KetsbaiaIsBald

I didn't spot that. Which is which?

Authentic left.

Only small and medium authentic left.

The white triangle on the authentic one is a little weird. I prefer the white stripe coming further round but I think I'd prefer that triangle to be black. In reality when wearing it I think it will make little difference. edit: it it to make it look like a colar? Looks better here:

Does the expensive or normal shirt smell less sweaty?

True. I was just basing it on the foundations page: https://www.nufoundation.org.uk/news/newcastle-united-announces-donation-to-newcastle-united-foundation-from-home-kit-sales But it is true I don't know 100% that JD are not also doing it.

Nufc.com only links the JD sports store. They also don't mention that if you purchase through the club shop £5 goes to the Newcastle foundation. That choice will have a derogatory effect on the size of the donation. Pretty pathetic.

Absolute fucking quality that video. Would be class hearing 52k people singing the song like the second half of the video.

I’m hoping it’s a house of cards.

Var is marmite. I just want to believe it can become better. I get why people hate it though. They’re/you’re not wrong. My bias is towards accuracy of decisions. I think we need to feel some pain now to iterate to a place where it 100% improves the game.

Sounds like he's avoided the cull 👍

In principal I agree with this but you don't win anything for money left on the FFP plate. Every team will be trying to maximise their spend. The difference in money per league position is massive. So you'd gamble on where you end up in the league to get you as close to the limit as possible. One or two things don't go your way and you need money. I think the reporting period is low down on what's wrong with FFP but still think that if it enables teams to force your hand to a sale under market value it's not great.

My son recommended it to me. It's a bit episodic at first but I really grew into it. edit: TBF the law side of things do play second fiddle to drama. I liked it for the characters.

Suits was class like. That's where I get 90% of my legal knowledge from 😀

The transfer market has been shown that leaving transfers later can maximise profit. Forest showed that they got more money for a player by doing exactly this. If this makes me stupidly naive in your opinion so be it.

I'm basing my opinion on the Forest defence and Sky reporting a mini transfer day mid transfer due to teams having to balance their books. Also probably having to accept below market prices to avoid points deduction. It feels daft to me but obviously others disagree

This was my original point: Feels like I'm debating with a goldfish.

Forests defence (they lost points due to making this choice): So I guess not entirely in my head?

Not sure the meaning of the smiley in that context but this happened to forest

Fair enough. So extend that period to be 31 May and deadline day + 1 day. Given all the clubs are focusing on 31 July I guess they've tried to get their accounting period as close as possible to dead line day to avoid selling players under market value.

I believe a third party could take the premier league to a CAT tribunal. Let's say a random Saudi firm was not allowed to sponsor Newcastle as they deemed the amount they offered above fair market value. They are not held by the premier league rules so could open a case. This would also not be hidden behind the privacy rules. I forget the specifics of how we got the premier league in front of CAT but it can be done.

So being forced to sell a player 15 million under what you'd get on deadline day to meet FFP rules is ok?

Also it's mental that the FFP end date is not the day after the transfer window closes.

I wonder if abstaining on these votes gives some sort of legal benefit in the future. Basically saying that the whole process and rules are not fit so no longer taking part in them. There always used to be every vote was 100% approved as nothing would get to a vote until it was agreed. I think these split votes and teams abstaining says a lot about the current state on the premier league and the "civil war" going on.

I didn't see that one going through. It felt dodgy during a reporting period to change it. For the teams that have budgeted within the rules to change it would be daft. If these rules were continuing for the next few years I could see an argument for setting the limit ahead of time saying in 2025 limit is x etc. But the rules are being replaced so that can't happen either. 2 in favour are heopefully Villa and Chelsea. Not us.