Watford need promotion this year.

[MooseBreath]

We're no more 'Udinese b' than they're Watford b playing in Serie A - we just happen to be owned by the same family, taking advantage of a shared pool of players. Ok, they're more successful than us at the moment, but if we get to the premier, you'd imagine more resources will be directed our way, since the EPL is where the money is . Following your logic are you 'Bankok b' ?

No, we don't have any players from Bangkok in our team. I can't believe you've even tried to draw parallels. There are none.

And no, Udinese are not Watford B because they are not benefiting from Watford players (the idea that Watford own any players good enough to make an impact for udinese is of course ludicrous - you are a nothing but a tiny little outpost where they can send their rejects to get some experience).

[Watford1982]

Co-ownership in football- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-ownership_%28football%29

 

Now I didn't realise the FA approved of this so not sure if what you say is even possible. Surely if it was you would have done it rather than loaning the players left right and centre?

Each club is owned by a separate family member.

[Watford1982]

No, we don't have any players from Bangkok in our team. I can't believe you've even tried to draw parallels. There are none.

And no, Udinese are not Watford B because they are not benefiting from Watford players (the idea that Watford own any players good enough to make an impact for udinese is of course ludicrous - you are a nothing but a tiny little outpost where they can send their rejects to get some experience).

If you take the time to read any of the above posts, you'll understand the situation a lot better than you do at present. I'm sorry if the facts of WFC don't fit with what you've read in the Daily Mail.

And if these lads are the rejects, I can't wait for when they send us someone decent ! And I suppose you're right about the 'tiny little outpost' - which makes the whole adventure that bit more enjoyable when we turn over the clubs with superiority complexes..

 

As a serious question to all those crying foul, how else do you suggest WFC compete with a Thai businessman injecting cash directly into one of our championship rivals?

[MooseBreath]

If you take the time to read any of the above posts, you'll understand the situation a lot better than you do at present. I'm sorry if the facts of WFC don't fit with what you've read in the Daily Mail.

And if these lads are the rejects, I can't wait for when they send us someone decent ! And I suppose you're right about the 'tiny little outpost' - which makes the whole adventure that bit more enjoyable when we turn over the clubs with superiority complexes..

As a serious question to all those crying foul, how else do you suggest WFC compete with a Thai businessman injecting cash directly into one of our championship rivals?

The same way tinpot tiny clubs have always 'competed' with big clubs - you don't. That's the natural order of things. Football isn't communist.

[Watford1982]

The same way tinpot tiny clubs have always 'competed' with big clubs - you don't. That's the natural order of things. Football isn't communist.

Welcome to the revolution, comrade....

[Guest Bilo]

Welcome to the revolution, comrade....

 

 

He does raise a good point though.

 

Leicester City have enjoyed a more impressive history than Watford for the same reason Liverpool have enjoyed a more successful history than Leicester City.

 

We're a bigger club than Watford and Liverpool are a bigger club than us.

 

It's the natural level of our respective clubs. If we tried to compete with Liverpool, we'd be massively over-reaching ourselves and would eventually fall down. For every Wigan Athletic, there's a Portsmouth, a Bradford and a Plymouth.

 

What happens if UEFA decide to go the way of the FA and ban multi-club ownership? 

[Danizen]

The quicker Watford get into the Europa League, the quicker this seedy relationship will fall apart. FIFA and UEFA tend to take a dim view of conflicts of interest in ownership.

[Watford1982]

The quicker Watford get into the Europa League, the quicker this seedy relationship will fall apart. FIFA and UEFA tend to take a dim view of conflicts of interest in ownership.

We all have separate owners. There is nothing in the rules about more than one family member owning a club.

[Kitchandro]

Why do Watford fans claim having rich owners is unethical?

 

Every club has owners, but we're unethical because ours are prepared to spend/borrow more?

 

I don't really feel cheated by Watford's use of loans, but I don't think it should be allowed in future.

[Guest Bilo]

Why do Watford fans claim having rich owners is unethical?

 

Every club has owners, but we're unethical because ours are prepared to spend/borrow more?

 

I don't really feel cheated by Watford's use of loans, but I don't think it should be allowed in future.

 

 

Exactly.

 

Some clubs are just richer than others. That's been the case since the year dot.

 

I'm sure our net spend was only about the sixth highest in the division as well, Cardiff and Blackburn outspent us to a hideous extent. 

 

'Big spending Leicester' has been a myth since Sven left.

[Danizen]

We all have separate owners. There is nothing in the rules about more than one family member owning a club.

It would still be a conflict of interests. You might want to look up what 'conflict of interests' means. UEFA and FIFA would definitely intervene. They have the integrity of their respective competitions to protect.

[Watford1982]

He does raise a good point though.

 

Leicester City have enjoyed a more impressive history than Watford for the same reason Liverpool have enjoyed a more successful history than Leicester City.

 

We're a bigger club than Watford and Liverpool are a bigger club than us.

 

It's the natural level of our respective clubs. If we tried to compete with Liverpool, we'd be massively over-reaching ourselves and would eventually fall down. For every Wigan Athletic, there's a Portsmouth, a Bradford and a Plymouth.

 

What happens if UEFA decide to go the way of the FA and ban multi-club ownership? 

I see Leicester and Watford as roughly similar in terms of our significance as football clubs - we've both had a flirt every now and again with the big time, both experienced life in the doldrums. We're never going to be global, like Man Utd or Barcelona, but we're both bigger than the likes of Burton Albion and Wycombe. You have a slightly bigger following to reflect the size of your town, but that's neither here nor there in the great scheme of things.

As I've said before, we have a different owner to Udinese's, albeit he's related.

[Watford1982]

Why do Watford fans claim having rich owners is unethical?

 

Every club has owners, but we're unethical because ours are prepared to spend/borrow more?

 

I don't really feel cheated by Watford's use of loans, but I don't think it should be allowed in future.

I don't claim that - I just think what we're doing is no less ethical than what you are. Your resource is hard cash, ours is quality players. You can easily convert your cash into players, so what's the difference?

[Watford1982]

It would still be a conflict of interests. You might want to look up what 'conflict of interests' means. UEFA and FIFA would definitely intervene. They have the integrity of their respective competitions to protect.

We'll cross that bridge when we come to it. If we're successful enough to be competing in Europe, I don't think we'll be still relying on so-called loans.

[whoareyaaa]

I see Leicester and Watford as roughly similar in terms of our significance as football clubs - we've both had a flirt every now and again with the big time, both experienced life in the doldrums. We're never going to be global, like Man Utd or Barcelona, but we're both bigger than the likes of Burton Albion and Wycombe. You have a slightly bigger following to reflect the size of your town, but that's neither here nor there in the great scheme of things.

As I've said before, we have a different owner to Udinese's, albeit he's related.

 

Similar to how a mafia runs there businesses, I'm pretty sure they would have discussed this before buying each club.

 

Plus Watford are no where near similar to Leicester, size of the city, fanbase, history and everything else football related.

[fazzyfox]

It's not as if City were randomly chosen by the owners, or they just heard about the merits of coombs bakery / cob shop and the Haymarket shopping centre, they identified potential:- the stadium and its facilities, the catchment, the potential for 30,000 gates in the PL and the fact we were looking for a buyer as Mandaric had taken things as far as he could making us ripe for picking. They also want to spread their brand name globally and be honoured by their king but they do care about realising our potential.

 

Watford seek to excede their potential. Exceding your potential is one of the great things in Football and it's so much harder to do now because of finance, not just in this league, but 91 other clubs have to amass squads on the basis that they need be an attractive enough prospect for the player they are after to committ to them. There may be 3 or 4 loan players on board making an impact who you know wouldn't sign a permanent contract  (Yakubu, Naughton) but there's an enforced limit and the majority of the players ordinarily would have been sourced by offering desirable wages and contract lengths to targets be it from academy or transfer market, frees or fees and then finding these fees and then committing to the contracts. But Watford don't have to do this. They can have any number of guys that wouldn't dream of signing a two or three year deal with Palace or Brighton because their ambitions are higher than that yet will turn out against them and spoil their chances of success and exceding of potential (those cherished principles). Taken from a pool? Hope they all drown in it.    

[Bert]

We're no more 'Udinese b' than they're Watford b playing in Serie A - we just happen to be owned by the same family, taking advantage of a shared pool of players. Ok, they're more successful than us at the moment, but if we get to the premier, you'd imagine more resources will be directed our way, since the EPL is where the money is . Following your logic are you 'Bankok b' ?

For a start, it's Bangkok.

Secondly, we have never had anyone from Thailand represent us, as well as not "sharing a pool of players" with "bankok fc".

[Bert]

I see Leicester and Watford as roughly similar in terms of our significance as football clubs - we've both had a flirt every now and again with the big time, both experienced life in the doldrums. We're never going to be global, like Man Utd or Barcelona, but we're both bigger than the likes of Burton Albion and Wycombe. You have a slightly bigger following to reflect the size of your town, but that's neither here nor there in the great scheme of things.

As I've said before, we have a different owner to Udinese's, albeit he's related.

Slightly bigger?

A lot bigger. We have more season ticket holders than your average attendance, and would've took

6,000 yesterday if you had a ground that was up to standards.

[Guest Bilo]

I see Leicester and Watford as roughly similar in terms of our significance as football clubs - we've both had a flirt every now and again with the big time, both experienced life in the doldrums. We're never going to be global, like Man Utd or Barcelona, but we're both bigger than the likes of Burton Albion and Wycombe. You have a slightly bigger following to reflect the size of your town, but that's neither here nor there in the great scheme of things.

As I've said before, we have a different owner to Udinese's, albeit he's related.

 

We've spent one season in 129 outside the top two tiers of English football.

We're responsible for England's only World Cup winning goalkeeper.

We produced England's most capped player and second highest goalscorer ever.

We've won three League Cups and made four FA Cup Final appearances.

We've had 46 seasons in the first tier of English football.

 

You've won no major trophies.

Your first season in the first tier wasn't until 1982.

You've had a total of 8 seasons in the first tier.

You've played in one FA Cup Final.

 

I'm not being an arse, but you can't pretend that Watford are anywhere near as big a club as Leicester in terms of history or fanbase.

[Watford1982]

 

 

Plus Watford are no where near similar to Leicester, size of the city, fanbase, history and everything else football related.

Sorry old friend. I must have missed all those league titles, FA cup and European cup wins. I hate to break it to you, but like us, you're a provincial nothing of a team, the only point to your existence being to bloody the noses of the big boys now and again, before slipping back to where you belong. But that isn't a bad thing - I'd rather that than follow a huge club for the guaranteed success - and I know you're the same, as you support Leicester and not Man Utd.

[Watford1982]

We've spent one season in 129 outside the top two tiers of English football.

We're responsible for England's only World Cup winning goalkeeper.

We produced England's most capped player and second highest goalscorer ever.

We've won three League Cups and made four FA Cup Final appearances.

We've had 46 seasons in the first tier of English football.

 

You've won no major trophies.

Your first season in the first tier wasn't until 1982.

You've had a total of 8 seasons in the first tier.

You've played in one FA Cup Final.

 

I'm not being an arse, but you can't pretend that Watford are anywhere near as big a club as Leicester in terms of history or fanbase.

I'm not saying you haven't been slightly more successful than us - but arguing over who is the bigger club is like arguing over whose sh*t smells sweetest. In the great scheme of things, we're very similar clubs - just another couple of teams trying to survive and have a good season every now and again.

[Guest Bilo]

I'm not saying you haven't been slightly more successful than us - but arguing over who is the bigger club is like arguing over whose sh*t smells sweetest. In the great scheme of things, we're very similar clubs - just another couple of teams trying to survive and have a good season every now and again.

 

Until their collapse a few years back, Luton Town had enjoyed more success than Watford.

 

You seem to think that there is no middle ground between Manchester United or Arsenal and Championship clubs.

 

Just as you wouldn't accept being told you're no bigger than Barnsley or Peterborough, we'd class ourselves as a bigger club based on tradition, fanbase and aspirations than Watford. It's just the way it is.

[Kitchandro]

I'm not saying you haven't been slightly more successful than us - but arguing over who is the bigger club is like arguing over whose sh*t smells sweetest. In the great scheme of things, we're very similar clubs - just another couple of teams trying to survive and have a good season every now and again.

 

I see Leicester and Watford as roughly similar in terms of our significance as football clubs - we've both had a flirt every now and again with the big time, both experienced life in the doldrums. We're never going to be global, like Man Utd or Barcelona, but we're both bigger than the likes of Burton Albion and Wycombe. You have a slightly bigger following to reflect the size of your town, but that's neither here nor there in the great scheme of things.

As I've said before, we have a different owner to Udinese's, albeit he's related.

 

Deluded I'm afraid.

 

In terms of league history and fanbase we're a lower end Premiership club, and you're a lower end Championship club.

 

It doesn't make any difference in the short term, though.

[Super_horns]

We'll just have to see...its exciting for us fans ATM though and if we can keep a few of the loan players on pernament deals then the future does look positive but I guess the danger might be if the FA do close this loan system!

 

Anyway that is for the Pozzos and us to worry about.

[marko]

We'll just have to see...its exciting for us fans ATM though and if we can keep a few of the loan players on pernament deals then the future does look positive but I guess the danger might be if the FA do close this loan system!

 

Anyway that is for the Pozzos and us to worry about.

According to your fans it won't be a problem if the FA close the loan loophole as you'll simply sign them on free transfers.