KetsbaiaIsBald

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.

Happy with this. Var is not the issue. The quality of implementation is. The premier league is rich. I would still love every game to have 3 separate VAR teams. They can't hear each other. A decision is only overruled if 2 out of three agree in a time limit. Human error will always occur. There will always be disagreements. So minimise that using consensus. If you wanted to go mad have 5 teams and 3 must agree. In reality this will never happen. There are not enough competent people to do 1 team per game. But I'm convinced, in my own mind at least, that this would improve accuracy. It would be a fun exercise.

I kind of think all the clubs close to breaching the limit should just break the rules. The league was a shit show this year with 2 relegation teams losing points, getting them back, not getting them back. 6 teams going though this will make the league look like an utter farce. Losing credibility in the league could drive change more than anything else.

Not sure on the date windows but our league position could have put us in breach I guess. 2-3 million per position.

Mike fucking Ashley.

Fuck the premier league and their 18 months of delays, followed up by ill thought out rule changes to fuck us. I hope Man City blow them out of the water. Today is a good day.

Felt inevitable but still disappointing. Would have been nice to win one of these races against a premier league team for once.

Lets not even start on the poor man management meaning they lost a Champions league finalist.

bollox. This conversation has just been on defence as it suits a narrative. Statistically Newcastles injuries were worse. This is fact. This does not include losing Tonali for a season. On a club that has less than half the resources to spend.

As I say blinkered. Maybe a troll too. (We were also dipping into the Academy with Murphy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Murphy_(footballer))

No you're being spineless. You're indirectly defending his choices by being pedantic about costing nothing. I'd wager money their bonus payments are substantially less than a months salary. He's deliberately making working conditions poor for the lowest paid workers at the club. Then encouraging staff to voluntarily resign. If you want to reduce staff do it the right way. Do voluntary redundancies any pay off staff the months worth of salary that they would be due. A billionaires is making working conditions poor for staff to save a few quid.

We don't have a seventh choice centre back due to resources. We were bringing Dummett on. "33 different back four parnerships" is a failing on Tag to work out what to do back there and playing roulette until something works.

Well say you don't agree with it then. Don't indirectly defend it.

Indeed. And the injuries we have had in defence have been so bad all season. Keeper, two defenders with ACL's, right back's and left backs injured. On a lower budget and with at least equal challenges Howe has done so so much better.

You really are blinkered very badly.

They have been asked to take voluntary resignations not redundancy. It really sounds like he's deliberately trying to create a pretty toxic place to work in order to trim the wage bill without having to pay anything out. I feel for staff at the club.

I think in principal as a fingers up to the bullshit European coefficient prize money rules it makes sense. I just don't see how it can work in practice given the UEFA spending rules. If there is away around the UEFA rules and we are going to add this back date it a few years though. So we get the spend we would have last year. Adding this now does after we have suffered from this does stink. Maybe this is a sign that the premier league does have some appetite to start fighting back against the UEFA rules. If they don't they're just going to eventually give up the leagues position of financial dominance.

Unfortunetly I don't think we ever do as the clubs with the most power and influence do not want it. They want the advantage and have fought for years to protect and extend it.