Quote

Now there are two or three teams who are very ethical in their outlook who have opened up the economic benefits and that is probably going to be a turning point in the sport.

It certainly is dangerous that there are only a few clubs left in Europe that can afford to pay millions. At the end of the day however, the spectators decide the rates of pay - by watching the games and consuming the goods and services advertised on sports TV programmes.

The bottom line is that these athletes tend to be safer investments because they really value their marketing opportunities. They don't make as much money as during their active careers.

Organizations are trying to save extra money. Players are trying to get extra money. That's the way it is.

The source of wealth is from individuals with little or no history of interest in the game, who have happened upon football as a means of serving some hidden agenda.

Footballers are an easy target. They are offered big lines of credit. Every sport is vulnerable; it's such a big gambling industry, and there are problems with syndicates in other countries.

It's bad for baseball to have owners who can benefit another business by losing money in baseball.

Building companies involves creating great wealth. If that means I am an oligarch, OK, it's fine. But if being an oligarch is about buying football clubs, it is not for me.

I worry when athletes are simply used by their universities to produce revenue, to make money for them, nothing to show at the back end. I grew up with a lot of players who had very, very tough lives after the ball started bouncing for them. And that's why I'm going to continue to fight.