PIF and RB Sports & Media

[FloydianMag]

Just now, Colos Short and Curlies said:

If a journalist does a 180 in their views its usually as they think they are getting ahead of the game - i.e. he sees changes afoot.

 

Whether he is right on that or not is another matter of course

I’ve had a feeling that the club are preparing some kind of action, ever since Dan Ashworth’s fishing trip at the beginning of November re loan players from Saudi. I could be wrong, hope I’m not.

[Geordie Ahmed]

34 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

So odd how he’s changed his tune. 

Tbf I'm sure he wrote an article a good while back slating FFP 

[TheBrownBottle]

1 hour ago, r0cafella said:

So odd how he’s changed his tune. 

He’s likely finally worked out that this also impacts his beloved West ‘Aaaaaam.  They can never compete, even if a crazy multibillionaire takes over

[ponsaelius]

3 hours ago, r0cafella said:

So odd how he’s changed his tune. 

 

Has he?

 

He's been very consistent on his opinion on FFP for years.

[DahnSahf]

1 hour ago, TheBrownBottle said:

He’s likely finally worked out that this also impacts his beloved West ‘Aaaaaam.  They can never compete, even if a crazy multibillionaire takes over

 

What I don't understand is why other clubs' owners don't get this. They're supposed to be businessmen. By voting for FFP & FMV measures they're effectively devaluing their own clubs. Unless they think they're going to own them forever, like.

[r0cafella]

12 minutes ago, ponsaelius said:

 

Has he?

 

He's been very consistent on his opinion on FFP for years.

I could be mistaken, I thought he’s one of those who’ve been bashing us since the takeover. 

[Turnbull2000]

11 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

I could be mistaken, I thought he’s one of those who’ve been bashing us since the takeover. 

 

Not really. Think he's been a bit critical of the regime and what undeniably amounts to sportswashing a couple of times (which as a journalist is not unreasonable), but generally covers us purely in sporting terms, and has been critical of FFP, FMV and the behaviour of the break-away 6 for quite a while now.

 

 

Edited January 3 by Turnbull2000

[Miggys First Goal]

I mean he’s still a fat mess who always sounded like a nonce outside a school with his heavy breathing when he used to be on Sunday Supplement. 

[FloydianMag]

27 minutes ago, Miggys First Goal said:

I mean he’s still a fat mess who always sounded like a nonce outside a school with his heavy breathing when he used to be on Sunday Supplement. 

Hasn’t stopped him calling it right on FFP and FMV though, has it?

[Keegans Export]

I think the reason nobody has intentionally breached FFP/FMV with the intention of a legal challenge is that they've weighed it up and decided it probably isn't worth the risk.

 

Take Everton for example - they've focused their defence on an argument that they actually haven't broken the rules or that the punishment itself is harsh. That's a more straightforward argument than trying to show the whole FFP/FMV system is anti-competitive and should be removed altogether.

 

By the time you've proved the latter how many points deductions, fines, forced relegations etc could you have suffered? And if you go all that way and don't win, then you're royally fucked.

[FloydianMag]

33 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

I think the reason nobody has intentionally breached FFP/FMV with the intention of a legal challenge is that they've weighed it up and decided it probably isn't worth the risk.

 

Take Everton for example - they've focused their defence on an argument that they actually haven't broken the rules or that the punishment itself is harsh. That's a more straightforward argument than trying to show the whole FFP/FMV system is anti-competitive and should be removed altogether.

 

By the time you've proved the latter how many points deductions, fines, forced relegations etc could you have suffered? And if you go all that way and don't win, then you're royally fucked.

It didn’t take Football agents long take on the PL, UEFA and FIFA who attempted to cap their fees etc and win. I know a lot of people don’t like Nick De Marco but he knows his shit and he was involved in that case. His opinion and it’s an opinion based on his experience and legal knowledge that FFP is anti competitive and only serves to protect the already wealthy cartel clubs in what they see as their privileged positions.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 3 by FloydianMag

[TheBrownBottle]

58 minutes ago, FloydianMag said:

It didn’t take Football agents long take on the PL, UEFA and FIFA who attempted to cap their fees etc and win. I know a lot of people don’t like Nick De Marco but he knows his shit and he was involved in that case. His opinion and it’s an opinion based on his experience and legal knowledge that FFP is anti competitive and only serves to protect the already wealthy cartel clubs in what they see as their privileged positions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don’t think you even need to be NDM to see that it’s uncompetitive practice.  It was always an obvious potential breach of commercial law.  The ‘retain and transfer’ system was an obvious restraint of trade for the best part of a century until Eastham took NUFC to court.  As was the holding of player’s registration until Jean-Marc Bosman took the Belgian FA to court.  It doesn’t require NDM to point this stuff out.  The issue for me is that this isn’t being done with the good of the game in mind - just as the ‘Super League’ wankers weren’t with UEFA.  The outcome to that was obvious too - but I fail to see how a lot of this helps.

 

Reform and control, not Thatcherite ‘let the markets run rampant’, is what football needs. 

[Jonas]

7 hours ago, DahnSahf said:

 

What I don't understand is why other clubs' owners don't get this. They're supposed to be businessmen. By voting for FFP & FMV measures they're effectively devaluing their own clubs. Unless they think they're going to own them forever, like.

Think its ideal for the less ambitious. Can just blame FFP for floundering and stymie fan unrest at their ownership, nice easy job for life really.

I used to know this horrible fat c*nt that would love that.

[TheBrownBottle]

1 hour ago, Keegans Export said:

I think the reason nobody has intentionally breached FFP/FMV with the intention of a legal challenge is that they've weighed it up and decided it probably isn't worth the risk.

 

Take Everton for example - they've focused their defence on an argument that they actually haven't broken the rules or that the punishment itself is harsh. That's a more straightforward argument than trying to show the whole FFP/FMV system is anti-competitive and should be removed altogether.

 

By the time you've proved the latter how many points deductions, fines, forced relegations etc could you have suffered? And if you go all that way and don't win, then you're royally fucked.

The govt has already came out talking about changing UK commercial legislation following the UEFA case.  There is a chance that this gap gets plugged soon. 

[andyc35i]

19 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

The govt has already came out talking about changing UK commercial legislation following the UEFA case.  There is a chance that this gap gets plugged soon. 

In what way? Genuine question here 

[TheBrownBottle]

1 minute ago, andyc35i said:

In what way? Genuine question here 

The govt can enact any legislation they like, ultimately.  Including amendments or new legislation providing opt-outs and protections for some sectors - including sports.

 

Post-Brexit, they are in a position to do this without external considerations.  

[duo]

21 hours ago, RS said:

I know the owners went into this with their eyes wide open but the constant PL “law” changes aimed directly at NUFC to prevent competition against the PL glamour clubs should lead to another significant legal challenge against them. 

Give it time imo - it is getting ridiculous.  It will get to the point where enough is enough. It's blatantly a cartel so I think it would fall like a deck of cards if legally challenged. 

 

I tell you what all eyes on Man City - every man and his dog knows they cheated to bypass FFP.  If they get away with it 'again' - FFP is finished.

 

 

Edited January 4 by duo

[madras]

59 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

The govt can enact any legislation they like, ultimately.  Including amendments or new legislation providing opt-outs and protections for some sectors - including sports.

 

Post-Brexit, they are in a position to do this without external considerations.  

No they can't. Parliament can within reason but can still flounder in the supreme Court (for now.....the Tories are actively looking to change that) 

 

 

Edited January 3 by madras

[TheBrownBottle]

1 minute ago, madras said:

No they can't. Parliament can within reason but can still flounder in the supreme Court (for now.....the Tories are actively looking to change that) 

 

 

 

The Supreme Court are there to interpret and of course create case law - but they can’t block legislation.

 

The elective dictatorship will always be able to get what it wants

[Jackie Broon]

51 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

The govt can enact any legislation they like, ultimately.  Including amendments or new legislation providing opt-outs and protections for some sectors - including sports.

 

Post-Brexit, they are in a position to do this without external considerations.  

 

There hasn't been any suggestion of them doing it in relation to FFP though, only in relation to preventing English clubs playing in the ESL.

 

Obviously they could, but there would be unlikely to be the same level of public political pressure to legislate to keep FFP in place if it were to be successfully challenged.

 

Also, if there were a successful challenge here it would need to be repeated in the european court to completely free top clubs from FFP.

[madras]

2 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

The Supreme Court are there to interpret and of course create case law - but they can’t block legislation.

 

The elective dictatorship will always be able to get what it wants

Even then its Parliament and not Government as we saw during Brexit.

[TheBrownBottle]

1 minute ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

There hasn't been any suggestion of them doing it in relation to FFP though, only in relation to preventing English clubs playing in the ESL.

 

Obviously they could, but there would be unlikely to be the same level of public political pressure to legislate to keep FFP in place if it were to be successfully challenged.

 

Also, if there were a successful challenge here it would need to be repeated in the european court to completely free top clubs from FFP.

You’re right - and yes, UEFA has its own FFP rules independent of the PL.  

Just now, madras said:

Even then its Parliament and not Government as we saw during Brexit.

Are you referring to the proroguing of Parliament?  
 

I think it’s difficult to truly distinguish govt from Parliament - I know our executive hold ministerial portfolios, but ultimately the govt comes from the govt benches.  Another system in need of reform!

[DahnSahf]

13 hours ago, Jonas said:

Think its ideal for the less ambitious. Can just blame FFP for floundering and stymie fan unrest at their ownership, nice easy job for life really.

I used to know this horrible fat c*nt that would love that.

 

? Yeah, but imposing spending restrictions is extremely shortsighted if you ever intend to sell the club. It makes a purchase pointless for anyone like Roman A.

[Unbelievable]

12 hours ago, duo said:

Give it time imo - it is getting ridiculous.  It will get to the point where enough is enough. It's blatantly a cartel so I think it would fall like a deck of cards if legally challenged. 

 

I tell you what all eyes on Man City - every man and his dog knows they cheated to bypass FFP.  If they get away with it 'again' - FFP is finished.

 

 

 

 

Speculative theory: Man City and the PL are in a deadlock, because Man City threaten to take the PL to court over FFP being anti-competitive if they are stripped of their titles and/or demoted a few divisions. Both parties know that Man City would have a very good chance of winning such a case, which would go against the interest of the PL and its big six cartel, and thus a compromise will be reached where parties will just kick the can down the road indefinitely as long as Man City play ball going forward.

[duo]

1 hour ago, Unbelievable said:

 

Speculative theory: Man City and the PL are in a deadlock, because Man City threaten to take the PL to court over FFP being anti-competitive if they are stripped of their titles and/or demoted a few divisions. Both parties know that Man City would have a very good chance of winning such a case, which would go against the interest of the PL and its big six cartel, and thus a compromise will be reached where parties will just kick the can down the road indefinitely as long as Man City play ball going forward.

We may as well flaunt FFP and do the same. If you can't beat them....