Raconteur

Generic click bait article, but Roy Keane names three Toon players - Lee, Speed and Batty - amongst his top five toughest opponents: https://www.sportbible.com/football/news-legends-roy-keane-names-the-five-toughest-opponents-in-his-career-20200806?source=facebook

You’re perfectly correct to say that the rules say they should do this, and should do that. In fact, if that idiot above was paying attention, he’d notice that my arguments are generally fact-based, and when I’m presented with facts that are inconsistent, I adjust my opinion accordingly. You, yourself, convinced me of f.1.3 about ten pages ago - because I asked for your argument and you provided it. However, the string of facts I presented above are true, even if Wandy[/member] denies it. As you said, JB, the PL does have to provide an answer within five days. If they ask for more information from the consortium, it has to be provided within ten days - and then the five days starts again. The PL have not adhered to those rules. Wandy[/member] suggests that is not a fact. To which I say “How then do you reconcile rule F.1.2 and rule F.1.3 with the facts as we know them?” The consortium has not challenged the failure of the PL to make a decision. This is indeed an opinion - based on the information available. These pages are filled with people suggesting the consortium should sue the PL, Ashley should sue the PL, the Trust, even that goose with his private letter. And I ask you, what legal basis is there to challenge in this case? Who could bring action, and what type of action, and in which jurisdiction? And if someone can give an actual answer to that, I’d love to hear it. I’m actually hoping that all the optimists/fantasists are right, and that MBS is signing the cheque for Mbappe before the new season starts. So please, some real hope would actually be really appreciated. Not some fluffy, hopeful bullshit.

Prime Shearer wipes the floor with both of them. Is it heresy to suggest that Prime Shearer wore blue and white?

Seems a fairly important question - whether there is actually an open file on Masters’ desk.

Why do I need to prove anything to you? It’s self evident. The PL doesn’t have to do anything. Why do they? Sure, the rules say they need to have an answer in five days (or ten, I can’t remember). They haven’t. Why not? Because there’s nothing to make them. From the reporting I’ve read, the impasse seems to be that the PL has requested that the consortium make amendments to their directors before they will approve the sale. PIF/KSA have declined to do so. If that scenario is correct, what exactly are they doing “wrong” by giving the consortium more time to make the required adjustments. In fact, you could even argue that the PL has done more than they needed to in giving them the opportunity to change their application. They should have rejected it, but they haven’t - see how fair they are being? (Just getting people ready for next week’s press) The PL has lots of rules it doesn’t enforce. Because no one makes them. Except, occasionally, commercial partners who ask for rules to be sort-of enforced. Maybe it’s just the first time some people have been victims of Qatari corruption. Me, I remember when the English FA... chose to vote for Qatar 2022 instead of Australia (despite private assurances). You need to prove it because you presented your opinion as if it were a known fact. Nothing is self evident here. Nobody has a clue what, if anything, is going on in the background. You suggesting that the PL have to do nothing from here on is nothing more than your own personal opinion. Mate, you’re kidding yourself. I notice you have not addressed my... thesis. Because you don’t have an argument. EDIT: Actually, I’ll play your stupid game, Rafa style. It’s a fact that the PL is obliged to provide a response to the O&D test within five days (PL rule f.1.3) Its a fact that they can request amendments that give the applicants ten days to get their directors list in order (PL rule f. 1.2). It’s a fact that they have not adhered to those rules as written - unless, for four months, there has been a 4-9-4-9 day bouncing between PL and PIF. It’s a fact that the consortium has not taken legal steps against the... improper processing of their application - at least, they have not announced it.

Why do I need to prove anything to you? It’s self evident. The PL doesn’t have to do anything. Why do they? Sure, the rules say they need to have an answer in five days (or ten, I can’t remember). They haven’t. Why not? Because there’s nothing to make them. From the reporting I’ve read, the impasse seems to be that the PL has requested that the consortium make amendments to their directors before they will approve the sale. PIF/KSA have declined to do so. If that scenario is correct, what exactly are they doing “wrong” by giving the consortium more time to make the required adjustments. In fact, you could even argue that the PL has done more than they needed to in giving them the opportunity to change their application. They should have rejected it, but they haven’t - see how fair they are being? (Just getting people ready for next week’s press) The PL has lots of rules it doesn’t enforce. Because no one makes them. Except, occasionally, commercial partners who ask for rules to be sort-of enforced. Maybe it’s just the first time some people have been victims of Qatari corruption. Me, I remember when the English FA... chose to vote for Qatar 2022 instead of Australia (despite private assurances).

I see the Mail is repeating the Callum Wilson rumour. It’s difficult to give a fuck about Bruceball 20/21, but Wilson is leagues ahead of Joelinton. Hard to argue he wouldn’t be a good signing.

The only clear answer

So how do they get out of this? Do nothing? Ain't going to work now, they have to make a decision and take a side. I'm not sure they do. It's just going to be ignored as they have down for 4 month until it goes away. That isn't happening now. It was, but the buyers blew them out of the water and exposed that tactic. Pretty much every outside body has said they need to explain themselves or come up with a decision, including the government. They’re not accountable to the government though. You’re still clutching at straws here. This. It doesn't matter who says what. If and when they do actually say something it'll be them telling us it's a confidential process, they stand by it and it wasn't succesful/buyers walked away. They don't have to do anything, they don't have to be transparent about their process regardless who tells them to. If they don't want to let them in, it's unfortunately up to them. I don’t know why so many of our fans choose not to believe these clear and obvious facts. It’s like this is the first time some have ever seen corruption and vested interests. The PL doesn’t have very many obligations at all.

Batistuta and Rui Costa

where the fuck is the money from the last january window??? we didnt spend because there wasnt any value in the market according to Bruce. should be at least another £30m from then. FCB should release it. he's got his £17m ffs. There’s lots of things Ashley should have done in the last 13 years. You’re right to say £30m isn’t enough and there should be more. But surely your experience tells you that even that £30m number is a lie? A week after their tame journalist makes the announcement, we have two “top loan targets”. If we thought Ashley was checked out before, we’re going to get a real dose of it now.

Ridiculous - first one was worse for me! I saw the Juve one first and was appalled. Fancy Juve getting a dodgy pen! And then I saw the Lyon pen. Where the hell was VAR to confirm the tackle was all ball?

Given that the WTO found that Qatar had been banned from seeking redress against BeOutQ in KSA, there's a case for saying that, but for the would-be directors of NUFC, BeIn would have secured the necessary convictions. It holds no water, but it seems evident that PL is reaching for reasons not to pass the test. And it's got absolutely nothing to do with it being NUFC, and everything to do with lovely, lovely cash (in the form of broadcasting rights). Let's also keep in mind that this organisation, with assets numbering in seven figures, does not want to be sued into oblivion by its commercial partner. And yes, I acknowledge that their rules require a timely response, but as I noted above, there are lots of other rules they don't follow either. Seems to me they're really trying to fudge through and hope it all blows over.

Thought I'd wandered into the MS Paint thread there, for a moment.

I remember someone came out with a super-stretchy, skin-tight top that made it super obvious when defenders were grabbing a handful - is the Italia one what I'm thinking of?

This is not true. It's been repeated many (many) times, but it's not true. Strictly speaking. According to the rules, every club that wins promotion must submit their directors to the PL O&D test: However, immediately above this is another curiosity: It strikes me, and I've said this before, the problem isn't that the rules aren't being followed. It's that they're not being followed equitably. Because, by my reading of that, each club has to list all their directors (and owners and controlling interests) and declare that they are fit and proper persons to be a director in the PL. (NB "Fit and proper person" in this context means has not committed any "disqualifying events" that would prevent him from being a director)

What's he done? https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/53687308 I’m guessing that’s what neesy is referring to

Yup, that’s enormous

That's not bad by modern standards I read somewhere the deal to go to Arsenal was sealed by an enormous signing on fee. Curious to know what is considered as such these days.

Guy is generally a scumbag. He voted against the 2nd Tyne tunnel and also against the Silverlink roundabout and A1 duelling. Had the misfortune of meeting him once before. He's an extremely bitter bastard. Hates NUFC or anything north of the Tyne for that matter. Openly admits it as well. Guy is a full blown Tosser. He sent his son to Whitley Bay High school despite living right next to John Spence. He sent him there because John Spence doesn’t have a good reputation or OFSTED rating, or at least it didn’t at the time, where as Whitley Bay did. If he was anyone else there is no way he would been able to send his kid to Whitley Bay over John Spence. Even if John Spence was full, he would have been required to send him to Marden, or Monkseaton ahead of Whitley Bay. It just so happens that both of those schools weren’t highly rated either. He was a teacher at Whitley High when i was there. He started dating a sixth form student and then left the school under a bit of a cloud i seem to remember. Then they got married a few years later. He was a right arsehole. Yes. He was born in 1957, left Whitley Bay High School in 1989 when he was 32. A sixth former would have been 18 when they left, so the scenario was he was 32 (or younger) and she was around 18 when they started seeing each other. Not a good look for an MP. It must make for an uncomfortable moment when anyone asks him or his wife how they met. I'm loathe to take this off topic, but what the fuck? I'm a teacher in Australia, and that guy would have his registration permanently cancelled and an investigation for historical child sex offences. And that's not hyperbole - I had a colleague whose 40 year old relationship with an 18yo consensual student saw him banned for life and a very rigorous police investigation (after it came to light).

He was a square peg in Rafa's system, and I have often said he's overrated. But I think you're right here - he'd look a lot better under Bruce than he did in his previous spell here.

Correct. Easy way to test that - hey Penn[/member] , Mauriss is a wrong ‘un

I have followed this argument closely, and you've come very close to convincing me. However, I would suggest that the PL have a strong argument has kept to the rules - because you didn't include the whole of rule F.4: So, what the PL appears to have done is bounce between F4.1 and F4.2 - telling the club we can't satisfactorily resolve F4.2 until the would-be directors complete F4.1 to our satisfaction. A case could even be made that the consortium, if they failed to accept the PL's request to include Saudi government officials to the O&D test, that they never successfully completed F4.1 and therefore all those mad Geordies should pipe down. (Not saying that's my opinion. Just the case could be made)

“Boris asked us to be quiet about how naughty MBS is, but since you all *had* to know...”

Are we all lumping on Fulham to go straight back down? Brucie’s team is staying up.