Mostly Money
There’s something very strange going on with this mysterious Ledley King injury. None of the more official sources (Spurs, BBC, Sky) are reporting anything whatsoever do with our club captain. There’s no mention of him leaving training early, any damage to any part of his body or indeed the use of his name at all. However, as pointed out by Mr.Smart, there is indeed a fair amount of word around the camp fire that he’s got some kind of leg problem and as far as it can be worked out, it isn’t a break and he should be fit come the weekend.
The nature of such an injury I can’t quite work out. Twisted ankle? Broken Toe? Needs his legs waxing? Who knows but it’s most irregular for this kind of thing to be purely as heard on the grape vine.
‘I know a bloke, who knows a bloke, who knows a bloke. Now, you know this bloke and he says that his best friend’s sister’s cousin’s girlfriend knows this guy, who knows this kid, who going with this girl that saw Ledley pass out at McDonald’s last night. I guess it’s pretty serious.’
Whatever the score, I’ll let you know as soon as I do. That is, as soon as I hear from this bloke who used to cut the hair of this guy…
Something that is being reported loud and clear is some very interesting information about the men, behind the men, behind the men at our club and indeed others. As you may or may not know, ENIC until recently held substantial shares in a number of European clubs, including ourselves and our UEFA Cup opponents, Slavia Prague. This is all very well and good until a situation arises where clubs owned by the same company are involved in the same competitions. Take a look at this article in the Guardian today for the full ins and outs.
http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1881584,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=5
I understand how this is now important in a world where companies own individual players but would majority shareholding businesses have enough control over the managerial decisions made by the coaches and their staff to affect the outcome of games? Not sure myself but I can see how it is for the best to remove the temptation for match influencing to occur.
The article also mentions the 15% cut given to the property man Paul Kemsley and I must say that I don’t really have a problem with that. This gives him one hell of an incentive to make some good investments with our club’s money and we all know how lucrative property can be. Tottenham would be paying a broker a fair old cut to be making money on its behalf, so what’s the difference here? 15% of nothing is nothing, so what the hell Paul, go out, do your best and make us all rich. Sounds fine to The Bagel.
In other back room political news, although not strictly our own, Frank Arnesen is dropping further and further into a big pile of poo. Chelsea, being the clean cut outfit they are with no dodgey connections whatsoever, look as if they’re attempting to distance themselves from the man with more bungs than a chemistry set. Old Franky Boy has been implicated in the possible illegal tapping up of 3 Leeds youth players on behalf of the West London club and they may just wave goodbye to our ex-director of football. It may also leave Chelsea having to actually suffer their suspended sentence of a 3 point deduction over the Ashley Cole affair.
Can’t say that any of this brings a tear to The Bagel’s eye, except perhaps one of laughter but you know what? I’d still take Arnesen back and Carrick for that matter and Stefan Freund.
Stefan Freund’s a bagel genius!
The Bagel.
compare student loans privatemutual loan about company american complaintsloan computers amortization calculatorsconclusion business project math loanauto loan condorconforming loan pay princilple downloan consernand consolidate cards loan car credit Map
September 27th, 2006 at 2:18 pm
Still no news on The King.
I too read the article in The Guardian(I bought the paper, none of that skin-flint-read-it-on-the-web malarkey) and thought, to be honest, it was a waste of ink.
The only piece of interest to me was the closing paragraphs regarding Wembley Stadium…
September 27th, 2006 at 2:34 pm
Wembley was good and the fact that having to keep an athletics track was putting them off the Olympic stadium was nice to read.
I liked the article for its global football interest and to learn a little more about ENIC’s agenda.
The ink wasn’t wasted on me but I do appreciate how it doesn’t infer any particular current affairs impact.
The Bagel.
September 27th, 2006 at 5:01 pm
Sadly, down to technicalities, it seems Chelsea could escape the 3 point fine. I think it applies only to a repeat of the exact same offense. Which is no surprise as the F.A. seem to have teeth as sharpe as my gran’s.