I was in line with Henry when he brought down that crossfield pass and slotted it from outside the box..Dunney will still be looking for him to this very day.And a few chants of its just like watching Brazil and we meant it
Pep’s answer was: “Perhaps he wants a job at united.”This is so laughable. I'm sure guys like Puyol, Xavi, Messi, Lahm, Kompany, etc would disagree with that nonsense of an opinion.
Id like to ask Evra 1 question...As they say in France.....
Pisse bouillante
![]()
Ayr sure?They were Perthetic !
Every time they tweak the rules they just make it more obvious that UEFA's FFP rules are designed purely to protect the cartel clubs and to stop City and any other club that might get taken over by well funded ambitious owners.I know it’s the Mail but Martin Samuel nails it, once again. The last paragraph sums it all up perfectly!
UEFA still looking after chosen ones
UEFA have revamped their rules regarding financial fair play. Now, it is about sustainability. A major change is that clubs can lose roughly £60million over three years - double what was previously allowed.
How fortuitous that this should come in just at the moment major influencers like Manchester United and Barcelona need to spend big to get back in the game. What a coincidence.
Yet in some areas the rules have been tightened. External agencies will more closely monitor sponsorship deals with third parties, particularly those brands that might have close relations with the owners. It's a rule that would allow Manchester United, say, to strike deals with companies in Saudi Arabia - but outlaw the same for Newcastle.
Why don't UEFA just bring in a rule that says: whatever Manchester City are doing is illegal. It would save a lot of time, insider networking and hypocrisy.
And still the sheep lap it up… It’s staggering that he’s the only journalist who consistently calls it out for what it is.Every time they tweak the rules they just make it more obvious that UEFA's FFP rules are designed purely to protect the cartel clubs and to stop City and any other club that might get taken over by well funded ambitious owners.
You got link to article?I know it’s the Mail but Martin Samuel nails it, once again. The last paragraph sums it all up perfectly!
UEFA still looking after chosen ones
UEFA have revamped their rules regarding financial fair play. Now, it is about sustainability. A major change is that clubs can lose roughly £60million over three years - double what was previously allowed.
How fortuitous that this should come in just at the moment major influencers like Manchester United and Barcelona need to spend big to get back in the game. What a coincidence.
Yet in some areas the rules have been tightened. External agencies will more closely monitor sponsorship deals with third parties, particularly those brands that might have close relations with the owners. It's a rule that would allow Manchester United, say, to strike deals with companies in Saudi Arabia - but outlaw the same for Newcastle.
Why don't UEFA just bring in a rule that says: whatever Manchester City are doing is illegal. It would save a lot of time, insider networking and hypocrisy.
OMG God that is class, I nearly spat my coffee out. Haa Haa well done Martin.I know it’s the Mail but Martin Samuel nails it, once again. The last paragraph sums it all up perfectly!
UEFA still looking after chosen ones
UEFA have revamped their rules regarding financial fair play. Now, it is about sustainability. A major change is that clubs can lose roughly £60million over three years - double what was previously allowed.
How fortuitous that this should come in just at the moment major influencers like Manchester United and Barcelona need to spend big to get back in the game. What a coincidence.
Yet in some areas the rules have been tightened. External agencies will more closely monitor sponsorship deals with third parties, particularly those brands that might have close relations with the owners. It's a rule that would allow Manchester United, say, to strike deals with companies in Saudi Arabia - but outlaw the same for Newcastle.
Why don't UEFA just bring in a rule that says: whatever Manchester City are doing is illegal. It would save a lot of time, insider networking and hypocrisy.
Who would determine "close relations"?I know it’s the Mail but Martin Samuel nails it, once again. The last paragraph sums it all up perfectly!
UEFA still looking after chosen ones
UEFA have revamped their rules regarding financial fair play. Now, it is about sustainability. A major change is that clubs can lose roughly £60million over three years - double what was previously allowed.
How fortuitous that this should come in just at the moment major influencers like Manchester United and Barcelona need to spend big to get back in the game. What a coincidence.
Yet in some areas the rules have been tightened. External agencies will more closely monitor sponsorship deals with third parties, particularly those brands that might have close relations with the owners. It's a rule that would allow Manchester United, say, to strike deals with companies in Saudi Arabia - but outlaw the same for Newcastle.
Why don't UEFA just bring in a rule that says: whatever Manchester City are doing is illegal. It would save a lot of time, insider networking and hypocrisy.
I thought the place was awarded to the team with the highest European coefficient that hadn't qualified for the CL from that qualifying country?also the CL format change it is almost a guaranteed extra place for Spain and England to be able to have 5 CL places.
probably 9 of ouf 10 times Spain and England will collect most coeff. points over a season, and it will be lke City, Chelsea good CL runs will help 5th placed United into the CL next season.
its a joke.
i think this comes into play already next year so whoever is 5th next season gets into CL I think.
I hope its Newcastle haha. that would send them into berserk mode.