Ben Posted Tuesday at 05:29 Share Posted Tuesday at 05:29 1 minute ago, Jackie Broon said: Because they generally won't want to have their disputes in public. As said above, it's entirely within the power of the 20 clubs to have a vote to make the arbitration process public. We lobbied for that during the takeover arbitration and clearly didn't get support from the other clubs. Dodgy fuckers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted Tuesday at 05:29 Share Posted Tuesday at 05:29 Money is killing the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted Tuesday at 05:30 Share Posted Tuesday at 05:30 3 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said: Because they generally won't want to have their disputes in public. As said above, it's entirely within the power of the 20 clubs to have a vote to make the arbitration process public. We lobbied for that during the takeover arbitration and clearly didn't get support from the other clubs. Who would vote against it in this case..? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted Tuesday at 05:54 Share Posted Tuesday at 05:54 21 minutes ago, Unbelievable said: Who would vote against it in this case..? There clearly isn't the desire to even have a vote on it let alone enough clubs that would vote for it to be public. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitley mag Posted Tuesday at 07:14 Share Posted Tuesday at 07:14 (edited) The only reason the takeover went to CAT was because it was brought by MASH not the club, would need someone outside the clubs with a vested interest to bring the house down. Edited Tuesday at 07:14 by Whitley mag Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likelylad Posted Tuesday at 07:36 Share Posted Tuesday at 07:36 I remember how poorly the Prem came across in that CAT hearing. I can imagine they’re even more adamant on privacy now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted Tuesday at 08:48 Share Posted Tuesday at 08:48 It’s why football needs independent governance. The FA isn’t fit for purpose, and the PL was designed to be a racket screwing over the rest of the game - this isn’t an unfortunate consequence, this is the PL doing what it was created to do in the first place Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloGeordio Posted Tuesday at 13:42 Share Posted Tuesday at 13:42 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted Tuesday at 20:11 Share Posted Tuesday at 20:11 6 hours ago, PauloGeordio said: Picture there of the team’s shirt adorned with two main sponsors, both of which are 100% owned by the owners. Yep, it’s difficult Peter - that must’ve taken some effort to get them over the line. I wonder who could’ve been approached for a training kit sponsor? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Spaceman Posted Tuesday at 20:14 Share Posted Tuesday at 20:14 3 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: Picture there of the team’s shirt adorned with two main sponsors, both of which are 100% owned by the owners. Yep, it’s difficult Peter - that must’ve taken some effort to get them over the line. I wonder who could’ve been approached for a training kit sponsor? They were in fairly quick by Silverstone's standards tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HayDen Traces Posted Tuesday at 20:23 Share Posted Tuesday at 20:23 We're lucky to have execs like Silverstone on our board. These are amongst the best in the business, I honestly despair at some of the negativity I read Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted Wednesday at 07:22 Share Posted Wednesday at 07:22 Chelsea still don't have a shirt sponsor, I wonder if they are waiting for the result of the Man City case next week to sort it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted Wednesday at 07:28 Share Posted Wednesday at 07:28 3 minutes ago, Ben said: Chelsea still don't have a shirt sponsor, I wonder if they are waiting for the result of the Man City case next week to sort it Regardless of what Peter Silverstone said recently about sponsorships, I think that is the reason we don’t have training kit sponsors yet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brummie Posted Wednesday at 21:27 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:27 Emery's two henchmen talking about PSR / FFP on TalkSpot today. Worth listening. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfcastle Posted Wednesday at 21:47 Share Posted Wednesday at 21:47 Seen in the papers yesterday it was referred to as "Villa's gamble" as if they've just not strengthened for the shit and giggles of it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonas Posted Wednesday at 22:00 Share Posted Wednesday at 22:00 (edited) Its an utter farce. The ideal is to get young players coming through so you don't have to buy others but the temptation to sell them is so strong that academies will be cattle farms first and foremost. Edited Wednesday at 22:00 by Jonas Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KetsbaiaIsBald Posted Thursday at 05:47 Share Posted Thursday at 05:47 (edited) 7 hours ago, Jonas said: Its an utter farce. The ideal is to get young players coming through so you don't have to buy others but the temptation to sell them is so strong that academies will be cattle farms first and foremost. As much as selling Minteh stung I hope we can keep getting and selling youngers like him so we can end up with a team full of Miley‘s. it feels like the only way around the current rules. Two tears of youngsters. The cattle and the ones to keep. Edited Thursday at 05:49 by KetsbaiaIsBald Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucasol Posted Thursday at 06:06 Share Posted Thursday at 06:06 8 hours ago, brummie said: Emery's two henchmen talking about PSR / FFP on TalkSpot today. Worth listening. Talks really well but ultimately shouting into the wind as you’ve got the Cartel Clubs sitting there either making it up whilst they go along (Man Utd, Chelsea, Man City), or comfortably bedding in their top of the pile status (Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs). Meanwhile the southern historical lower league dwelling “happily married to the Cartel - we know our place” cuckholds/suppliants like Brighton, Brentford, Palace, Bournemouth and Fulham carry on appeasing their masters for crumbs. The mooted Bournemouth Marmadashvilii loan deal is the perfect visual representation of Cartel tickling the belly of one of its new generation feeder clubs. You’ve got the three promoted clubs just happy to be there, starry eyed gazing at Anfield, Old Trafford’s leaky roof and the Emirates, as they lube up ready for a 5-0 low quality rogering. Then you have a gang of 6 who want to strive. Us, Villa, West Ham, Wolves, Forest, Everton - all notionally old guard clubs who have had success in their long histories and want to get back up there but are hobbled by the stupid fucking artificially engineered rules to hamstring us. God bless the EPL. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted Thursday at 06:14 Share Posted Thursday at 06:14 6 minutes ago, Nucasol said: Talks really well but ultimately shouting into the wind as you’ve got the Cartel Clubs sitting there either making it up whilst they go along (Man Utd, Chelsea, Man City), or comfortably bedding in their top of the pile status (Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs). Meanwhile the southern historical lower league dwelling “happily married to the Cartel - we know our place” cuckholds/suppliants like Brighton, Brentford, Palace, Bournemouth and Fulham carry on appeasing their masters for crumbs. The mooted Bournemouth Marmadashvilii loan deal is the perfect visual representation of Cartel tickling the belly of one of its new generation feeder clubs. You’ve got the three promoted clubs just happy to be there, starry eyed gazing at Anfield, Old Trafford’s leaky roof and the Emirates, as they lube up ready for a 5-0 low quality rogering. Then you have a gang of 6 who want to strive. Us, Villa, West Ham, Wolves, Forest, Everton - all notionally old guard clubs who have had success in their long histories and want to get back up there but are hobbled by the stupid fucking artificially engineered rules to hamstring us. God bless the EPL. Can't help but wonder if the traditional lower league clubs were replaced with traditional top flight clubs (Leeds, Derby, Sheff Wed, West Brom ... even the mackems and smoggies) whether the cartel would get their way as easily. The 'happy to be here club' are a nightmare for this stuff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted Thursday at 06:17 Share Posted Thursday at 06:17 1 minute ago, TheBrownBottle said: Can't help but wonder if the traditional lower league clubs were replaced with traditional top flight clubs (Leeds, Derby, Sheff Wed, West Brom ... even the mackems and smoggies) whether the cartel would get their way as easily. The 'happy to be here club' are a nightmare for this stuff. The history of the clubs aren’t particularly relevant imo, it’s more the make up of the owners involved. Ultimately just surviving in the premier league is very profitable. Who really has the ambition and financial clout to challenge the top? Might as well accept our place and ride the gravy train. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted Thursday at 07:10 Share Posted Thursday at 07:10 52 minutes ago, r0cafella said: The history of the clubs aren’t particularly relevant imo, it’s more the make up of the owners involved. Ultimately just surviving in the premier league is very profitable. Who really has the ambition and financial clout to challenge the top? Might as well accept our place and ride the gravy train. Yeah, the owners are definitely part of it - but if Leeds or Sheff Wed were re-established, then their support would ultimately be pushing for improvement - and any half decent owner would understand that the potential is there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted Thursday at 07:12 Share Posted Thursday at 07:12 Just now, TheBrownBottle said: Yeah, the owners are definitely part of it - but if Leeds or Sheff Wed were re-established, then their support would ultimately be pushing for improvement - and any half decent owner would understand that the potential is there. Tbh I don’t think fans have any bearing on these things, all depends on what the goal of the ownership is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted Thursday at 14:06 Share Posted Thursday at 14:06 So I'm a bit confused about the status of PL vs Man City. In recent days we got this Ziegler tweet suggesting Manchester City had achieved "some success" in the arbitration hearing. We're expecting some conclusions in the next two weeks, which may or may not become public. And two days ago we had Masters come out to to suggest the hearing will finally start next month with the process expecting to complete in 2025. What is the difference between the arbitration and the hearing Masters is on about, and how is each likely to affect other clubs including us? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezzle Posted Thursday at 14:08 Share Posted Thursday at 14:08 Just now, Unbelievable said: So I'm a bit confused about the status of PL vs Man City. In recent days we got this Ziegler tweet suggesting Manchester City had achieved "some success" in the arbitration hearing. We're expecting some conclusions in the next two weeks, which may or may not become public. And two days ago we had Masters come out to to suggest the hearing will finally start next month with the process expecting to complete in 2025. What is the difference between the arbitration and the hearing Masters is on about, and how is each likely to affect other clubs including us? The first one is about related market stuff, the results are due. Second is the 115 charges that will start soon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted Thursday at 14:10 Share Posted Thursday at 14:10 1 minute ago, Unbelievable said: So I'm a bit confused about the status of PL vs Man City. In recent days we got this Ziegler tweet suggesting Manchester City had achieved "some success" in the arbitration hearing. We're expecting some conclusions in the next two weeks, which may or may not become public. And two days ago we had Masters come out to to suggest the hearing will finally start next month with the process expecting to complete in 2025. What is the difference between the arbitration and the hearing Masters is on about, and how is each likely to affect other clubs including us? The hearing Masters is on about is the 115 charges, the hearing Ziegler is on about is the APT rules 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