gjohnson

Maybe not the most appropriate comparison, but I still fail to see why we should be looking after their costs just because we're playing them. Would there have been any debate at all if they'd been drawn against another league 2 team? No they'd have paid it without a word and noone would have heard a thing. Yes they're playing against a team that could afford to pay it for them, but why should they? A goodwill gesture would be to pay the Morecambe players for the week of the tie....I'd bet people would complain if somehow Mike grew a heart and decided it was the right thing to do

Fuck the poor, we're alright and that's all that matters. This is nothing to do with fuck the poor. This is about being able to competently host a match. Think Man City will be paying ours when we go there? Same kind of wealth difference. Surely they carry them out for normal league matches? I would have thought each team should be responsible for their own testing regardless of opposition? Yes it would be a nice goodwill gesture, but this club isn't exactly renowned for that

How is this controversial? Why should or would they expect Newcastle to pay for testing for a match their ground? If they were coming up here then it would be fair enough to expect Newcastle to pay. If they can't afford it then maybe they should forfeit... However that would deprive them of seeing their team passing and bossing a premier League team off the park

Lawyers aren't quick. They only confirmed involvement last week, so it'll be months before they say anything, if they do at all. Abramovich stuff has no relevance to this at all, other than showing some of his more suspect activities to the public...and the lack of pick up and fanfare about it shows it won't be deeply or publicly probed

Probably lots, but nothing proven legally. Think the worst widely known thing was the morally questionable ways he managed to get ownership of various Russian resources at knock down prices which in turn made him a billionaire.

All I know about him is what I read on here and I've seen nothing to explain the love-in that some have. I really don't have an opinion on him, but the way people go on about him is ridiculous. Just what I was trying to get at. Yes he's good but he's no prophet like some see him on here

Exactly this. Since when does not considering Caulkin some kind of journalistic Messiah count as abuse. He's good at what he does, but is far too reliant on single sources.

But but but, they're Bruce's buys? Caulkin has as much a clue as Edwards. He built a reputation on being significantly more articulate that the typical local journalist and having a tenuous friendship with Staveley which has been shown up to be worth less than a slice of dung smeared toast. I'd be happy to state that people on this forum know as much about what has gone on as Caulkin does after the last few months. Christ man! Detach the emotion, and what exactly is inaccurate with that? There is some absolute fruit cakes on this forum. I think it’s largely accepted that caulkin gets his info from staveley, he passes on what she tells him. It really is as simple as that Questioning whether the info she passes him is crap does not make a fruitcake, If it did, then the takeover would have been done ages ago based on what she fed him and he reported. He isn't presenting it as the truth. He did present what she told him as the truth. I've no doubt he truthfully reported what she said. Either way what was reported has not been the actual outcome. Now here we are sitting looking at a protracted legal battle, with no guarantee of any takeover at the end of it.

But but but, they're Bruce's buys? Caulkin has as much a clue as Edwards. He built a reputation on being significantly more articulate that the typical local journalist and having a tenuous friendship with Staveley which has been shown up to be worth less than a slice of dung smeared toast. I'd be happy to state that people on this forum know as much about what has gone on as Caulkin does after the last few months. Christ man! Detach the emotion, and what exactly is inaccurate with that? There is some absolute fruit cakes on this forum. I think it’s largely accepted that caulkin gets his info from staveley, he passes on what she tells him. It really is as simple as that Questioning whether the info she passes him is crap does not make a fruitcake, If it did, then the takeover would have been done ages ago based on what she fed him and he reported.

But but but, they're Bruce's buys? Caulkin has as much a clue as Edwards. He built a reputation on being significantly more articulate that the typical local journalist and having a tenuous friendship with Staveley which has been shown up to be worth less than a slice of dung smeared toast. I'd be happy to state that people on this forum know as much about what has gone on as Caulkin does after the last few months. Completely untrue. How so? People on here only know what Caulkin and the press tell them barring a few that claim to be ITK. So i Don't think it's unreasonable to claim that people on here know as much as he does (or publishes at least). There's enough members watching many many sources and reports, so anything that comes out tends to end up here one way or another.

But but but, they're Bruce's buys? Caulkin has as much a clue as Edwards. He built a reputation on being significantly more articulate that the typical local journalist and having a tenuous friendship with Staveley which has been shown up to be worth less than a slice of dung smeared toast. I'd be happy to state that people on this forum know as much about what has gone on as Caulkin does after the last few months. Christ man! Detach the emotion, and what exactly is inaccurate with that?

But but but, they're Bruce's buys? Caulkin has as much a clue as Edwards. He built a reputation on being significantly more articulate that the typical local journalist and having a tenuous friendship with Staveley which has been shown up to be worth less than a slice of dung smeared toast. I'd be happy to state that people on this forum know as much about what has gone on as Caulkin does after the last few months.

Worked out well a few times....Palacios, Valencia

Exactly how it will play out. As Mojo said... Gullit - won stuff elsewhere, came here, tragic. Dalglish - won stuff elsewhere, came here, tragic Souness - won stuff elsewhere (even Blackburn and after destroying Liverpool), came here, tragic Sir Bobby Robson - won stuff everywhere, came here, did amazing but still won nothing. We are a very special club. Nick De Marco - acted on behalf of Derby Couty in their battle against EFL over player registration and the sale of their Pride Park stadium - and won. Took on NUFC, huffing glue under the bridge 2021. Shaheed Fatima - clients include the UN Refugee Agency; World Bank Group as well as experience working on behalf of the UK's Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Took on NUFC, working behind the counter in Greggs 2021. We are a very special club. Bookmarked for posterity. However I see it as DeMarco sailing off on a Yacht never to be seen again, and Fatima working for Amnesty claiming NUFC are the biggest human rights abusers in the world and should be damned to an eternity of purgatory

Exactly how it will play out. As Mojo said... Gullit - won stuff elsewhere, came here, tragic. Dalglish - won stuff elsewhere, came here, tragic Souness - won stuff elsewhere (even Blackburn and after destroying Liverpool), came here, tragic Sir Bobby Robson - won stuff everywhere, came here, did amazing but still won nothing. We are a very special club. Could even put McLaren in there...won a cup with Boro and a league with Twente, but couldn't figure a respectable team here

Isn't that Brewcies standard plan for whoever were playing?

How about Ferdinand? Yes his Spurs period was 'alright', but not a patch on his time with us

N'Zogbia, Goma Seems to be a recurring theme with French players

Has there been many more dramatic than his? Genuine question. Somebody who clearly is capable of performing over a full season or two, moves elsewhere in the same league and disappears? Bizarre. Robert?

Guess who wins again ?

Can't believe no one picked up on this. All this talk of suing the PL out of existence seems a bit silly; there is no way an organisation with the kind of liability exposure that the PL has doesn't have extensive legal insurance. The point that they may end up being the true wielders of power is an interesting one, and not to be discounted More than likely they do, but it's never stopped a company being bankrupted by legal action. Pretty sure insurance would only cover the legal costs if they won too. Anyone who's got a car knows insureres will use any excuse to get out of paying now matter how small or irrelevant. Have a bump, but got tinted windows without telling them then your motor insurance is invalid. The PL ignoring their own rules would surely be an issue to an insurer

There's not a club in the league that values potentially millions of pounds of lost revenue higher than keeping the PL organisation afloat in the event they have to pay out significant compensation. It would be quicker, simpler and cheaper for them just to form a new organisation and let the existing one take the fall. No matter what though it's going to be wonderfully messy.

This... It's rare to see someone starting legal action unless they're pretty confident of winning. Apart from the weirdos who constantly bring up ridiculous cases (think its called vexatious litigation?)

The PL are not a cash rich organisation either, the operation is actually quite small. This could get very tasty, especially in the current climate. One things for sure other clubs will be fucking furious If the PL has the financial support of those other clubs they'll be alright. £10million off each of them should see them alright. Can't see many clubs happy to lose 10/20million just to keep the PL going. Would imagine if the PL lose and have a massive bill, the clubs would let them go to the wall and just set up a new league organisation...Ultra League or something along those lines Neither can I. That was a starting point. But I'm sure a scale could work. £50M a piece from Man U&C, Chelsea, Liverpool, Spurs and Arsenal would do it. Wouldnt be permitted by PL rules Think the PL have shown that they are quite happy to ignore their own rules when it suits them. Also the mentioned clubs would probably the most reluctant to contribute anything to save them, considering they frequently try and argue that they should get a bigger share of the broadcasting money anyway

The PL are not a cash rich organisation either, the operation is actually quite small. This could get very tasty, especially in the current climate. One things for sure other clubs will be fucking furious If the PL has the financial support of those other clubs they'll be alright. £10million off each of them should see them alright. Can't see many clubs happy to lose 10/20million just to keep the PL going. Would imagine if the PL lose and have a massive bill, the clubs would let them go to the wall and just set up a new league organisation...Ultra League or something along those lines