PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Jim Tolmie's Underpants said:
KBi3-Jk-D9-ezgif-com-resize.gif
Click to expand...
That's that unfunny rag twat from Phoenix Nights, Shirley?
 
Can’t actually believe people are debating whether the contract is 114 or 115 months or whether it makes a difference. Just seen Harris has done a whole intro about it using my (broader) tweet. I can’t read Harris’s piece and not paying for this one if it’s just an opinion piece but a) it’s close enough to be a wink to “115” b) I’m no longer actually sure it is 129 or 130 breaches anyway as not every paragraph of rule E on PSR is capable of breaching c) it is perfectly possible that the contract could be agreed and effective from an earlier date than the contract is signed (not that it was signed on the day it was released to the public anyway).

It’s make no substantive difference at all (and I’d be amazed if Haaland stays for anything like 9.5 years) but I’m still of the view it’s a 115 wink as part of a deal that has a significant PR element.
 
meltonblue said:
Well it’s only half a year because it was negotiated mid year.

In terms of why it’s so long, it’s a risk but it’s due to the player involved and wanting to ensure he spends his prime years with us.

It’s just clearly not the kind of thing anyone would ever do as a pisstake.
Click to expand...
Then they’ve missed a trick
 
slbsn said:
Can’t actually believe people are debating whether the contract is 114 or 115 months or whether it makes a difference. Just seen Harris has done a whole intro about it using my (broader) tweet. I can’t read Harris’s piece and not paying for this one if it’s just an opinion piece but a) it’s close enough to be a wink to “115” b) I’m no longer actually sure it is 129 or 130 breaches anyway as not every paragraph of rule E on PSR is capable of breaching c) it is perfectly possible that the contract could be agreed and effective from an earlier date than the contract is signed (not that it was signed on the day it was released to the public anyway).

It’s make no substantive difference at all (and I’d be amazed if Haaland stays for anything like 9.5 years) but I’m still of the view it’s a 115 wink as part of a deal that has a significant PR element.
Click to expand...
Just use a site like 12ft.io to read the page. You just have to copy the page you want to read into the search bar of the 12ft.io website.
 
slbsn said:
Can’t actually believe people are debating whether the contract is 114 or 115 months or whether it makes a difference. Just seen Harris has done a whole intro about it using my (broader) tweet. I can’t read Harris’s piece and not paying for this one if it’s just an opinion piece but a) it’s close enough to be a wink to “115” b) I’m no longer actually sure it is 129 or 130 breaches anyway as not every paragraph of rule E on PSR is capable of breaching c) it is perfectly possible that the contract could be agreed and effective from an earlier date than the contract is signed (not that it was signed on the day it was released to the public anyway).

It’s make no substantive difference at all (and I’d be amazed if Haaland stays for anything like 9.5 years) but I’m still of the view it’s a 115 wink as part of a deal that has a significant PR element.
Click to expand...
Definitely. A not so subtle way of telling Blues not to be too worried, and a piss take to all others.

Good to see Haaland as a good sense of humour. Bet he’s loving it.
 
windie said:
Just use a site like 12ft.io to read the page. You just have to copy the page you want to read into the search bar of the 12ft.io website.
Click to expand...
Doesn't work on substack, plus just seen the article is not yet released. Only the intro
 
Last edited:
slbsn said:
Can’t actually believe people are debating whether the contract is 114 or 115 months or whether it makes a difference. Just seen Harris has done a whole intro about it using my (broader) tweet. I can’t read Harris’s piece and not paying for this one if it’s just an opinion piece but a) it’s close enough to be a wink to “115” b) I’m no longer actually sure it is 129 or 130 breaches anyway as not every paragraph of rule E on PSR is capable of breaching c) it is perfectly possible that the contract could be agreed and effective from an earlier date than the contract is signed (not that it was signed on the day it was released to the public anyway).

It’s make no substantive difference at all (and I’d be amazed if Haaland stays for anything like 9.5 years) but I’m still of the view it’s a 115 wink as part of a deal that has a significant PR element.
Click to expand...
Some bellend journalist in the embargoed press conference thought he was a clever fucker saying Erlings contract was 115 months long.
Pep?
Totally over his head, whether or not it meant he knew or he thought he'd leave said nobhead journalist hanging who knows but what a complete dick to come out with that.
Do you ever meet these hacks on your travels?
Are they absolutely seething about us and how we go about things?
I just think journalism as a whole has been on its arse for a good few years and social media hasn't helped their cause one iota.
 
slbsn said:
Can’t actually believe people are debating whether the contract is 114 or 115 months or whether it makes a difference. Just seen Harris has done a whole intro about it using my (broader) tweet. I can’t read Harris’s piece and not paying for this one if it’s just an opinion piece but a) it’s close enough to be a wink to “115” b) I’m no longer actually sure it is 129 or 130 breaches anyway as not every paragraph of rule E on PSR is capable of breaching c) it is perfectly possible that the contract could be agreed and effective from an earlier date than the contract is signed (not that it was signed on the day it was released to the public anyway).

It’s make no substantive difference at all (and I’d be amazed if Haaland stays for anything like 9.5 years) but I’m still of the view it’s a 115 wink as part of a deal that has a significant PR element.
Click to expand...
I respect you mate but I cannot believe for a minute that a £200m contract would be framed in any way around a wink or a piss take like that.
 
manimanc said:
Some bellend journalist in the embargoed press conference thought he was a clever fucker saying Erlings contract was 115 months long.
Pep?
Totally over his head, whether or not it meant he knew or he thought he'd leave said nobhead journalist hanging who knows but what a complete dick to come out with that.
Do you ever meet these hacks on your travels?
Are they absolutely seething about us and how we go about things?
I just think journalism as a whole has been on its arse for a good few years and social media hasn't helped their cause one iota.
Click to expand...
You won't like this but I speak to a lot of them. All of them are friendly to my face and very personable. Obviously, technical knowledge varies but not one is seething (though I don't speak to Harris or Delaney, for example.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top