Xtratime Community banner

1 - 20 of 56 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
54,575 Posts
The Bernebau is still a great stadium anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,995 Posts
I'm confused. BBC says the decision is final yet they say
"We are hopeful that the tax situation can be resolved to Uefa's satisfaction before the final decision is taken."
Doesn't that mean that the final could still be given to Wembley.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,751 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Yes it is.

But Wembley is a new stadium, easily one of the best in Europe if not the best.

It jus shows what runs our football these days. Theyre not interested in the best candidates (because Arsenal have come off worse because of this aswell) theyre interested in the moeny.

Id like to point out, Britain provides Uefa with most of its money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,995 Posts
I agree that Uefa is run with too many retarded people, its too silly to not give the final to Wembley because of tax.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54,575 Posts
A stadium is a stadium. To be honest, when I went to Wembley... I sat down, watched the match, went home, there was nothing extra special about it.... the Bernebau has over 80,000 seats... which is not much less than Wembley... apart from this I dont see much difference. Its not like they gave the final to Kiev or something :pp
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,751 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Well its a new stadium.

The home of football.

I suspect the stade de france got a final when it was first built.
 

·
Cachorro
Joined
·
18,741 Posts
Between two great stadiums, they went for the one that cost less. How is that surprising or outrageous?

Can't blame 'em for going for the better deal.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
30,825 Posts
I think it is outrageous. They should have picked Maracana.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,751 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Between two great stadiums, they went for the one that cost less. How is that surprising or outrageous?
It doesnt cost less.

It probably costs just the same top run the final at the stadium.

Its about money an a "legal" bribe... you give us this or your not having the final. FVCK YOU UEFA

I want to leave, make the whole thing into a joke wihtout english funding and money.
 

·
Cachorro
Joined
·
18,741 Posts
It doesnt cost less.

It probably costs just the same top run the final at the stadium.

Its about money an a "legal" bribe... you give us this or your not having the final. FVCK YOU UEFA
Actually, having read the article again to make sure, it IS about money, Fadabeilo. Specifically, about players who play in England being taxed according to english law, and how UEFA doesn't agree with that taxation.


But Platini added: "The concerns we had over players being taxed were minimised by the English FA but not confirmed by the British government."
Uefa maintains that footballers should be taxed in their country of domicile and that taxing them separately in every country in which they play matches would be both unfair and unnecessarily complicated.


Platini said Uefa had received assurances from the German government that it would not tax visiting players if the finals were awarded to Berlin's Olympiastadion or Munich's Allianz Arena.
Spain's two bids, involving the Bernabeu and Valencia's Mestalla stadium, were not affected as there is no such direct tax law in Spain.
Sounds reasonable to me. Both Wembley and the Bernabeu are among UEFA's "elite stadiums"; one involves a potentially-complicated tax situation and the other doesn't. I can't blame them for going with the Bernabeu.

And it's not like Wembley will never host a CL final again, the article itself mentions that Wembley is still on the shortlist of candidates for the 2011 final. It's not that big of a deal.

I want to leave, make the whole thing into a joke wihtout english funding and money.
Yeah, we all feel like telling the federations to go screw themselves sometimes, but that's not going to happen. UEFA aren't the only ones who profit from the CL.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,845 Posts
Between two great stadiums, they went for the one that cost less. How is that surprising or outrageous?

Can't blame 'em for going for the better deal.
The point that is clearly apparant in the article (or so I thought anyway) is that it doesn't cost UEFA more or less. It would mean the players were taxed, not UEFA. It's not a better deal for UEFA - quite the opposite I would assume as Wembley holds 10,000 more than the Bernabeu.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
27,068 Posts
UEFA in it for the money???

what a shocking revelation!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,074 Posts
Actually, having read the article again to make sure, it IS about money, Fadabeilo. Specifically, about players who play in England being taxed according to english law, and how UEFA doesn't agree with that taxation.




Sounds reasonable to me. Both Wembley and the Bernabeu are among UEFA's "elite stadiums"; one involves a potentially-complicated tax situation and the other doesn't. I can't blame them for going with the Bernabeu.

And it's not like Wembley will never host a CL final again, the article itself mentions that Wembley is still on the shortlist of candidates for the 2011 final. It's not that big of a deal.



Yeah, we all feel like telling the federations to go screw themselves sometimes, but that's not going to happen. UEFA aren't the only ones who profit from the CL.
Pretty much what I was going to say. I don't see anything wrong with the decision. In fact, FA officials knowing this was going to be a problem should have done better and deserve this fan sentiment rather than UEFA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,751 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Well theoretically they wont ever host a final, because the tax laws wont get changed for these money grabbing bastards who want everything.
 

·
Freedom for all
Joined
·
16,851 Posts
The idea that players who come to play in England for a single game could be taxed is quite frankly beyond belief. But I expect little else from the UK government.



And no, the avatar is a coincidence. :D
 

·
Cachorro
Joined
·
18,741 Posts
And no, the avatar is a coincidence. :D
Correction: it's an INSPIRED coincidence. ;)

Voilà! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran, cast vicariously as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate. This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is a vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin van-guarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition. :shades:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62,100 Posts
Wise decision from UEFA. :thumbsup:
 
1 - 20 of 56 Posts
Top