FloydianMag Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 12 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said: While I'm all in favour of slagging off Masters, didn't they need 14 clubs to vote for all of these rules? Yep, but who drove the need for the rules……….it certainly wasn’t the likes of LCFC,Wolves, CPFC and the other poodles of the cartel. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-13988385/Man-Citys-legal-war-Premier-League-sponsorship-rules-rumbles-club-officials-clash-feisty-emergency-meeting-fears-growing-resolution-not-reached-year.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=social-facebook-sport&fbclid=IwY2xjawGEx4BleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHXj1ALLz-PHCyfZiCczSHT6dU9hCPE3-FQnYLtmLQ6unFOvqLDM86RGLGA_aem_pYs2xLgvxPb0Go1HJZWuZw Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloGeordio Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 19 minutes ago, FloydianMag said: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-13988385/Man-Citys-legal-war-Premier-League-sponsorship-rules-rumbles-club-officials-clash-feisty-emergency-meeting-fears-growing-resolution-not-reached-year.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=social-facebook-sport&fbclid=IwY2xjawGEx4BleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHXj1ALLz-PHCyfZiCczSHT6dU9hCPE3-FQnYLtmLQ6unFOvqLDM86RGLGA_aem_pYs2xLgvxPb0Go1HJZWuZw Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
huss9 Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 Man City fans aim unsubtle dig at Premier League CEO Richard Masters as legal war rumbles on... amid 'feisty' emergency meeting between top flight clubs over sponsorship rules An emergency meeting between club officials was held on Tuesday afternoon This came amid an ongoing legal war between Man City and the Premier League Manchester City fans planted a giant screen outside the Premier League’s HQ claiming that the competition’s chief executive is being controlled by some of their Big Six rivals - as the civil war between the pair rumbled on. An emergency summit was held on Tuesday afternoon to try and find peace in City’s battle with the top-flight over sponsorship rules. However, execs from across the top flight had to walk past a flatbed truck which featured an LED board showing the badges of Arsenal, Liverpool, Manchester United and Spurs with the caption ‘Richard’s Masters’ – a not-so thinly-veiled dig at Premier League boss Richard Masters. The van was parked on North Wharf Road in Paddington close to the entrance of the building where clubs attempted to thrash out next steps in what was described as a ‘feisty’ meeting where no timeline was given on a resolution to the sponsorship rules row. The group claiming responsibility, called The OSC, posted a picture of the elaborate protest, along with the caption: ‘A message to the Premier League from those of us outside the cartel. Stop governing on behalf of them and represent the league fairly and evenly. City, Everton, Forest, Newcastle, Chelsea, West Ham, Newcastle – who is next?’ Premier League CEO Masters (pictured) wants the matter dealt with 'swiftly and effectively' but there are now fears it could drag into 2025 Earlier this month a tribunal ruled that regulations over commercial deals with companies linked to owners of top-flight sides were ‘unlawful’ – after a challenge from City. Insiders have disclosed that the Premier League attempted to stick to their guns in the summit after chief executive Masters told clubs in the aftermath of the hearing that they could make the necessary amendments ‘quickly and effectively’. Read More Inside the week that blew up the Premier League: How Man City's legal war has forced clubs split However, City’s legal counsel Simon Cliff – who responded to Masters’ summary by emailing all clubs to emphatically dismiss that notion – again pointed out that there could be no swift solution. Views were sought from those present, with one source describing exchanges as ‘feisty’. Each club had two representatives. Some attended in person while others dialled in. At one stage, according to insiders, the Premier League representatives complained about the volume of work which would be required. Clubs were told that their feedback would eventually be presented to those working on a solution to the three issues identified with the associated party transaction (APT) rules, including the need to include shareholder loans within the amended system. No date for a vote, which would be needed to bring in changes, was given. Instead, clubs were told that they would be issued with an update in due course. The meeting was scheduled for two hours but only lasted for around a half of that. In special circumstances a vote can be rushed through, should the clubs be in agreement. However, normal practice is for a 21-day period of reflection after proposals are put forward before a vote is taken. Some believe what is a damaging episode for the top flight may now drag into the new year. Meanwhile, the Premier League’s legal battle with City over their alleged 115 breaches of financial regulations, which is not connected to the above, continues. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OverThere Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 FFP is a load of bollocks. You could write a 1 line rule for finances.... "Each team is allowed a cap of x per season for transfers and salaries" That would be that and would be the same for every team, including the "Big Six". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingxlnc Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 I like that... except I'm not sure how Chelsea get away scot free Surely they are part of the cartel - how else have they been allowed such ridiculous spending and other blatant disregard for the rules? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 1 hour ago, huss9 said: Premier League representatives complained about the volume of work which would be required. 1 hour ago, huss9 said: The meeting was scheduled for two hours but only lasted for around a half of that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 (edited) Football Regulator Communications post advertised. https://www.civilservicejobs.service.gov.uk/csr/index.cgi?SID=dXNlcnNlYXJjaGNvbnRleHQ9MTAwODE4Mjg0Jm93bmVyPTUwNzAwMDAmcGFnZWFjdGlvbj12aWV3dmFjYnlqb2JsaXN0JnBhZ2VjbGFzcz1Kb2JzJm93bmVydHlwZT1mYWlyJnNlYXJjaHNvcnQ9Y2xvc2luZyZzZWFyY2hwYWdlPTMxJmpvYmxpc3Rfdmlld192YWM9MTkyNjA5OCZyZXFzaWc9MTcyODk5MzYyNy1iNDZhYzJhYjAwY2Q1NmU5YmQxYTkzYTNjMzM4NGVlZTE4MTgxM2E5&utm_source=indeed.com&utm_medium=free Edited October 23 by FloydianMag Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stal Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 15 hours ago, huss9 said: Man City fans aim unsubtle dig at Premier League CEO Richard Masters as legal war rumbles on... amid 'feisty' emergency meeting between top flight clubs over sponsorship rules An emergency meeting between club officials was held on Tuesday afternoon This came amid an ongoing legal war between Man City and the Premier League Manchester City fans planted a giant screen outside the Premier League’s HQ claiming that the competition’s chief executive is being controlled by some of their Big Six rivals - as the civil war between the pair rumbled on. An emergency summit was held on Tuesday afternoon to try and find peace in City’s battle with the top-flight over sponsorship rules. However, execs from across the top flight had to walk past a flatbed truck which featured an LED board showing the badges of Arsenal, Liverpool, Manchester United and Spurs with the caption ‘Richard’s Masters’ – a not-so thinly-veiled dig at Premier League boss Richard Masters. The van was parked on North Wharf Road in Paddington close to the entrance of the building where clubs attempted to thrash out next steps in what was described as a ‘feisty’ meeting where no timeline was given on a resolution to the sponsorship rules row. The group claiming responsibility, called The OSC, posted a picture of the elaborate protest, along with the caption: ‘A message to the Premier League from those of us outside the cartel. Stop governing on behalf of them and represent the league fairly and evenly. City, Everton, Forest, Newcastle, Chelsea, West Ham, Newcastle – who is next?’ Premier League CEO Masters (pictured) wants the matter dealt with 'swiftly and effectively' but there are now fears it could drag into 2025 Earlier this month a tribunal ruled that regulations over commercial deals with companies linked to owners of top-flight sides were ‘unlawful’ – after a challenge from City. Insiders have disclosed that the Premier League attempted to stick to their guns in the summit after chief executive Masters told clubs in the aftermath of the hearing that they could make the necessary amendments ‘quickly and effectively’. Read More Inside the week that blew up the Premier League: How Man City's legal war has forced clubs split However, City’s legal counsel Simon Cliff – who responded to Masters’ summary by emailing all clubs to emphatically dismiss that notion – again pointed out that there could be no swift solution. Views were sought from those present, with one source describing exchanges as ‘feisty’. Each club had two representatives. Some attended in person while others dialled in. At one stage, according to insiders, the Premier League representatives complained about the volume of work which would be required. Clubs were told that their feedback would eventually be presented to those working on a solution to the three issues identified with the associated party transaction (APT) rules, including the need to include shareholder loans within the amended system. No date for a vote, which would be needed to bring in changes, was given. Instead, clubs were told that they would be issued with an update in due course. The meeting was scheduled for two hours but only lasted for around a half of that. In special circumstances a vote can be rushed through, should the clubs be in agreement. However, normal practice is for a 21-day period of reflection after proposals are put forward before a vote is taken. Some believe what is a damaging episode for the top flight may now drag into the new year. Meanwhile, the Premier League’s legal battle with City over their alleged 115 breaches of financial regulations, which is not connected to the above, continues. So good they named us twice Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 Legal challenge by PFA against the PSR anchoring which will likely be in place next season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFEE Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 9 minutes ago, FloydianMag said: Legal challenge by PFA against the PSR anchoring which will likely be in place next season. Not sure where i stand on this one without knowing exact details. Probably more in favour of anchoring than any other solution. Doesn’t limit what you can pay an individual player. Just means one team can’t have all the highest paid players which i see as a good thing. Usually always guarded against anything the PFA are in favour of as a rule. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 What’s PSR anchoring? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 4 minutes ago, LFEE said: Not sure where i stand on this one without knowing exact details. Probably more in favour of anchoring than any other solution. Doesn’t limit what you can pay an individual player. Just means one team can’t have all the highest paid players which i see as a good thing. Usually always guarded against anything the PFA are in favour of as a rule. PFA acts on behalf of its members, the players. They seem to feel they’ve got an argument, be interesting how this pan’s out given NDM won a case on behalf of agents when the PL attempted to cap their fees. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 4 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said: What’s PSR anchoring? https://www.sportindustry.biz/news-categories/news/premier-league-clubs-financial-rules-psr-scr-tba-regulations/#:~:text=Through this%2C a new anchoring,overview of clubs' financial sustainability. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 So even the players are against PSR now. Fucking hell, just scrap it lads. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 3 minutes ago, FloydianMag said: https://www.sportindustry.biz/news-categories/news/premier-league-clubs-financial-rules-psr-scr-tba-regulations/#:~:text=Through this%2C a new anchoring,overview of clubs' financial sustainability. Do you know what it means? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 16 hours ago, kingxlnc said: I like that... except I'm not sure how Chelsea get away scot free Surely they are part of the cartel - how else have they been allowed such ridiculous spending and other blatant disregard for the rules? They’re not. It’s the red tops and Levy primarily. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 Just now, AyeDubbleYoo said: Do you know what it means? Mentioned a lot back end of last year…….what you spend is linked to spending of clubs at the bottom of the league…….will have to have a good read of the proposals re anchoring. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mouldy_uk Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 31 minutes ago, FloydianMag said: Legal challenge by PFA against the PSR anchoring which will likely be in place next season. Fire up the bread ovens!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 5 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said: Do you know what it means? This might explain it better. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2024/apr/29/majority-of-premier-league-clubs-vote-in-favour-of-exploring-spending-cap-plans Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 6 minutes ago, Stifler said: So even the players are against PSR now. Fucking hell, just scrap it lads. Currently spurs pretty much have to have the 6th largest wage bill. By some distance. Anchoring would push the wage bills up and have spurs competing with more PL clubs on wages. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 2 hours ago, LFEE said: Not sure where i stand on this one without knowing exact details. Probably more in favour of anchoring than any other solution. Doesn’t limit what you can pay an individual player. Just means one team can’t have all the highest paid players which i see as a good thing. Usually always guarded against anything the PFA are in favour of as a rule. Likewise. All this is liable to do is see ticket price hikes - which usually follows from inflated wages. Like the PL, the PFA does little for the good of the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFEE Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 1 hour ago, AyeDubbleYoo said: Do you know what it means? In short top clubs can only spend 5 times the amount earned by the lowest club in the division. So roughly 5x£105m. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 😬😬🤷♂️ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCormick Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 (edited) 2 hours ago, The College Dropout said: They’re not. It’s the red tops and Levy primarily. Chelsea are doing everything they can to circumvent psr. As outsiders we should champion them making fools of these rules instead of hoping they get reprimanded. Edited October 23 by McCormick 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