Jump to content

Financial Fair Play / Profit & Sustainability - New APT Rules Approved by Premier League


Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, LFEE said:

 

Honestly man, the sport is so fucked off the field it’s beyond repair. It’s just going to be endless litigation from now on with all parties involved 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Hudson said:

Fucking Corporate Americans, leeches the lot of them

 

 

 

Many may accuse the Saudis of sportswashing. But the Americans are literally washing away the Premier League with their own brand of detergent and it stinks !

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, gbandit said:

Honestly man, the sport is so fucked off the field it’s beyond repair. It’s just going to be endless litigation from now on with all parties involved 

So Liverpool will sue Man City because they broke the rules to win titles ?? Can they only sue for the seasons they finished second ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ben said:

So Liverpool will sue Man City because they broke the rules to win titles ?? Can they only sue for the seasons they finished second ?

where does it end? every team in the league will have lost points / money as a result

 

 

Edited by duo

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gbandit said:

No one loves a lawsuit more than the Yanks. I’d wager they’re the worst force in trying to change football as a “product”

Shitbags will be pulling for super leagues, extra overseas games, a franchise model and all sorts of contemptible shit from their own closed shop plastic sports.

Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Nucasol said:

Shitbags will be pulling for super leagues, extra overseas games, a franchise model and all sorts of contemptible shit from their own closed shop plastic sports.

That was allways the plan, Once the Cartel 6 had Masters in place the League was doomed 

Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, JLC said:

Sadly I think a Premier League game taking place in the USA is only a matter of time

This is why we need an independent regulator, it ensures the ‘yankie doodle do’ lot don’t control our league.

Link to post
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Ronson333 said:

This is why we need an independent regulator, it ensures the ‘yankie doodle do’ lot don’t control our league.

An independent regulator will do fuck all. The cartel clubs will just say that it makes it more likely that the rest of the pyramid gets trickled down money, and all of a sudden it will be given the green light. I’m not convinced that they wouldn’t end up giving the key people in charge of the regulator loads of perks to get them inside as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, r0cafella said:

Still no verdict from the city related party case right?

I thought that there had been.  The issue is that it is confidential - the first time we'll get anything confirmed is via any changes to the PL rulebook.  So far, no changes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

I thought that there had been.  The issue is that it is confidential - the first time we'll get anything confirmed is via any changes to the PL rulebook.  So far, no changes.

I get the feeling the media shot the load a bit early and it was speculation given the lack of any detail  on any of the reporting around it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, r0cafella said:

I get the feeling the media shot the load a bit early and it was speculation given the lack of any detail  on any of the reporting around it. 

Definitely - I commented earlier in the thread that there was a lot of 2 + 2 = [insert number here] going on from the football press on the day the news 'leaked', followed by fevered backpedaling.  My suspicion is that if it was seismic it likely would have leaked out - my guess would be that the ruling isn't a 'win' for either party

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's lots and lots of commentary re commercial law etc, but football generally doesn't stack up vs commercial or employment law.  Where else can you be held to a multiple year contract with a buyout beyond the means of any individual employed?  Football's player registration system isn't in line with general employment law.  But it still exists (and has been pushed back in the past, via the Eastham and Bosman cases).  

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Definitely - I commented earlier in the thread that there was a lot of 2 + 2 = [insert number here] going on from the football press on the day the news 'leaked', followed by fevered backpedaling.  My suspicion is that if it was seismic it likely would have leaked out - my guess would be that the ruling isn't a 'win' for either party

I’d expect any ruling to favour either side because the status quo is basically the premier league way so no amendment. = PL won imo. 
 

Im sure a more fleshed out story detailing this will leak though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, r0cafella said:

I’d expect any ruling to favour either side because the status quo is basically the premier league way so no amendment. = PL won imo. 
 

Im sure a more fleshed out story detailing this will leak though. 

Yes, although it could be the case that the ruling required limited amendment to the rules, which would not be a 'win' for either side.

 

Ultimately, the clubs are members of the PL and sign up voluntarily - the don't have to play in it.  I'd still be mildly surprised if the adjudicators simply told the PL to tear up the rules that the vast majority of their members willingly voted through.  It is an incorporated association.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...