samarasra
Well-Known Member
Don't mind a red if he/she wears a Cork G.A.A. shirt or a Munster rugby shirt.No sweat. My reposte was very much tongue in cheek.
There's more Red heads over here than you can swing a Hurley at.
Don't mind a red if he/she wears a Cork G.A.A. shirt or a Munster rugby shirt.No sweat. My reposte was very much tongue in cheek.
There's more Red heads over here than you can swing a Hurley at.
I have no doubt we will be found guilty by UEFA, however; reopening the case we were found guilty of means the deal we agreed to is off the table and we can take our gloves off and take them to court for changing the FFP rules AFTER we submitted our 2012 accounts. UEFA's processes and intentions during FFP will be fully documented and opened to scrutiny as well. It really wont end well for UEFA and the ex G14 clubs.
We should call it NFFP.......NOT... FIT... FOR... PURPOSE, as that is what it is, and to have the words fair play in the title is just to make knownowt fans of the cartel clubs think that they have been fair all these years while raking in top 4/cl money made easier for them by sky and the like......Tossers.Maybe we need to start coming up with our own lexicon of phrases.
Like Post and Pre FFP doping. Or maybe Pre FFP doping could be Elite or Historical Doping.
Or maybe not call it FFP at all. How about Cartel Fund Management rules.
Regarding "misleading" investigators, our acounts are there for all to see. How misleading is having them in the Cayman Islands away from scrutiny.
That wouldn't be allowed would it, under CFM rules. (see above)
Would it?
In fairness they predicted the rise of City by needing to prepare a barrier to entry as a means to prevent our owner from investing.Martin Samuels, in the Daily Fail nails it absolutely. Nothing more need be said other than his closing lines:
"Never forget the clubs who made football all about money in the first place.
What they really hate is City winning at their game."
In fairness they predicted the rise of City by needing to prepare a barrier to entry as a means to prevent our owner from investing.
Their worst fears have actually happened despite collaborating to stop him. Being scared of competition is one thing being in charge of the rule book and still failing to stop our owner shows they are collectively out of our league regarding football as well as being shown how to maximise ones investments.
I think the main problem for them has been investment. They were certain their previous investment phase was sufficient and they could contain City. Belatedly they spent but without a business plan so we overtook them from a business perspective and our many 50m buys outperformed their high value individual buys.I agree up to a point. Originally they put the barrier in place and, with growing alarm, they have consistently kept on raising it as the City surge has developed into a tsunami. They'll keep on doing it too. Good job we made it across the drawbridge before the moat became too wide to cross.
Now yer talking. They are the only red shirts I will ever wear.Don't mind a red if he/she wears a Cork G.A.A. shirt or a Munster rugby shirt.
Wow. Someone finally openly talking about the real purpose of FFP designed by the Cartel clubs. We need more such press to tip the balance of PR war in our favour.After the more balanced Martin Samuels article we also have this one from the Washington Post today-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.15cb774911b5