Guest Posted June 22 Share Posted June 22 Until they come to their senses and realise how fucking stupid FFP is in its current guise, clubs like us, Villa, Everton, Forest need to club together and fuck about a little bit. Ruin the record books for example. DCL to Newcastle for £200m, Wilson to Everton for £199m. Kilman to Newcastle for £235m, Longstaff to Wolves for £220m and so on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macphisto Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 7 hours ago, Optimistic Nut said: Until they come to their senses and realise how fucking stupid FFP is in its current guise, clubs like us, Villa, Everton, Forest need to club together and fuck about a little bit. Ruin the record books for example. DCL to Newcastle for £200m, Wilson to Everton for £199m. Kilman to Newcastle for £235m, Longstaff to Wolves for £220m and so on. I know it's not the same situation but I wonder if all these clubs could be investigated for charges similar to Juventus? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 19 hours ago, Maggies said: City are also claiming damages from the Premier League. The rule must surely be immediately lifted if they win otherwise the queue of damage claims will grow. Is it possible that no decision could be made, the judges just say "its a closed shop outside of any normal business structure, the EPL panel is nade up of 20 equal members and so long as a majority of 14 is maintained no rules are broken" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 41 minutes ago, Ben said: Is it possible that no decision could be made, the judges just say "its a closed shop outside of any normal business structure, the EPL panel is nade up of 20 equal members and so long as a majority of 14 is maintained no rules are broken" Arbitration is about PL rules, in particular APT, being unlawful in that they breach UK competition law. The 20 PL clubs can vote in whatever rules they like but they have to be within the law. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 42 minutes ago, Ben said: Is it possible that no decision could be made, the judges just say "its a closed shop outside of any normal business structure, the EPL panel is nade up of 20 equal members and so long as a majority of 14 is maintained no rules are broken" There are far more knowledgeable folks on here than me re this subject, but my understanding was always that this isn't a 'closed' case. There are exemptions given for commercial law when it is viewed to be in the public interest to do so - and Exclusion Orders have been issued in the past (for example around broadcasting rights). We'll get an answer soon enough Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 8 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: There are far more knowledgeable folks on here than me re this subject, but my understanding was always that this isn't a 'closed' case. There are exemptions given for commercial law when it is viewed to be in the public interest to do so - and Exclusion Orders have been issued in the past (for example around broadcasting rights). We'll get an answer soon enough Exclusion Orders are rarely granted, it’s usually in times of war, pandemics etc when such orders are made. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 2 minutes ago, FloydianMag said: Exclusion Orders are rarely granted, it’s usually in times of war, pandemics etc when such orders are made. In all honesty FM, I don't see how the PL wins the arbitration case, but we'll see Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 3 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: In all honesty FM, I don't see how the PL wins the arbitration case, but we'll see Me either, so many of the rules seems to be either restraint of trade or anti competitive to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 Let's face it, these rules were rushed in to stop Newcastle spending money to take over/join the top 6. Its only when they started to affect other teams that things kicked off. Masters lucked out with Forest and Everton surviving relegation, the points deductions need to stop before some team gets relegated the court costs and backlash will rip the league apart, paving the way for a new European super league. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawalls Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 18 minutes ago, Ben said: Let's face it, these rules were rushed in to stop Newcastle spending money to take over/join the top 6. Its only when they started to affect other teams that things kicked off. Masters lucked out with Forest and Everton surviving relegation, the points deductions need to stop before some team gets relegated the court costs and backlash will rip the league apart, paving the way for a new European super league. In no expert either but surely Leicester have a case as they are being judged on the whole rolling three years but they weren’t even in top flight for one of those years so they could argue less tv rights, less prize money, less attendance or gate attendance price and still having to pay same wages due to contractual obligations? The whole thing is a farce imo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezzle Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 8 minutes ago, Gawalls said: In no expert either but surely Leicester have a case as they are being judged on the whole rolling three years but they weren’t even in top flight for one of those years so they could argue less tv rights, less prize money, less attendance or gate attendance price and still having to pay same wages due to contractual obligations? The whole thing is a farce imo It's why forest got hammered. The championship loss limits are far less, ridiculous situation Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 When your criteria for making rules is basically *keep the top 6 happy, make sure no team can financially threaten them, keep Newcastle from spending* It's going to end in tears somewhere down the line. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 Martin Samuels https://archive.ph/OhRY6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitley mag Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 (edited) 9 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said: I mean, we don’t - Ashley dropped the CAT when the club was sold. That’s just my take and always will be, they didn’t just cave in when the Saudis decided to pay Bein, lot of moving parts and I think disclosure in a CAT case was something they’d have avoided at all cost. The payment to Bein was all part of the optics and I also believe there’s a reason we have held back from any action such as City’s so far, it certainly wasn’t agreed all of a sudden due to clearing up who was running the club. Edited June 23 by Whitley mag Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 I don’t think PIF want to get involved with legal action against the PL. They’re in football to improve their reputation and make people think they’re acceptable and normal business people. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
astraguy Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-13559713/Football-Leaks-hacker-Man-City-FFP-rules.html?ito=native_share_article-nativemenubutton Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terraloon Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 (edited) 4 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said: In all honesty FM, I don't see how the PL wins the arbitration case, but we'll see The thrust of the SJHL case before CAT ( it’s important to note it wasn’t ever Newcastle Utd ) was to do with structure at Company level and particularly a clubs obligation to take matters of dispute to arbitration under football rules. CAT didn’t rule on the matter , they didn’t need to, the PL had always asked for a stay of CAT process their claim was that the outcome of the arbitration would render SJHL’s case in effect irrelevant. The difference between the City case here is that the club has gone to arbitration a significant part of their claims is that rules agreed by the majority could arguably be aimed at the minority, they called it “ Tyranny of the Majority “ I personally think this is an interesting comment and suggests that City acknowledge the ability of the “ competition “ to apply a process to its own rules as it were but City probably are going to argue that such rules aren’t fair because of its impact on them specifically SJHL argued that they weren’t subject to PL/ FA rules as they weren’t a club so in effect weren’t bound by such rules. City haven’t advanced that argument nor dare I say did CAT rule one way or another re SJHL claim. I have read the transcript and yes ¿through my Chelsea eyes which are broadly neutral I don’t think either side had compelling arguments re jurisdiction but what we do know that the PLs request to wait maybe wasn’t quite met but almost certainly the threat of SJHL led to a resolution of the case before it was put to arbitration In 2023 legislation was passed that in effect returned primacy of UK laws over EU laws one such are where there was a requirement for UK to factor in EU regulation was trade and so by default interpretation of Competition Law to be broadly in line and one such area where the ECJ has paid special attention to is sport where in effect it is suggested that it’s not just as straightforward as applying a generic approach. I personally think City will fail but these KCs are clever people and have the ability to shape their arguments so convincing that it’s obvious then the opposition KCs prove the polar opposite is the correct outcome Edited June 23 by Terraloon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
huss9 Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 1 hour ago, AyeDubbleYoo said: I don’t think PIF want to get involved with legal action against the PL. They’re in football to improve their reputation and make people think they’re acceptable and normal business people. they took on LIV though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Jinx Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 Witness protection? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 34 minutes ago, huss9 said: they took on LIV though. Think that’s a much bigger priority for them though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
huss9 Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 Just now, SUPERTOON said: Think that’s a much bigger priority for them though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 38 minutes ago, huss9 said: they took on LIV though. It wouldn't surprise me if PIF took the PL on down the road, but little point in doing so with City doing exactly the same at the moment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 4 hours ago, FloydianMag said: Martin Samuels https://archive.ph/OhRY6 Samuels and Ratcliff can both fuck off. For years they (their club in Ratcliff's case) have actually defended this sorry state of affairs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucasol Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 One of the Redshirt Shithouse Clubs is crying. Any of the three or one of their bitch cuckhold clubs like Palace. This flurry of transfer activity immediately drew scepticism, but has also annoyed some rival clubs. And BBC Sport knows of at least one club that is so concerned it intends to raise the matter with the Premier League. No-one is breaking the rules, but questions have been raised over valuations, the use of young players, and whether this has highlighted a loophole in the league’s PSR system which can be used to limit losses. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c5111jg2r3yo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE27 Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 12 minutes ago, Nucasol said: One of the Redshirt Shithouse Clubs is crying. Any of the three or one of their bitch cuckhold clubs like Palace. This flurry of transfer activity immediately drew scepticism, but has also annoyed some rival clubs. And BBC Sport knows of at least one club that is so concerned it intends to raise the matter with the Premier League. No-one is breaking the rules, but questions have been raised over valuations, the use of young players, and whether this has highlighted a loophole in the league’s PSR system which can be used to limit losses. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c5111jg2r3yo Whinge if we do it like they did, whinge if we find new ways, just constant fucking whinging. Has there even been a peep about Chelsea and their hotel sales since that came about? That was the biggest cock slap in the face to the league ffs 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