City launch legal action against the Premier League | City win APT case (pg901)

Though he mentions the rags should be in the title race but fails to mention the deal they got so they didn't fail PSR in the first place, also, the fact they did spend a good amount on players again but they got injured.
 
It has always annoyed me that some clubs are just in the league to make up the numbers and defer to the rags (mostly) as they are the "bestest ever".
Why aren't they criticised for their lack of ambition?
Their fans are just being rinsed imo.
Yet City have the temerity to want to win stuff and they are vilified.
 
Interesting to see a high profile KC like Nick De Marco backing up what Martin Samuel said. Obviously he has skin in the game, but does feel like the discontent is growing.


Well - that's going to boil some piss on rawk and sadcafe. They seek to get everyone to dismiss what Martin Samuel writes - of course he is a shill and his son works for City.................

It's a coping mechanism for them.

But they will net be able to so easily dismiss De Marco - and looking at the comments, perhaps we can hope that the penny is starting to drop for non-cartel fans
 
Interesting to see a high profile KC like Nick De Marco backing up what Martin Samuel said. Obviously he has skin in the game, but does feel like the discontent is growing.


Now two on Santa’s list for a visit Christmas Eve.

Hard to retain any journalistic credibility when the facts are screaming at you to stop typing shit. Bet we could all write a list of those who will be last to turn….if ever.
 
Another great article by Martin Samuel making the cartel have it.

Forest proving this is good title race – but Newcastle and United should be in it too

Another fine article from Martin, clearly demonstrating the nonsense of PSR. What strikes me is that the case is so obvious you have to wonder why in the vast array of journos he stands alone as a sensible voice. Such a pity that, according to the Telegraph, we lost our case against PSR.
 
Last edited:
The only criticism I have of Martin Samuel's article concerns his discussion of the role of Sir Jim's investment in the rags. Samuel is right to argue that the rags could be involved in the title race if Ineos were allowed to finance the changes needed at the club - but PSR prevents this. This is far too charitable to Sir Jim. There is much more evidence to show that Sir Jim put money into the club BECAUSE the rules would NOT allow him to finance any real change. There is no evidence of any real disagreement with the Glazers and no real evidence of a desire to spend, no desire of real unhappiness with the rules. What we have seen with his other clubs is rather a determination to cut costs and increase profitability at a cost of bringing no success on the field. At the swamp we have seen an emphasis on cutting costs coupled with the worst start to a league season since ... Sir Jim is the kind of "investor" that PSR attracts ... a hard faced "what's in it for me? ... "loads a momey" wide boy. Pay no tax, put nowt in, make a packet and stuff the rest.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.