et tu brute Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 30 minutes ago, Mase said: Is that true? 6 teams voted against it but it was still brought in? The Premier League doing everything the American owners want without realising it will be the end of the PL as we know it! Yeah 12 6 was the vote, with villa and palace abstaining Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joelinton7 Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 (edited) Can anybody else just not be arsed with it now. Just read Ashworth’s first priority (were he to stay) would be to sell a top player. Literally exactly what we were under Ashley. I’m not comparing these owners to Ashley, they’re the complete opposite but as soon as our takeover was confirmed it seemed like rule after rule was brought in to stop us in our tracks. If our top board members are jumping ship to a team we should be looking to overtake then what actually has changed. It’s a closed shop and it will remain that way without successful legal challenges. I thought our days of being a “stepping stone club” were over but it appears not with Bruno, Isak, Joelinton, Trippier etc being linked with moves away and us seemingly having no choice in the matter because of PSR. Our academy needs gutting and restarting which will take years. Any gain we make is instantly evaporated by some edict from the red two. The ONLY chance any club had is to be taken over by a sovereign wealth fund and now that isn’t even enough. We need to fuck off the PL and start a new league with the other 14. Leave the 6 to eat each other alive. Edited February 14 by Joelinton7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andycap Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 So could the club not just take out loans to buy players? Would that affect ffp? As they don't mind debt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitley mag Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 22 minutes ago, Joelinton7 said: Can anybody else just not be arsed with it now. Just read Ashworth’s first priority (were he to stay) would be to sell a top player. Literally exactly what we were under Ashley. I’m not comparing these owners to Ashley, they’re the complete opposite but as soon as our takeover was confirmed it seemed like rule after rule was brought in to stop us in our tracks. If our top board members are jumping ship to a team we should be looking to overtake then what actually has changed. It’s a closed shop and it will remain that way without successful legal challenges. I thought our days of being a “stepping stone club” were over but it appears not with Bruno, Isak, Joelinton, Trippier etc being linked with moves away and us seemingly having no choice in the matter because of PSR. Our academy needs gutting and restarting which will take years. Any gain we make is instantly evaporated by some edict from the red two. The ONLY chance any club had is to be taken over by a sovereign wealth fund and now that isn’t even enough. We need to fuck off the PL and start a new league with the other 14. Leave the 6 to eat each other alive. A large part of the other 14 are complicit with owners happy to trundle along and not have to invest. Until an independent regulator seizes control self interest and greed will rule. On a positive note we will get there it’s just going to take longer than we want. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 22 minutes ago, Joelinton7 said: Can anybody else just not be arsed with it now. Just read Ashworth’s first priority (were he to stay) would be to sell a top player. Literally exactly what we were under Ashley. I’m not comparing these owners to Ashley, they’re the complete opposite but as soon as our takeover was confirmed it seemed like rule after rule was brought in to stop us in our tracks. If our top board members are jumping ship to a team we should be looking to overtake then what actually has changed. It’s a closed shop and it will remain that way without successful legal challenges. I thought our days of being a “stepping stone club” were over but it appears not with Bruno, Isak, Joelinton, Trippier etc being linked with moves away and us seemingly having no choice in the matter because of PSR. Our academy needs gutting and restarting which will take years. Any gain we make is instantly evaporated by some edict from the red two. The ONLY chance any club had is to be taken over by a sovereign wealth fund and now that isn’t even enough. We need to fuck off the PL and start a new league with the other 14. Leave the 6 to eat each other alive. If we don’t challenge FFP/FMV legally we’ll just have to be happy with who we are. PL have now voted in stronger FMV rules to strangle our revenue streams. At the PL meeting last week I honestly believe it was us who threatened legal action…..mind that’s based on absolutely fuck all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegans Export Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 14 minutes ago, andycap said: So could the club not just take out loans to buy players? Would that affect ffp? As they don't mind debt. It would still affect FFP because what goes on the books isn't the transfer fee, its the reduction in the value of the player over the course of his contract (up to 5 years). So you can buy a £40m player on a four year contract however you like - cash, installments, getting a loan from HSBC - he's still going to cost you £10m per year (plus wages obviously) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 Still think the fact we're hindered by 'sustainability' rules despite being owned by the richest cunts on the planet is a bit ridiculous mind. Like "oooooooooohhh, can the Saudi's afford this amount of money or are they risking the club's future???" Fuck. Directly. Off Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfcastle Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 Can't see a way it doesn't make football a lot more boring in time when everyone learns their place and realises they're stuck with it as a rule. Even not having to worry about being overhauled will be nullifying. No more venting at clubs for not showing more ambition - because they can't. Basically I guess it's imagine a PL without Blackburn, Chelsea and Man City being financed, Leeds for better and worse under/after Ridsdale, Boro's over extracagance, Shearer coming home, where Ashley's are encouraged. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paully Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 https://twitter.com/mcfc_trey/status/1757770861153591405?s=46&t=FsEm6VC2ijNnTjHjyXU7DA Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 Feels rank that a 15 year spell can define a club's history and now the ladder is being raised and no-one else is allowed the opportunity. Liverpool had a 17-18 year spell early 70s to late 90s and it's set them up for the rest of their lives. They were always an historic club but up until they beat us in the '74 Final they were no bigger than us. They'd won 9 major trophies up to that final, we had 10. Something needs to change. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 2 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said: Feels rank that a 15 year spell can define a club's history and now the ladder is being raised and no-one else is allowed the opportunity. Liverpool had a 17-18 year spell early 70s to late 90s and it's set them up for the rest of their lives. They were always an historic club but up until they beat us in the '74 Final they were no bigger than us. They'd won 9 major trophies up to that final, we had 10. Something needs to change. Money always corrupts sadly, now football is about hyper capitalism the owners rush in with the protectionism. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 8 minutes ago, r0cafella said: Money always corrupts sadly, now football is about hyper capitalism the owners rush in with the protectionism. You’re correct, however this is there to allow fair competition and the sooner some club has the balls to use it the better. https://www.catribunal.org.uk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 Just before Christmas wasn’t there something mentioned, possibly by Mark Douglas that there was a number of new sponsorship deals to be announced, and not the adidas deal which we already knew about? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 2 hours ago, FloydianMag said: You’re correct, however this is there to allow fair competition and the sooner some club has the balls to use it the better. https://www.catribunal.org.uk I'm sticking to the idea that it will be Forest if they get a points deduction, using the fact that they sold BJ to Spurs within a transfer window that spanned 2 accounting periods, but by delaying the sale they got £15m more than thy would have if they had sold before the 31st July. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 Just now, Colos Short and Curlies said: I'm sticking to the idea that it will be Forest if they get a points deduction, using the fact that they sold BJ to Spurs within a transfer window that spanned 2 accounting periods, but by delaying the sale they got £15m more than thy would have if they had sold before the 31st July. Forest, City, Everton or us I’m not bothered as long as there’s a challenge. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 It feels likely to me that the regulations will have to be relaxed soon, in some way anyway. It doesn't suit the PL to starve itself of money and have deadline days where nothing happens. It's meant to be the most glamorous league in the world. I know top clubs don't like others to catch up, but the PL as a whole doesn't benefit from keeping money out. I guess because of the members-club nature of the organisation, maybe it doesn't have the capacity to make decisions for the benefit of the whole. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 3 minutes ago, FloydianMag said: Forest, City, Everton or us I’m not bothered as long as there’s a challenge. City are tying the PL in legal knots, they have no real desire to challenge FFP knowing they will win in court if and when needed. Everton don't really have a leg to stand on as they blatantly played a game with FFP expecting the PL to roll over. They can only challenge the concept of it which may be tricky and take a long time We have no real appetite to be the ones challenging it, I think we know that any challenge by us would just result in other rules being put in their place Forest, as above have a real tangible challenge on how the FFP rules contravene competition law and also go against the principles of why transfer windows remain post Bosman. They'll appeal first and then challenge the rules in court if needed. The worry with this (for the likes of us) is that the PL buckle under appeal and make a soft provision for sales and purchases within the summer transfer window which lets Forest off the hook but does no good to anyone else Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leffe186 Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 11 hours ago, Joelinton7 said: …. The ONLY chance any club had is to be taken over by a sovereign wealth fund and now that isn’t even enough…. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 9 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said: City are tying the PL in legal knots, they have no real desire to challenge FFP knowing they will win in court if and when needed. Everton don't really have a leg to stand on as they blatantly played a game with FFP expecting the PL to roll over. They can only challenge the concept of it which may be tricky and take a long time We have no real appetite to be the ones challenging it, I think we know that any challenge by us would just result in other rules being put in their place Forest, as above have a real tangible challenge on how the FFP rules contravene competition law and also go against the principles of why transfer windows remain post Bosman. They'll appeal first and then challenge the rules in court if needed. The worry with this (for the likes of us) is that the PL buckle under appeal and make a soft provision for sales and purchases within the summer transfer window which lets Forest off the hook but does no good to anyone else I think you’re wrong on City, if FFP was found to be anti competitive a lot of their charges could disappear, there lawyers would have a field day. Now us, we have good reason to challenge FFP and especially FMV rules that strangles our sponsorship deals. As I said earlier when the PL met last week and introduced the new more onerous rules a club threatened legal action and I don’t think it was a bluff and I don’t think it was City. Time will tell. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattoon Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 What is even more infuriating is it's not about the competition and winning for these red owners, they aren't in it for the glory, they're in it for the dividends. These American business owners just want to milk the tit at the highest table yet have the audacity to say that the state owned clubs will ruin football. State owned clubs don't care about the prize funds, the balance sheets and their healthy end of year financial pat on the back. They want to be the best, to flex their might against the best teams, they're in it for the prestige. It's all very clandestine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 1 hour ago, FloydianMag said: I think you’re wrong on City, if FFP was found to be anti competitive a lot of their charges could disappear, there lawyers would have a field day. Now us, we have good reason to challenge FFP and especially FMV rules that strangles our sponsorship deals. As I said earlier when the PL met last week and introduced the new more onerous rules a club threatened legal action and I don’t think it was a bluff and I don’t think it was City. Time will tell. I don't disagree on City, but I don't think they will rock the boat and challenge FFP unless the PL starts trying to apply sanctions from the charges. The legal Beagles know the position and know they would likely win, but taking a concept to court as being unfair and uncompetitive is different to taking a judgment to court as part of the that challenge. Same with us, yes we may take a view that we need to go legal down the line but we'll be more than happy to wait and see how the Everton and Forest cases play out first Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 Seen on Talksport and Twitter City Fans saying they were "cleared" by CAS and there is an untrue narrtive.. 2 second google shows that to be unture. They didn't clear City. Judgment rules that much of Uefa’s case was ‘time-barred’ Basically the charges were brought late. Never cleared them of wrongdoing. The Cas panel of three European lawyers decided by a majority 2-1 also (1 appointed by City) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 13 hours ago, Wolfcastle said: Can't see a way it doesn't make football a lot more boring in time when everyone learns their place and realises they're stuck with it as a rule. Even not having to worry about being overhauled will be nullifying. No more venting at clubs for not showing more ambition - because they can't. Basically I guess it's imagine a PL without Blackburn, Chelsea and Man City being financed, Leeds for better and worse under/after Ridsdale, Boro's over extracagance, Shearer coming home, where Ashley's are encouraged. Since Forest and Clough had the audacity to win the league in 77/78 you would have had the following champions: 78/79 - Liverpool 79/80 - Liverpool 80/81 - Villa 81/82 - Liverpool 82/83 - Liverpool 83/84 - Liverpool 84/85 - Everton 85/86 - Liverpool 86/87 - Everton 87/88 - Liverpool 88/89 - Arsenal 89/90 - Liverpool 90/91 - Arsenal 91/92 - Leeds 92/93 - Man United 93/94 - Man United 94/95 - Man United 95/96 - Man United 96/97 - Man United 97/98 - Arsenal 98/99 - Man United 99/00 - Man United 00/01 - Man United 01/02 - Arsenal 02/03 - Man United 03/04 - Arsenal 04/05 - Arsenal 05/06 - Man United 06/07 - Man United 07/08 - Man United 08/09 - Man United 09/10 - Man United 10/11 - Man United 11/12 - Man United 12/13 - Man United 13/14 - Liverpool 14/15 - Arsenal 15/16 - Leicester 16/17 - Tottenham 17/18 - Man United 18/19 - Liverpool 19/20 - Liverpool 20/21 - Man United 21/22 - Liverpool 22/23 - Arsenal 45 seasons and 39 titles won by three clubs. That is exactly what Richard Masters' puppeteers want the league to look like. Important to note I only changed one winner from 1978/79 through 2003/04. In the last 19 seasons I had to change 12 of them. They had a firm grip on the game and they lost it when Roman and then Sheikh Mansour turned up. They are now frantically trying to pull up the drawbridge before anyone else threatens their standing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 3 minutes ago, timeEd32 said: Since Forest and Clough had the audacity to win the league in 77/78 you would have had the following champions: 78/79 - Liverpool 79/80 - Liverpool 80/81 - Villa 81/82 - Liverpool 82/83 - Liverpool 83/84 - Liverpool 84/85 - Everton 85/86 - Liverpool 86/87 - Everton 87/88 - Liverpool 88/89 - Arsenal 89/90 - Liverpool 90/91 - Arsenal 91/92 - Leeds 92/93 - Man United 93/94 - Man United 94/95 - Man United 95/96 - Man United 96/97 - Man United 97/98 - Arsenal 98/99 - Man United 99/00 - Man United 00/01 - Man United 01/02 - Arsenal 02/03 - Man United 03/04 - Arsenal 04/05 - Arsenal 05/06 - Man United 06/07 - Man United 07/08 - Man United 08/09 - Man United 09/10 - Man United 10/11 - Man United 11/12 - Man United 12/13 - Man United 13/14 - Liverpool 14/15 - Arsenal 15/16 - Leicester 16/17 - Tottenham 17/18 - Man United 18/19 - Liverpool 19/20 - Liverpool 20/21 - Man United 21/22 - Liverpool 22/23 - Arsenal 45 seasons and 39 titles won by three clubs. That is exactly what Richard Masters' puppeteers want the league to look like. Important to note I only changed one winner from 1978/79 through 2003/04. In the last 19 seasons I had to change 12 of them. They had a firm grip on the game and they lost it when Roman and then Sheikh Mansour turned up. They are now frantically trying to pull up the drawbridge before anyone else threatens their standing. You often hear fans talking about a red cartel, you can see what they mean!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfcastle Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 What a surprising list. Leeds in 91/92 might have exceeded ffp too. They were big spenders for a 28k crowd and having been in the top division for two years. Some of those would have been at an absolute canter too. Oh the fun. 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