Surely it can be argued that the building of the stadium is of long term benefit to the club financially, and will go a long way to them being profitable/ self sustaining going forward?
You would think so, so I don’t know why they’re going after them again for stadium costs, or interest relating to stadium costs. At this point it seems like a witch hunt.
City haven't been charged with what Everton have so there's no correlation.
City's charges are far more serious as the PL is essentially saying they have been fraudulent with their
Fiances. Totally different situation and if the PL can make some of them stick City are going to be for a world of pain and rightly so.
But they won’t tell people when City’s case will be heard. I think there will be backhanded deals going on to make sure City aren’t severely punished. Something about the whole process just doesn’t sit right with me.
comment by Melbourne Red (U5417)
posted 5 minutes ago
But they won’t tell people when City’s case will be heard. I think there will be backhanded deals going on to make sure City aren’t severely punished. Something about the whole process just doesn’t sit right with me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You could be right but then why come out the way they did? Why announce it if they knew it wasn't going to stick?
City have been the ones stalling in all this process not the PL. Why would an 'innocent club' stall and complain about the investigation if they had nothing to hide?
Genuinely think the PL should come down even harder on them for drawing this out for a lot longer.
There's no way they should get to Keep the trophies won in that period. If they do we should petition for Lance Armstrong to get his medals back. What's the difference? Medical doping or financial doping....it's all the same thing. It's cheating to gain an unfair advantage.
The owners of City have a lot of political influence in the UK. I think that’s playing out in the background. But yes, the Premier League should come down harder on City.
Regarding Chelsea, if it’s true that they need to raise 100m by the end of June to comply with PSR, any club willing to do business with them before then are out of their mind.
Everton r totally getting screwed over
The whole thing is a farce. Amazed anyone is backing it.
I read somewhere that the debate was whether these interest payments can be entirely attributed as a stadium cost. Basically EFC trying to pass off as many costs as possible to infrastructure, thus deductible,.to minimise their losses/breach.
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
I don't agree with the appeals process on this. It's not fair to Luton if they think they're going to survive by 1 point, only for Everton to win 2 points back on appeal and send them down.
It would make more sense to not make public the punishments, until an appeal has been heard and either granted or denied.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour ago
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. You lot are sweating now aren't you? Forest and Everton docked points for minor breaches, whilst City have broken 115 rules.
Time for you lot to be relegated.
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour ago
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. You lot are sweating now aren't you? Forest and Everton docked points for minor breaches, whilst City have broken 115 rules.
Time for you lot to be relegated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re all for an independent regulator, why are United and Liverpool so against it?
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour ago
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. You lot are sweating now aren't you? Forest and Everton docked points for minor breaches, whilst City have broken 115 rules.
Time for you lot to be relegated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re all for an independent regulator, why are United and Liverpool so against it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You lot want an independent regulator, about as much as Jimmy Savile wanted a thorough police investigation against him.
115 charges and you're guilty regardless of the verdict too. Let it be known that even if you get off, like OJ Simpson, everyone knows the truth of the matter.
You're going to be relegated.
Good article on the subject
https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakgarnerpurkis/2023/02/07/self-interested-premier-league-action-against-manchester-city-proves-need-for-regulation/?sh=4a6634ef2099
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 6 minutes ago
Good article on the subject
https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakgarnerpurkis/2023/02/07/self-interested-premier-league-action-against-manchester-city-proves-need-for-regulation/?sh=4a6634ef2099
----------------------------------------------------------------------
115 charges.
115 reasons why ours meant more.
You're getting relegated.
<yawn>. Are you stamping your feet whilst your writing this nonsense?
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour ago
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. You lot are sweating now aren't you? Forest and Everton docked points for minor breaches, whilst City have broken 115 rules.
Time for you lot to be relegated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re all for an independent regulator, why are United and Liverpool so against it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean like the 'independent' third member of the CAS panel. They guy who conveniently had business interests in the UAE which never seem to cause much of stir.
I think this might be a big reason why Boris. Both clubs know you will bribe your way out of it like last time.
Why do City need an independent panel if they have done nothing wrong? You could have Fergie Wenger and Klopp on the panel and they'd not find anything if you were innocent would they?
115 consecutive mistakes made by the PL? About as likely as finding gold at the end of a rainbow I'd say.
Send them down.
comment by Cinciwolf-----JA606 NFL fantasy champ 2023 (U11551)
posted 2 hours, 15 minutes ago
The whole thing is a farce. Amazed anyone is backing it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is it a farce?
What is a bit of a joke is that it hasnt been properly enforced but now that an independent regulator is threatened suddenly the PL starts to clamp down.
But the rules bring more benefits than harm. A free for all on investing in PL clubs would have pretty substantial collateral damage and probably destroy the football pyramid that underpins the game in the UK.
Fans have to think beyond their own club and what winning the lottery might do for them and accept that some things are for the greater good.
That's not to say that the rules do not need improving, but the principle of what they're looking to achieve is right. Its not as if clubs are stopped from investing or building up massive losses (£105m), they're just stopped from fast tracking it and putting the clubs finances at risk.
And Everton are a prime example. Lots of money spent and wasted. If Everton had gone down last season they would have been in a massive world of financial pain, scrabbling around for new investment while trying to build our a new stadium. That is the risk here. Not all billionaire owners will bring City-esque success. They also have huge potential to destroy clubs.
Admittedly not read up on the specific case, but I am a chartered accountant.
My rationale would be: what is interest levied upon? Interest is levied on debt, therefore, if you’re incurring interest on infrastructure expenditure, it means it has been funded - at least partly - via debt.
The rules are in place to promote financial health for clubs, whilst leveraging a significant amount of debt on the club is contrary to that, therefore, including the interest in the PSR calculation makes sense as both a deterrent and a more accurate depiction of financial health.
Had the owners simply put the money in for the stadium up front, there wouldn’t be any interest incurred, so we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour ago
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. You lot are sweating now aren't you? Forest and Everton docked points for minor breaches, whilst City have broken 115 rules.
Time for you lot to be relegated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re all for an independent regulator, why are United and Liverpool so against it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean like the 'independent' third member of the CAS panel. They guy who conveniently had business interests in the UAE which never seem to cause much of stir.
I think this might be a big reason why Boris. Both clubs know you will bribe your way out of it like last time.
Why do City need an independent panel if they have done nothing wrong? You could have Fergie Wenger and Klopp on the panel and they'd not find anything if you were innocent would they?
115 consecutive mistakes made by the PL? About as likely as finding gold at the end of a rainbow I'd say.
Send them down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City fans know they're guilty deep down, they just won't admit it.
Like having a son who turns out to be a nonce etc.
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 30 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour ago
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. You lot are sweating now aren't you? Forest and Everton docked points for minor breaches, whilst City have broken 115 rules.
Time for you lot to be relegated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re all for an independent regulator, why are United and Liverpool so against it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean like the 'independent' third member of the CAS panel. They guy who conveniently had business interests in the UAE which never seem to cause much of stir.
I think this might be a big reason why Boris. Both clubs know you will bribe your way out of it like last time.
Why do City need an independent panel if they have done nothing wrong? You could have Fergie Wenger and Klopp on the panel and they'd not find anything if you were innocent would they?
115 consecutive mistakes made by the PL? About as likely as finding gold at the end of a rainbow I'd say.
Send them down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City fans know they're guilty deep down, they just won't admit it.
Like having a son who turns out to be a nonce etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by rooney_hernandez (U7012)
posted 32 minutes ago
Admittedly not read up on the specific case, but I am a chartered accountant.
My rationale would be: what is interest levied upon? Interest is levied on debt, therefore, if you’re incurring interest on infrastructure expenditure, it means it has been funded - at least partly - via debt.
The rules are in place to promote financial health for clubs, whilst leveraging a significant amount of debt on the club is contrary to that, therefore, including the interest in the PSR calculation makes sense as both a deterrent and a more accurate depiction of financial health.
Had the owners simply put the money in for the stadium up front, there wouldn’t be any interest incurred, so we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But that debt is enabling much greater revenues, revenues that will comfortable exceed the cost of servicing that debt, so it does represent sustainable growth rather than high risk such as spending £500m on footballers who turn out to be duds and almost get you relegated.
Spurs are the perfect example. Matchday revenue gone from about £45m to £120m and big new commercial revenues off the back of the multi-use of the stadium
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour ago
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. You lot are sweating now aren't you? Forest and Everton docked points for minor breaches, whilst City have broken 115 rules.
Time for you lot to be relegated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re all for an independent regulator, why are United and Liverpool so against it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean like the 'independent' third member of the CAS panel. They guy who conveniently had business interests in the UAE which never seem to cause much of stir.
I think this might be a big reason why Boris. Both clubs know you will bribe your way out of it like last time.
Why do City need an independent panel if they have done nothing wrong? You could have Fergie Wenger and Klopp on the panel and they'd not find anything if you were innocent would they?
115 consecutive mistakes made by the PL? About as likely as finding gold at the end of a rainbow I'd say.
Send them down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City fans know they're guilty deep down, they just won't admit it.
Like having a son who turns out to be a nonce etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or being Mason Greenwood’s parents
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour ago
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. You lot are sweating now aren't you? Forest and Everton docked points for minor breaches, whilst City have broken 115 rules.
Time for you lot to be relegated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re all for an independent regulator, why are United and Liverpool so against it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean like the 'independent' third member of the CAS panel. They guy who conveniently had business interests in the UAE which never seem to cause much of stir.
I think this might be a big reason why Boris. Both clubs know you will bribe your way out of it like last time.
Why do City need an independent panel if they have done nothing wrong? You could have Fergie Wenger and Klopp on the panel and they'd not find anything if you were innocent would they?
115 consecutive mistakes made by the PL? About as likely as finding gold at the end of a rainbow I'd say.
Send them down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City fans know they're guilty deep down, they just won't admit it.
Like having a son who turns out to be a nonce etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or being Mason Greenwood’s parents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or supporting a club that employed Barry Bennell and Benjamin Mendy
Sign in if you want to comment
Everton’s further points deduction
Page 1 of 4
posted on 8/4/24
Surely it can be argued that the building of the stadium is of long term benefit to the club financially, and will go a long way to them being profitable/ self sustaining going forward?
posted on 8/4/24
You would think so, so I don’t know why they’re going after them again for stadium costs, or interest relating to stadium costs. At this point it seems like a witch hunt.
posted on 8/4/24
City haven't been charged with what Everton have so there's no correlation.
City's charges are far more serious as the PL is essentially saying they have been fraudulent with their
Fiances. Totally different situation and if the PL can make some of them stick City are going to be for a world of pain and rightly so.
posted on 9/4/24
But they won’t tell people when City’s case will be heard. I think there will be backhanded deals going on to make sure City aren’t severely punished. Something about the whole process just doesn’t sit right with me.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Melbourne Red (U5417)
posted 5 minutes ago
But they won’t tell people when City’s case will be heard. I think there will be backhanded deals going on to make sure City aren’t severely punished. Something about the whole process just doesn’t sit right with me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You could be right but then why come out the way they did? Why announce it if they knew it wasn't going to stick?
City have been the ones stalling in all this process not the PL. Why would an 'innocent club' stall and complain about the investigation if they had nothing to hide?
Genuinely think the PL should come down even harder on them for drawing this out for a lot longer.
There's no way they should get to Keep the trophies won in that period. If they do we should petition for Lance Armstrong to get his medals back. What's the difference? Medical doping or financial doping....it's all the same thing. It's cheating to gain an unfair advantage.
posted on 9/4/24
The owners of City have a lot of political influence in the UK. I think that’s playing out in the background. But yes, the Premier League should come down harder on City.
Regarding Chelsea, if it’s true that they need to raise 100m by the end of June to comply with PSR, any club willing to do business with them before then are out of their mind.
posted on 9/4/24
Everton r totally getting screwed over
posted on 9/4/24
The whole thing is a farce. Amazed anyone is backing it.
posted on 9/4/24
I read somewhere that the debate was whether these interest payments can be entirely attributed as a stadium cost. Basically EFC trying to pass off as many costs as possible to infrastructure, thus deductible,.to minimise their losses/breach.
posted on 9/4/24
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
posted on 9/4/24
I don't agree with the appeals process on this. It's not fair to Luton if they think they're going to survive by 1 point, only for Everton to win 2 points back on appeal and send them down.
It would make more sense to not make public the punishments, until an appeal has been heard and either granted or denied.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour ago
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. You lot are sweating now aren't you? Forest and Everton docked points for minor breaches, whilst City have broken 115 rules.
Time for you lot to be relegated.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour ago
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. You lot are sweating now aren't you? Forest and Everton docked points for minor breaches, whilst City have broken 115 rules.
Time for you lot to be relegated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re all for an independent regulator, why are United and Liverpool so against it?
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour ago
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. You lot are sweating now aren't you? Forest and Everton docked points for minor breaches, whilst City have broken 115 rules.
Time for you lot to be relegated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re all for an independent regulator, why are United and Liverpool so against it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You lot want an independent regulator, about as much as Jimmy Savile wanted a thorough police investigation against him.
115 charges and you're guilty regardless of the verdict too. Let it be known that even if you get off, like OJ Simpson, everyone knows the truth of the matter.
You're going to be relegated.
posted on 9/4/24
Good article on the subject
https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakgarnerpurkis/2023/02/07/self-interested-premier-league-action-against-manchester-city-proves-need-for-regulation/?sh=4a6634ef2099
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 6 minutes ago
Good article on the subject
https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakgarnerpurkis/2023/02/07/self-interested-premier-league-action-against-manchester-city-proves-need-for-regulation/?sh=4a6634ef2099
----------------------------------------------------------------------
115 charges.
115 reasons why ours meant more.
You're getting relegated.
posted on 9/4/24
<yawn>. Are you stamping your feet whilst your writing this nonsense?
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour ago
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. You lot are sweating now aren't you? Forest and Everton docked points for minor breaches, whilst City have broken 115 rules.
Time for you lot to be relegated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re all for an independent regulator, why are United and Liverpool so against it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean like the 'independent' third member of the CAS panel. They guy who conveniently had business interests in the UAE which never seem to cause much of stir.
I think this might be a big reason why Boris. Both clubs know you will bribe your way out of it like last time.
Why do City need an independent panel if they have done nothing wrong? You could have Fergie Wenger and Klopp on the panel and they'd not find anything if you were innocent would they?
115 consecutive mistakes made by the PL? About as likely as finding gold at the end of a rainbow I'd say.
Send them down.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Cinciwolf-----JA606 NFL fantasy champ 2023 (U11551)
posted 2 hours, 15 minutes ago
The whole thing is a farce. Amazed anyone is backing it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is it a farce?
What is a bit of a joke is that it hasnt been properly enforced but now that an independent regulator is threatened suddenly the PL starts to clamp down.
But the rules bring more benefits than harm. A free for all on investing in PL clubs would have pretty substantial collateral damage and probably destroy the football pyramid that underpins the game in the UK.
Fans have to think beyond their own club and what winning the lottery might do for them and accept that some things are for the greater good.
That's not to say that the rules do not need improving, but the principle of what they're looking to achieve is right. Its not as if clubs are stopped from investing or building up massive losses (£105m), they're just stopped from fast tracking it and putting the clubs finances at risk.
And Everton are a prime example. Lots of money spent and wasted. If Everton had gone down last season they would have been in a massive world of financial pain, scrabbling around for new investment while trying to build our a new stadium. That is the risk here. Not all billionaire owners will bring City-esque success. They also have huge potential to destroy clubs.
posted on 9/4/24
Admittedly not read up on the specific case, but I am a chartered accountant.
My rationale would be: what is interest levied upon? Interest is levied on debt, therefore, if you’re incurring interest on infrastructure expenditure, it means it has been funded - at least partly - via debt.
The rules are in place to promote financial health for clubs, whilst leveraging a significant amount of debt on the club is contrary to that, therefore, including the interest in the PSR calculation makes sense as both a deterrent and a more accurate depiction of financial health.
Had the owners simply put the money in for the stadium up front, there wouldn’t be any interest incurred, so we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour ago
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. You lot are sweating now aren't you? Forest and Everton docked points for minor breaches, whilst City have broken 115 rules.
Time for you lot to be relegated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re all for an independent regulator, why are United and Liverpool so against it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean like the 'independent' third member of the CAS panel. They guy who conveniently had business interests in the UAE which never seem to cause much of stir.
I think this might be a big reason why Boris. Both clubs know you will bribe your way out of it like last time.
Why do City need an independent panel if they have done nothing wrong? You could have Fergie Wenger and Klopp on the panel and they'd not find anything if you were innocent would they?
115 consecutive mistakes made by the PL? About as likely as finding gold at the end of a rainbow I'd say.
Send them down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City fans know they're guilty deep down, they just won't admit it.
Like having a son who turns out to be a nonce etc.
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 30 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour ago
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. You lot are sweating now aren't you? Forest and Everton docked points for minor breaches, whilst City have broken 115 rules.
Time for you lot to be relegated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re all for an independent regulator, why are United and Liverpool so against it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean like the 'independent' third member of the CAS panel. They guy who conveniently had business interests in the UAE which never seem to cause much of stir.
I think this might be a big reason why Boris. Both clubs know you will bribe your way out of it like last time.
Why do City need an independent panel if they have done nothing wrong? You could have Fergie Wenger and Klopp on the panel and they'd not find anything if you were innocent would they?
115 consecutive mistakes made by the PL? About as likely as finding gold at the end of a rainbow I'd say.
Send them down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City fans know they're guilty deep down, they just won't admit it.
Like having a son who turns out to be a nonce etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 9/4/24
comment by rooney_hernandez (U7012)
posted 32 minutes ago
Admittedly not read up on the specific case, but I am a chartered accountant.
My rationale would be: what is interest levied upon? Interest is levied on debt, therefore, if you’re incurring interest on infrastructure expenditure, it means it has been funded - at least partly - via debt.
The rules are in place to promote financial health for clubs, whilst leveraging a significant amount of debt on the club is contrary to that, therefore, including the interest in the PSR calculation makes sense as both a deterrent and a more accurate depiction of financial health.
Had the owners simply put the money in for the stadium up front, there wouldn’t be any interest incurred, so we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But that debt is enabling much greater revenues, revenues that will comfortable exceed the cost of servicing that debt, so it does represent sustainable growth rather than high risk such as spending £500m on footballers who turn out to be duds and almost get you relegated.
Spurs are the perfect example. Matchday revenue gone from about £45m to £120m and big new commercial revenues off the back of the multi-use of the stadium
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour ago
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. You lot are sweating now aren't you? Forest and Everton docked points for minor breaches, whilst City have broken 115 rules.
Time for you lot to be relegated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re all for an independent regulator, why are United and Liverpool so against it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean like the 'independent' third member of the CAS panel. They guy who conveniently had business interests in the UAE which never seem to cause much of stir.
I think this might be a big reason why Boris. Both clubs know you will bribe your way out of it like last time.
Why do City need an independent panel if they have done nothing wrong? You could have Fergie Wenger and Klopp on the panel and they'd not find anything if you were innocent would they?
115 consecutive mistakes made by the PL? About as likely as finding gold at the end of a rainbow I'd say.
Send them down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City fans know they're guilty deep down, they just won't admit it.
Like having a son who turns out to be a nonce etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or being Mason Greenwood’s parents
posted on 9/4/24
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Pierrepoint Strangeways (U9489)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 hour ago
Why are United so against an independent regulator?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. You lot are sweating now aren't you? Forest and Everton docked points for minor breaches, whilst City have broken 115 rules.
Time for you lot to be relegated.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re all for an independent regulator, why are United and Liverpool so against it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean like the 'independent' third member of the CAS panel. They guy who conveniently had business interests in the UAE which never seem to cause much of stir.
I think this might be a big reason why Boris. Both clubs know you will bribe your way out of it like last time.
Why do City need an independent panel if they have done nothing wrong? You could have Fergie Wenger and Klopp on the panel and they'd not find anything if you were innocent would they?
115 consecutive mistakes made by the PL? About as likely as finding gold at the end of a rainbow I'd say.
Send them down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City fans know they're guilty deep down, they just won't admit it.
Like having a son who turns out to be a nonce etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or being Mason Greenwood’s parents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or supporting a club that employed Barry Bennell and Benjamin Mendy
Page 1 of 4