SUPERTOON Posted Wednesday at 16:56 Share Posted Wednesday at 16:56 https://twitter.com/Tom_Morgs/status/1859271113412407353 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted Wednesday at 21:01 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:01 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted Wednesday at 21:41 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:41 I feel like it's going to fail, but I also don't understand what happens if it does. This can't live in limbo forever as what happens when a club brings a new sponsorship forward. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RodneyCisse Posted Wednesday at 21:49 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:49 Who else really jumps in with city and villa bar us potentially? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted Wednesday at 21:49 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:49 Just now, RodneyCisse said: Who else really jumps in with city and villa bar us potentially? Chelsea Forest Leicester Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RodneyCisse Posted Wednesday at 21:50 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:50 Would that do the job we want? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted Wednesday at 21:50 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:50 Is Richard Masters really Elon Musk? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatwax Posted Wednesday at 21:50 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:50 Then you're relying on those who abstain. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatwax Posted Wednesday at 21:50 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:50 Then you're relying on those who abstain. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
et tu brute Posted Wednesday at 21:51 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:51 7 minutes ago, timeEd32 said: I feel like it's going to fail, but I also don't understand what happens if it does. This can't live in limbo forever as what happens when a club brings a new sponsorship forward. If the Tribunal state that the current law is unlawful (they have been requested to confirm) and the vote fails (likely), then it's open season as their will be no rules to stop clubs making sponsorship deals 1 minute ago, SUPERTOON said: Chelsea Forest Leicester Everton also Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted Wednesday at 21:53 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:53 2 minutes ago, RodneyCisse said: Would that do the job we want? Think we need 7, or they need 14 to pass it. However if it’s deemed unlawful as city claim, then I’m not sure it matters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
et tu brute Posted Wednesday at 21:54 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:54 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Fatwax said: Then you're relying on those who abstain. Not if the 7 reported clubs against vote to reject. There may be other clubs also Edited Wednesday at 21:54 by et tu brute Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted Wednesday at 21:54 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:54 (edited) If the vote isn't passed then surely it creates an entirely anarchistic type situation for the Premier League and I'd presume its member could theoretically write to the governing body (The FA? UEFA? FIFA?) To give it a vote of no confidence. I mean that may seem a little extreme. However, it's what's needed in reality. Said reform could take months or years. Edited Wednesday at 21:55 by Heron Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bunk Moreland Posted Wednesday at 21:54 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:54 52 minutes ago, FloydianMag said: I like the look of those capital letters, bodes well for us Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted Wednesday at 21:58 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:58 6 minutes ago, et tu brute said: If the Tribunal state that the current law is unlawful (they have been requested to confirm) and the vote fails (likely), then it's open season as their will be no rules to stop clubs making sponsorship deals In theory, but imagine the uproar if we immediately tried to push something through that was inflated. Would be chaos. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
et tu brute Posted Wednesday at 21:59 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:59 Just now, timeEd32 said: In theory, but imagine the uproar if we immediately tried to push something through that was inflated. Would be chaos. Nothing to stop us though or city as there would be no lawful rule in place Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted Wednesday at 22:01 Share Posted Wednesday at 22:01 10 minutes ago, RodneyCisse said: Would that do the job we want? We need 7 clubs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted Wednesday at 22:02 Share Posted Wednesday at 22:02 Just now, et tu brute said: Nothing to stop us though or city as there would be no lawful rule in place You'd like to think (as a neutral with the best interests of the game at heart) there'd be a legal alternative provided to prevent absolute chaos from reigning irrespective of the vote on Friday. Like surely there cannot be only one plan. If so, then my God the PL really are an absolute farcical laughing stock of thieving, greedy, lickspittles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitley mag Posted Wednesday at 22:10 Share Posted Wednesday at 22:10 Very reasonable request from Villa, quite why these corrupt cunts want to push through a vote without the tribunals clarification beggars belief. The red tops and Levy will push for it to go through, just needs another club on top of those mentioned, possibly Everton though doubtful with new American owners. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted Wednesday at 22:12 Share Posted Wednesday at 22:12 Wolves are mentioned in the article as possibly voting against the new rules. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHoob Posted Wednesday at 22:14 Share Posted Wednesday at 22:14 Do wonder if there will be a few surprises, maybe more clubs see the writing on the wall and break rank. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted Wednesday at 22:15 Share Posted Wednesday at 22:15 I'd rather it go through because I'm pretty sure it will still be unlawful due to not retrospectively applying FMV to shareholder loans and the PL will put themselves even deeper in the shit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KetsbaiaIsBald Posted Wednesday at 22:32 Share Posted Wednesday at 22:32 I’m convinced the vote will pass on Friday. The premier league have been working with clubs to find rules that they are happy with. The deferral of the interest free loans appears so obviously unlawful but it will be there to win votes. Everton, for example ,with that rule that suits them may vote for the rule when otherwise they would not. The whole process just seems flawed. There does not appear to be any “punishment” for having unlawful rules. The premier league has had them for what? 18 months? If the vote passes everyone will have to conform to the new rules lawful or not. Man City will start another case. It will take a year. Let’s say they say it is unlawful again, then what? Rinse and repeat? This appears to be the premier leagues tactics, get rules in place that 16 clubs agree with whether they are lawful or not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted Wednesday at 22:36 Share Posted Wednesday at 22:36 (edited) 5 minutes ago, KetsbaiaIsBald said: I’m convinced the vote will pass on Friday. The premier league have been working with clubs to find rules that they are happy with. The deferral of the interest free loans appears so obviously unlawful but it will be there to win votes. Everton, for example ,with that rule that suits them may vote for the rule when otherwise they would not. The whole process just seems flawed. There does not appear to be any “punishment” for having unlawful rules. The premier league has had them for what? 18 months? If the vote passes everyone will have to conform to the new rules lawful or not. Man City will start another case. It will take a year. Let’s say they say it is unlawful again, then what? Rinse and repeat? This appears to be the premier leagues tactics, get rules in place that 16 clubs agree with whether they are lawful or not. ...and they've been known to kick the can down the road. Genuine question though...who governs the Premier League? The FA and English/European law in the first instance(s)? Edited Wednesday at 22:37 by Heron Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted Wednesday at 22:43 Share Posted Wednesday at 22:43 6 minutes ago, Heron said: ...and they've been known to kick the can down the road. Genuine question though...who governs the Premier League? The FA and English/European law in the first instance(s)? Man U, Arsenal and Liverpool 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