DanielS

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

There might have been a 1912 version of Kev who gave Hitler grief about his Jester hat. Humiliated, Hitler might have gone back to Germany in a seeting huff and the entire Second World War may have been caused by Hitler trying to get back at 1912-Kev. No?

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

I presumed it was sponsorship - would also include advertising revenue for their pitchside boards which would be more than usual because of their non-static nature (something we should be looking at). Either that or Gill putting the housekeeping on Red at the local casino.

There is an article on today's Guardian Unlimited site about United's debt, etc and it has some interesting information on the much vaunted Man Utd commercial interests. The best bits are the following: They promise that the Glazers' United will achieve a better sponsorship deal than the current one recently terminated by Vodafone and secure more profit in a range of activities. They can make the future seem bright. But one of the stubborn Premier League ironies has been that, although the clubs have indeed become huge global names, for all the Far East tie-ups and US tours clubs have found it difficult to turn this worldwide interest in football into cash. Of United's £157m total income last year, just £383,000, 0.24%, was made commercially overseas. Around a third of United's income, £48.4m, came from media rights and £42.4m from commercial activities. The largest earner by far, £66.3m, was made in one nondescript corner of the globe, Stretford, from an old-fashioned activity colloquially known as "going to the match". For all the talk of world markets, as the stadium expands to 75,000 capacity the Glazers' plans rely hugely on demand holding up at Old Trafford. £380,000 from overseas commercial ventures! That last line is key. Football income comes from bums on seats at the stadium and being on the telly. Selling shirts in Miami and Hong Kong brings in peanuts. Investment and new stadium issues aside, does Man Utd's inability to rake in millions, despie their much touted nous, from overseas put to bed the argument that our board aren't exploiting overseas markets enough? Full article here.

Johnson should not have gone for that tackle. Poor decision. It was a yellow card and if it was one of our players who had been sent off for that the howls of derision for Rennie wouldn't stop...