Completely disagree! Spain might have stricter rules but like EU fishing quotas their policing turn a blind eye.It is a fact that they have stricter controls than the proposed new PL ones. Not an opinion, or assertion, it's a fact. They have stricter rules (ie they allow a lower % of spending to revenue) and in La Liga have active monitoring, where you have to prove you can afford a transfer before the player can register, not retrospective yearly checks.
So...once we've establised that, you should be able to work out that if those stricter rules are not preventing La Liga clubs from spending top wages or fees, nor are the more lenient ones being brought into the PL.
The Premier League has more money than anyone else. It's bringing in more lenient rules than anywhere else which will allow more money to be spent than anywhere else.
What you're doing is the equivalent of a German declaring everyone will leave to drive on UK motorways because the autobahn brought in a 100mph speed limit. The new "limit" is still higher than anywhere else.
No stakeholder in the Premier League is interested in allowing a system where the Premier League loses it's position of dominance, in fact, that's their main priority.
but like EU fishing quotas their policing turn a blind eye.
The Goverment fired enough warning shots over the PL but Masters treated them with contempt. Labour, like the Tories, are desperate to attract overseas investment because the counry is on its knees. I am generally sceptical about independent regulation because it has failed in most other industries.I think this is unlikely, Kippax. As bobbyowenquiff says, it is one of the few things the Tories and Labour agree on and one element that has cross party support is that City are a model for other clubs to imitate ie high investment with an emphasis on investment in the community. This aim doesn't seem to be helped by the PL's restrictive rules since investment can only come out of profits which can only come from hiring good players and playing football that people want to watch. This is also the answer to those who argue that all the club's profits must be used to keep ticket prices low: the club should invest for the benefit of the community, not just for a privileged group of ticket buyers.
The independent regulator could well be one of the jokers who have been spouting shite pre- and post-match for the last weeks or so. Wonder what the major qualification would be? Someone from football, ex-player, someone who's never seen a football match. If I didn't have to find VAT they're gonna chuck on school fees (joke!) I'd have a little flutter on one Gary Neville getting the gig. He's been cosying up to Sir Starmer during the election campaign.Well City were all for a new regulator. And hopefully this ends the inference from the red tops
It’s called politicsWhat makes you think the regulator will “play to the crowd”?
We're City the only club to vote for an IR, if that's the case and we're getting one, then I would think somewhere along the line we have some influence.A lot will depend on how the regulator establishes and defines 'sustainability', 'competitiveness' and attitude to debt with regard to these and 'financial soundness'.
Ok, what makes you think the regulator will play politics? The whole point of an independent regulator is to avoid political bias.It’s called politics
You really think the red teams won't be colluding to get the regulator they want?Regulator bill announced today in King’s speech.
That should annoy the red teams.