laserblue
Well-Known Member
moomba said:
13 out of 20 is only 65%. Therefore 14 votes are needed as has been widely quoted.
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.
Serious question relating to us and FFP(update P17)
- Thread starter Johnsonontheleft
- Start date
13 out of 20 is only 65%. Therefore 14 votes are needed as has been widely quoted.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
I pointed this out last night. It doesn't make any sense, unless the abstention counts as a non-vote thus reducing the number of voting parties to 19. I wonder if any express reference is made to this in the PL constitution. If not (and even if so) you can bet Al Fayed's lawyers will be all over it like a fucking rash.moomba said:laserblue said:Stuart Brennan @StuBrennanMEN[/b] City did NOT vote for the new FFP rules. They were one of six against it, with one abstention, so it squeaked through
This can't be right. 14 votes in favour were needed. 6 votes against and one abstention would mean only 13 were in favour.
Need 66% of the vote.
laserblue said:moomba said:laserblue said:This can't be right. 14 votes in favour were needed. 6 votes against and one abstention would mean only 13 were in favour.
Need 66% of the vote.
13 out of 20 is only 65%. Therefore 14 votes are needed as has been widely quoted.
The abstention is not counted as a vote. 13 from 19 got it through.
Trollsmoan
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 460
Unlucky to all those aspiring clubs fans, thank your owners the ship has well and truly sailed.
Nobheads.
Sadly can see ticket prices rising significantly at our club as matchday revenues are no way near the other clubs in the top ten, either that or we need a ground extension!
Nobheads.
Sadly can see ticket prices rising significantly at our club as matchday revenues are no way near the other clubs in the top ten, either that or we need a ground extension!
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
In that case there is no point whatsoever in abstaining for the purposes of a vote that is split along these lines. You may as well vote in favour, which is perhaps what, in effect they were doing. As I said, I wonder what the PL constitution says about this. I can't imagine it isn't provided for, but nonetheless.moomba said:laserblue said:moomba said:Need 66% of the vote.
13 out of 20 is only 65%. Therefore 14 votes are needed as has been widely quoted.
The abstention is not counted as a vote. 13 from 19 got it through.
The fact that Reading abstained and thus carried the vote through is more annoying than the clubs that actually did vote for it.moomba said:laserblue said:moomba said:Need 66% of the vote.
13 out of 20 is only 65%. Therefore 14 votes are needed as has been widely quoted.
The abstention is not counted as a vote. 13 from 19 got it through.
Reading;- a wishy washy club that can't even decide what colour shirt to wear, "We'll have it blue, no we'll have it white, no blue, no white........
The Flash
Well-Known Member
Stubbs & St. Ronald lauding this decision on talkshite this morning. The moose explained that it was to put clubs on a sound financial footing and "to stop billionaires buying success overnight"......unbelievable...... Stubbs: "This is a good thing for footbal isn't it?" St. Ronald: "yeah, yeah"
No idea have they? Clueless bastards. And considering Stubbs is an Everton fan, clearly he doesn't understand that Kenwright is staying forever and his team can only ever hope to win a cup.
Dick!
No idea have they? Clueless bastards. And considering Stubbs is an Everton fan, clearly he doesn't understand that Kenwright is staying forever and his team can only ever hope to win a cup.
Dick!
While I can see that you have to have a snapshot in time to have a vote, how can it be fair for 20 teams, of which 3 are going to be relegated vote for something that affects not only the Premier League, but every other league and team as well?? I would have thought that Leeds for one (and any other team who is looking at promotion the the Premier League) would be very unhappy at this decision. As has been previously said, a sad day for football indeed...while the Premier League is a cartel, the FA should be taking an active part in this for ALL their members, not just let the so called "elite" clubs vote for something as earthshaking as this...
So the turkeys have finally voted for christmas.
I can't believe the other clubs have been suckered for Manchester United's brand of "fairness".
They have condemed themselves to an eternity of no success now the only fair income streams are the ones that United have. Any other way of funding is deemed unfair. Does that sound fair? Everton is a good example, how will they ever out sell the rags for merchandise and branding?
Funny how United's massive debt has somehow escaped the rules?.
I can't believe the other clubs have been suckered for Manchester United's brand of "fairness".
They have condemed themselves to an eternity of no success now the only fair income streams are the ones that United have. Any other way of funding is deemed unfair. Does that sound fair? Everton is a good example, how will they ever out sell the rags for merchandise and branding?
Funny how United's massive debt has somehow escaped the rules?.