Fezzle Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 2 minutes ago, r0cafella said: So odd how he’s changed his tune. Kept reading waiting for the punchline, must have been drunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miggys First Goal Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 He ain’t wrong though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RS Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 7 minutes ago, Fezzle said: Kept reading waiting for the punchline, must have been drunk It’s up to the clubs who suffer from FFP to submit a legal challenge and fuck the old top 6, we would be hated for doing so but then the cunts hate us anyway. Give them something to really fucking hate us for!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miggys First Goal Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 You’ve got Carragher going on all the time about the PL being the best league in the world. Aye, if you’re part of the cabal at the top. Think of how much better it could be if everybody had a chance to compete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloGeordio Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 Just now, Miggys First Goal said: You’ve got Carragher going on all the time about the PL being the best league in the world. Aye, if you’re part of the cabal at the top. Think of how much better it could be if everybody had a chance to compete. Squeeky fucker doesn’t want that! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geordie Ahmed Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DahnSahf Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turnbull2000 Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 (edited) 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miggys First Goal Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 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? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegans Export Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 (edited) 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonas Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyc35i Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
duo Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 (edited) 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 (edited) 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now