the system. In an ideal world, all clubs would live within their means but do you honestly think that will ever happen, the market is just not there so people will gamble for a slice of what is there, that is inevitable. This is why I advocate franchise football, something nobody on here will even consider no matter how many clubs go to the wall, no matter how poor crowds get.
Bookmarks