Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

FFP is a joke.  Let Everton spend whatever they want if their owner is willing to pay for it. 


Weren’t you annoyed when Liverpool were spending despite annual losses? Genuine question btw, it’s a very vague memory.

Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, leffe186 said:


Weren’t you annoyed when Liverpool were spending despite annual losses? Genuine question btw, it’s a very vague memory.

No? Happy to be proven wrong.  I’ve not historically been very bothered by FFP but I have disliked Liverpool habitually.  
 

And in any case, things have changed.  I can admit bias.  But I don’t think I’ve genuinely cared about FFP.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The College Dropout said:

No? Happy to be proven wrong.  I’ve not historically been very bothered by FFP but I have disliked Liverpool habitually.  
 

And in any case, things have changed.  I can admit bias.  But I don’t think I’ve genuinely cared about FFP.  


Yeah I kinda liked the principle of FFP insofar that it could have lead to “sustainable” football. Obviously part of the problem was that it was partly driven by rich clubs trying to pull up the drawbridge.

 

Just seemed mildly amusing because like you say, things have changed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, STM said:

Would it be fair to suggest that Everton won't be spending vast amounts this summer? And if so, will possibly need to raise a few funds from outgoings?

I think they'll get away with the stuff from the last three years and be broadly allowed to spend what they want this summer. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Martinez (Aston Villa)

Trippier (Newcastle)

Tierney (Arsenal)

Rudiger (Chelsea)

Dias (Man City)

Rice (West Ham)

Ward-Prowse (Southampton)

Fernandes (Man Utd)

Son (Spurs)

Salah (Liverpool)

Vardy (Leicester)


Guaita (Crystal Palace)

Aarons (Norwich)

Tarkowski (Burnley)

Dunk (Brighton)

Neves (Wolves)

Eriksen (Brentford)

Raphinha (Leeds)

Sarr (Watford)

Calvert-Lewin (Everton)

 

 

 

Edited by Optimistic Nut

Link to post
Share on other sites

De Gea (Man U)

 

Trippier (Newcastle)

Fofana (Leicester)

Rudiger (Chelsea)

Walker-Peters (Southampton)

 

De Bruyne (Man City)

Neves (Wolves)

 

Salah (Liverpool)

Bowen (West Ham)

Saka (Arsenal)

 

Kane (Spurs)

 

Subs:

K.Phillips (Leeds)

Trossard (Brighton)

Sarr (Watford)

Olise (Palace)

Calvert-Lewin (Everton)

J. Ramsey (Villa)

Toney (Brentford)

Tarkowski (Burnley)

Aarons (Norwich)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should have just told the ‘big clubs’ fuck off to their super league and ousted them from the PL. We’ll be fine with the five subs rule going forwards but it’s absolutely shit for teams lower down the league 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Has the 'historical qualification' for the Champions League gained any legs? If they sneak that in I can't see there being the kick off that there was over the ESL, but there absolutely should be.

One thing that was forgotten in the whole Super League thing is that the new CL format which was released around the same time is horrendous

 

 

Edited by triggs

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Has the 'historical qualification' for the Champions League gained any legs? If they sneak that in I can't see there being the kick off that there was over the ESL, but there absolutely should be.

It was first mentioned last year - it's coming in for sure.

 

The 5 sub thing further reduces the element of "luck" in football. Every decision the game makes favours the bigger teams.

 

It's shit for FPL too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite apart from whether it benefits one team or another, the 5 subs rule is bad for the game in general. There's been a real disjointedness in games in Europe over the last couple of years once large numbers of subs are made, the flow of a game often disappears completely and the last 20 minutes is just spent watching players go on and off.

 

Diabolical if you like a bet on yellow cards as well. :anguish:

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Wullie said:

Quite apart from whether it benefits one team or another, the 5 subs rule is bad for the game in general. There's been a real disjointedness in games in Europe over the last couple of years once large numbers of subs are made, the flow of a game often disappears completely and the last 20 minutes is just spent watching players go on and off.

 

Diabolical if you like a bet on yellow cards as well. :anguish:

Big clubs often don't make so many changes against each other too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Has the 'historical qualification' for the Champions League gained any legs? If they sneak that in I can't see there being the kick off that there was over the ESL, but there absolutely should be.

They have included 2 spots for historical performances, plus another spot for something else. However neither spot will come at the expense of a club qualifying via the league and the most spots a country can have in the Champions League has increased to 6.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...