r0cafella

I totally understand why yourself and many others hold this view but when I think of the power dynamics at play I just don’t see that outcome. I only see it being brought down by some form of legal challenge. The PL is a gravy train and most clubs do not wish to rock to boat and upset the likes of Man United and Liverpool as these clubs are cash cows.

Lots of respect to Villa for banging this drum. The fact what he’s saying is all true makes it even more mind bending that these rules exist in the first place.

That’s wild

To me yes it is, because most executives close ranks when such failures occur. Also despite the Tai chi impressions he was responsible for carrying out the plan.

Of course they will take from members, again the PL is owners by the clubs and they are following through on rules which the majority of clubs have enacted.

What?

The interesting thing is, one of them is lying

Much more balanced take on his discussion on the athletic btw.

This is the point of the rule; nobody in the league wants fair competition because that’s bad for business. In case you had any doubts the league is a business to these people, it’s only a sport to us fans.

We don’t have a “cash issue” our owners can inject funds no issues however FFP is a separate matter and owners capital injections are restricted. FFP is after all totally artificial in nature we could have 10billion in our bank account but because the club has generated it we would be sanctioned for using it.

It was definitely hefty, but nobody took issue with it at that time. I’m with your sentiment though but I still think ultimately if we want to bridge the gap aggressively which I believe was the goal at that time we really had to push the line which is precisely what we did.

That’s why we did the loan with the obligation in the new financial year. it’s also worth remembering that when we did this agreement everyone was over the moon particularly after how well he played against us.

The problem with such questions is become Luddite’s about the matter, a lot will genuinely not want to move or do anything if it involves any form of personal sacrifice. IMO it’s patently obvious we need a new stadium mind but no matter what is decided a lot of people are going to be upset.

It’s temporary; we can’t have our cake and eat it. If the fans insist on staying in the same location a reduced capacity elsewhere is a sacrifice they have to make.

No chance, an extension isn’t going to be a b. If so you’d just rebuild. Spurs stadium cost 1.2b for example.

Fair play for fronting up, not having some of those comments mind. Offering so much Guehi and talking about us overpaying in the past is wild.

Yea but he doesn’t need to risk it because the downside is much more than what we are offering. If he doesn’t get relegated and sells for 50m In the summer Parish has played a blinder.

Your looking at it the wrong way Kaka, what Parish cares about is being in the premier league; if they keep Guehi and don’t get relegated he’s won for another year regardless of how much less they get for him.

I just want us to be able to compete on even footings, if that means spending caps so be it. Of course anything over say 80% or revenue has to be under written by owners so issues of sustainability don’t come up. If we box ourselves in to don’t want to be like x team you run the risk of not being able to compete if that model somehow comes off. Your in luck too KI because the owners who are here to make profit will never allow it to become a Wild West.

Why it would be the right move? If the mongs on twitter can’t grasp that your better off sticking to good old NO

I think he gets a new contract 3+1.

Listening to the athletic podcast on Everton and it’s a decent listen. I think Matt slater is a really good journalist mind, always a good listen.

His salary might be a bit high but nothing Chelsea can’t cope with. He can just warm the bench until Fofana gets injured (which should be any day now). Super low risk inexpensive signing as far as Chelsea are concerned.