Herb, you can check out of this conversation at any point. I just didn't appreciate the line about being pathologically adverse to Wenger or being a Mourinho lover of all things. There is no need to go down that route and get emotional. When it comes to the finance issue, what is it that you have a problem with?

1- The fact that outside investment is allowed?
2- The amount allowed to be invested?
3- Or whose investing?

There are holes in the argument. Why downplay Liverpool'a succes becaue they've spent £100m but turn a blind eye when we spent £50m of Fizsman's money when that was a huge sum way back then? Had, like in Manure's case, the money been generated from football, why is ok for us to take outside money from Danny? Is it the amount that matters or how it was generated? Then we look to Chelsea and City and there is a problem with the owners not loving the club and how that money may have been acquired. It's a lot of grey areas that's hard to regulate. I agree with the part about a salary cap even thought that may cause problems, but I've always been a fan of the American system. It seems more fair to what we have now.

This debates all over the shop and I'm not switching goal posts. It's just interesting to here people talk about football finance. The growns grow louder now that we're not winning, but when we were nobody damn about the little clubs below us struggling that couldn't afford to do what we were doing. The game has never been fair but you only want justice when your the victim, right?

I applaud our financial model to a degree and trying to stay Financially independent but I have a serious problem with the burden being lumped on to the fans. That's no good for me or anyone else if we can't afford to go to games.