Gordyola
Well-Known Member
Benefit of doubt he’s probably means that it’s taken so long and in the meantime we continue to win things The high court judge said similar to the PL you’ve been investigating so long they’ve won four titles
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
And Billy Meredith has retired.Benefit of doubt he’s probably means that it’s taken so long and in the meantime we continue to win things The high court judge said similar to the PL you’ve been investigating so long they’ve won four titles
Correct with Britain once again ;)I've had it explained in subsequent posts & didn't realise the Protestant/Catholic animosity & troubles extended to football. Today's been a real eye-opener.
The sooner Ireland is one, the better... )(
Sir peace frog
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 18,518
- Location
- stalking the canals and rivers
- Team supported
- Manchester City Football Club
so our owner spends 15 years growing his business ,investing so we can invest more into the club, all of a sudden we cant spend what weve earnt, we have to spend what sheff united earnt x whatever, who in their right mind thinks that's right.
Invisible Man's Bandage
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4 Sep 2020
- Messages
- 3,093
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Dan 'Cuntface' Roan reporting about the new proposed regs from outside the Swamp rather than Ashton New Road on the 6 O'Clock News. Only mentioned us after saying the Rags were against it as well as us and Villa. No mention of the charges.
GAA and rugby getting bigger and bigger??? GAA is as big as it will ever get and has its crowd that are mostly best avoided while rugby is still a minority sport dispite the way over the top media coverage it gets, last rugby world cup was on you would hardly notice at all.GAA and rugby getting bigger and bigger. If some journalists in Ireland could see the wood for the trees they’d be thanking City for slowing down the ferries and planes to England and getting more bums on seats for LOI.
its all clickbait though Johnny Ward on OTB spent most of Saturday crying about City.
Then how much we could spend this summer. theoretically speaking if Sheffield has earned 100m and we have earned 712mil, then we could spend roughly 606mil on transfers, wages, agent fees, but they can’t exceed that of Sheffield’s 100x5 mil for the season if our expenditure for transfers, wages and agent fees is 500 then we can’t really buy anyone this summer windowThis isn’t that complicated. There’s 2 parts.
1) Each club can spend 85% of revenue. This is agreed on and happening.
2) No club can spend more than 6x revenue of 20th team. Things agreed on principle but details tbc and voted on again.
Nowhere are Luton going to be allowed to spend £560m a year on wages and transfers, that would break PSR, wouldn’t it?
The only thing this does is make sure that the gap between top and bottom doesn’t grow too big by incentivising the top clubs to keep growing the revenues of the league as a whole.
burning blue soul
Well-Known Member
From what is now being proposed to limit our spending, it is yet another indicator that the charges levied against us have gone to rat shit for the PL.
Then how much we could spend this summer. theoretically speaking if Sheffield has earned 100m and we have earned 712mil, then we could spend roughly 606mil on transfers, wages, agent fees, but they can’t exceed that of Sheffield’s 100x5 mil for the season if our expenditure for transfers, wages and agent fees is 500 then we can’t really buy anyone this summer window
At 6x revenue of the bottom club we can spend more than we do now.
At 5x it’s about the same.
At 4.5x it’s a bit less.
We don’t know until the final vote is held where it will be, But all the clubs need to do to be able to spend more is adjust how much tv and prize money the bottom teams get. Give them an extra 10m and you can spend 45-60m more.
If more competitive league is the aim, It would be much simpler
1) to change the place money to favour lower teams
or 2) to have a subsidy for the lower teams where all clubs paid a percentage of their gross income into a pot
or 3) to share domestic tv revenue, after all there are always two clubs on the pitch.
1) to change the place money to favour lower teams
or 2) to have a subsidy for the lower teams where all clubs paid a percentage of their gross income into a pot
or 3) to share domestic tv revenue, after all there are always two clubs on the pitch.