Nail on the head , the Yank owners want rules and sanctions in place so they can invest the bare minimum and financially rape their club whilst using the ready made excuse of FFP for the reason they cannot buy players.Million dollar question. It might be because the owners of the other clubs don’t actually want to spend money and are quite happy to hang off the rags/dips coat tails. Whatever the reason you can be sure money and jealousy is involved.
Who bar Sir Jim will buy into his culture change?Yes Barada has a big job to turn their culture round.
We've all decided the PL are bent and it's run by Neville and Carragher. People have mentioned Boris Johnson being bent as it's BM and the Tories are obviously to be blamed - surprised Trump hasn't been mentioned yet.As I can't be arsed reading back through hundreds of pages, any kind soul out there care to tell me what's happening??, what's with the confidence of a not guilty all of a sudden??, thought we were doomed and certs for relegation of a few leagues
Not in my eyes.Unfortunately our magnificent achievement will always be tainted , it was the only way the Rags and Dippers could fight back , with their off the field antics because we have totally outclassed them for a decade or more on the field
I’m certainly not trying to belittle Lewis in any way and he has an excellent reputation as a sporting lawyer and importantly is the PL‘s KC of choice. Pannick is however arguably our Country’s leading advocate and as an aside who wouldn’t want to cross swords with him. Anybody who’s anybody in life enjoys taking on the best. That was the point I was trying to make in response to a poster who keeps banging on that Lewis would only take on winning positions…which is ridiculous.They’re both from the same chambers and Lewis is very well renowned in his own right, it’s not as if it’s a David vs Goliath story.
Lewis has represented the PL several times before including the appeals about our investigation that went to court so that’s all it is. There’s nothing to be read into him taking the case aside from if we’re found not guilty, anyone arguing it’s down to us spending money on the best lawyers is a moron - the PL has access to them too and is using one.
True, l still watch 93.20 almost weekly, edge of my seat and then such joy.Still thrills me. Liddl ol’ Siddy, champions of all football. Yeah!
I’m certainly not trying to belittle Lewis in any way and he has an excellent reputation as a sporting lawyer and importantly is the PL‘s KC of choice. Pannick is however arguably our Country’s leading advocate and as an aside who wouldn’t want to cross swords with him. Anybody who’s anybody in life enjoys taking on the best. That was the point I was trying to make in response to a poster who keeps banging on that Lewis would only take on winning positions…which is ridiculous.
The problem is that the money involved is at multi-billionaire/state level. Our owners put in around £1.5b and in addition could influence sponsorship deals from Abu Dhabi to add a significant sum on top of that. But Liverpool, for example, have three times the revenue that had in 2008.In theory Newcastle could buy a squad of 22 Mbappes and Haalands at £200m each and pay them £1m a week for 10 years at a total cost of £12.5b. They could then do it again a further 24 times before they would start to feel the pinch and yet the current PSR is forcing them to sell to avoid failing the spending regulations.
My proposal would be that teams are limited to a maximum net spend over 3 years rather than limiting losses over 3 years. If it is set at say £500m for clubs with established owners who have been there for a set period and maybe £750m for the first 3 years for new ambitious owner.
It would allow for the transfer market to remain fluid and limit transfer spending at the same time.
Phew :)Difficult to argue with that.