If true, and they did it to ward off the white paper, then it could massively backfire. The white paper was announced anyway, and the FA will be humiliated if the charges were made with insufficient evidence. Let's hope the four clubs can be brought down too.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
Bluesince1979
Well-Known Member
All jokes apart, why and how have spurs got themselves into the Big Club Gang? Its bizarre!Definitely refers to Tolmie's Hairdo.
What would Spurs have to do with it?
manimanc
Well-Known Member
Well their name does have a lot of syllables in it.All jokes apart, why and how have spurs got themselves into the Big Club Gang? Its bizarre!
And that's about it.
They were one of the clubs who pushed the idea of the Premier League back in the late eighties early nineties.All jokes apart, why and how have spurs got themselves into the Big Club Gang? Its bizarre!
Last edited:
Chris in London
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 13,829
What's Spurs but a second hand emotion?Definitely refers to Tolmie's Hairdo.
What would Spurs have to do with it?
StillBluessinceHydeRoad
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2020
- Messages
- 2,454
- Team supported
- City
Debt has always been an accepted way of raising capital for investment; what is not allowed by law is any attempt to prohibit or limit investment. No "sporting exception" gets a mention anywhere.Their original concern was as I remember that football was a special sector of business so normal business methods were not applicable.
Our owner has proved that theory to be wrong. The basic FFP rules were simply a rip off of normal business practice in the real world. Obviously they changed debt to be ok and investment to be strictly controlled and presented it as novel financial and fair control.
There they are correct because I am unaware of any other sector of normal business that restricts investment yet seems to condone debt.
Just an opinion.
Rory Bluelow
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4 May 2014
- Messages
- 2,922
At the very least that sounds feasible (apart from the threats from Spurs !). Assuming the other clubs on the call were Liverpool, United and Arsenal, you have the prime movers with the Super League and therefore the most dissatisfied with the status quo…it may explain why Levy was personally called out at Pep’s presser (and why we’ve not heard a squeak from him in response or indeed since). I wondered what motivated the club to single him out like that.I bumped into an old buddy in town today, he's an Evertonian, we went for a coffee and he told me the following, strictly on the QT...
The week before the charges were announced four clubs demanded a video conference with PL Chief Exec Richard Masters. One of the clubs execs led the meeting let's say "TH". He requested the latest status of the PL investigation into MCFC. He was told it was effectively stalled with no progress. Then on behalf of all four clubs TH demanded the PL proceed with all possible charges irrespective of the prospects of winning. After a series of threats were made by TH, Masters capitulated and agreed to rush the charges through before the announcement of the White Paper. That's why there were so many errors in the published charges requiring numerous corrections.The club are confident this is a golden opportunity to resolve these issues once and for all.
Encouraging to see Alvarez sign a new contract. You’d imagine his agent would’ve sought assurances from the club regarding the charges before he agreed a deal. He has no shortage of suitors, so his agent wouldn’t get him to commit his future to a club that are in deep shit.
I guess there’s probably some kind of escape clause for the worst case scenario, but at least it shows that current players aren’t looking to jump ship and, presumably, that potential transfer targets won’t be deterred from joining in the summer.
That and the North Stand expansion plans suggest that the club aren’t bluffing with their confident, bullish stance on the charges.
I guess there’s probably some kind of escape clause for the worst case scenario, but at least it shows that current players aren’t looking to jump ship and, presumably, that potential transfer targets won’t be deterred from joining in the summer.
That and the North Stand expansion plans suggest that the club aren’t bluffing with their confident, bullish stance on the charges.
Blue_Lightsaber
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2022
- Messages
- 4,490
- Team supported
- Man City
Definitely refers to Tolmie's Hairdo.
What would Spurs have to do with it?
SilverFox2
Well-Known Member
Thanks for that reminder about debt SB.Debt has always been an accepted way of raising capital for investment; what is not allowed by law is any attempt to prohibit or limit investment. No "sporting exception" gets a mention anywhere.
I was not aware of the legal restriction you mention and the absence of a "sporting exception" so thanks for that information.
Perhaps we signed away something we were legally entitled to?
foggy1974
Well-Known Member
I wonder who those 4 clubs could be, mmm......I bumped into an old buddy in town today, he's an Evertonian, we went for a coffee and he told me the following, strictly on the QT...
The week before the charges were announced four clubs demanded a video conference with PL Chief Exec Richard Masters. One of the clubs execs led the meeting let's say "TH". He requested the latest status of the PL investigation into MCFC. He was told it was effectively stalled with no progress. Then on behalf of all four clubs TH demanded the PL proceed with all possible charges irrespective of the prospects of winning. After a series of threats were made by TH, Masters capitulated and agreed to rush the charges through before the announcement of the White Paper. That's why there were so many errors in the published charges requiring numerous corrections.The club are confident this is a golden opportunity to resolve these issues once and for all.
Its no coincidence that Pep mentioned Levy in the press conference directly after the charges
foggy1974
Well-Known Member
And whether you're threatening the status quoThere is no difference afaik. It's what you do with the money that's important for FFP.
foggy1974
Well-Known Member
A patsy for when it gets blown out of the waterAll jokes apart, why and how have spurs got themselves into the Big Club Gang? Its bizarre!
foggy1974
Well-Known Member
Probably the fall out from Harry Kane sagaAt the very least that sounds feasible (apart from the threats from Spurs !). Assuming the other clubs on the call were Liverpool, United and Arsenal, you have the prime movers with the Super League and therefore the most dissatisfied with the status quo…it may explain why Levy was personally called out at Pep’s presser (and why we’ve not heard a squeak from him in response or indeed since). I wondered what motivated the club to single him out like that.
Keith Moon
Well-Known Member
Well, everybody has to sometime break the rulesAnd whether you're threatening the status quo
Play Rockin All Over the World one more time and you’re deadAnd whether you're threatening the status quo
foggy1974
Well-Known Member
Are we in the army nowPlay Rockin All Over the World one more time and you’re dead
Hoghead
Well-Known Member
Idealistic fundamentalists comes to mind.When CAS decided in our favour, the 2 or 3 journalists who've made this their raison d'etre decided it was the problem. No concerns were raised before the hearing, but when it delivered the "wrong" verdict they tried to undermine it.
If every single decision at the PL hearing went our way, including the non-cooperation etc., the same journalists would just balme the PL.
They've seen the emails and they've decided it's proof of what they think has been going on, no matter how many court cases go against that narrative.
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
WTF would "TH" have to make threats about?!? haha
I think the relevant part is the "on behalf of all four clubs" - secession, some other thing to target/remove Masters, could be anything.
It reads to be as much to get charges out before the white paper than anything specifically to get at City early. The govt did then delay the white paper for 2 weeks, although why is unclear.
Strictly on the QT you say :)I bumped into an old buddy in town today, he's an Evertonian, we went for a coffee and he told me the following, strictly on the QT...
The week before the charges were announced four clubs demanded a video conference with PL Chief Exec Richard Masters. One of the clubs execs led the meeting let's say "TH". He requested the latest status of the PL investigation into MCFC. He was told it was effectively stalled with no progress. Then on behalf of all four clubs TH demanded the PL proceed with all possible charges irrespective of the prospects of winning. After a series of threats were made by TH, Masters capitulated and agreed to rush the charges through before the announcement of the White Paper. That's why there were so many errors in the published charges requiring numerous corrections.The club are confident this is a golden opportunity to resolve these issues once and for all.