Here we go

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Newcastle will be allowed to loan players from the Saudi League.

[cambridgeshire canary 6,865]

Of course they will. There was never any threat of them not being allowed. It was all just a show to try and pretend like the FA cared.

 

We all know the rules. The big clubs and rich clubs can do whatever they like whenever they like. Man City breaks over 100 regulations and rules over many years? 'Ohhhh you naughty boy let me give you a little slap on the wrist you cheeky cheeky man!'

 

But Everton breaks just a couple? 'HOW DARE YOU POINTS DEDUCTION RIGHT HERE RIGHT NOW!'

[Nexus_Canary 1,044]

I don't follow international football anymore, I wonder if in 10 years j will stop following club football?.

Scary concept but it's just not a sport anymore, so rigged it might as well be the WWE 

[Commonsense 665]

17 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Of course they will. There was never any threat of them not being allowed. It was all just a show to try and pretend like the FA cared.

 

We all know the rules. The big clubs and rich clubs can do whatever they like whenever they like. Man City breaks over 100 regulations and rules over many years? 'Ohhhh you naughty boy let me give you a little slap on the wrist you cheeky cheeky man!'

 

But Everton breaks just a couple? 'HOW DARE YOU POINTS DEDUCTION RIGHT HERE RIGHT NOW!'

So Norwich lose a relatively small amount of money and this board goes into meltdown. Everton exceed the total borrowing allowed by the Premier League, during a period when they continued to buy players for large fees and you claim they just broke a couple of regulations. Is there any logic at all tO your posts?

[Capt. Pants 4,325]

26 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Of course they will. There was never any threat of them not being allowed. It was all just a show to try and pretend like the FA cared.

 

We all know the rules. The big clubs and rich clubs can do whatever they like whenever they like. Man City breaks over 100 regulations and rules over many years? 'Ohhhh you naughty boy let me give you a little slap on the wrist you cheeky cheeky man!'

 

But Everton breaks just a couple? 'HOW DARE YOU POINTS DEDUCTION RIGHT HERE RIGHT NOW!'

Except that Everton breaking the rules probably meant Leicester, Leeds and Burnley got relegated.

Not just Newcastle as potentially it opens up other clubs to do likewise, and they're not the big 6...

Manchester City, Arsenal, Aston Villa, Chelsea, Brighton, West Ham, Nottingham Forest, Bournemouth, Sheffield United and Crystal Palace all have owners with stakes in foreign clubs, while incoming Manchester United co-owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe owns French team Nice. 

[Pyro Pete 1,940]

4 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

Except that Everton breaking the rules probably meant Leicester, Leeds and Burnley got relegated.

 

I'm fairly sure Everton not getting relegated only meant one of those clubs went down.

Also, good luck proving that in a court, anyway.

[Channon’s Windmill 344]

No surprise at all, there will be a proposal soon to hold the FA Cup final in Riyadh next. Top level football is becoming pretty repulsive imo.

[Ulfotto 660]

25 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

Except that Everton breaking the rules probably meant Leicester, Leeds and Burnley got relegated.

Not just Newcastle as potentially it opens up other clubs to do likewise, and they're not the big 6...

Manchester City, Arsenal, Aston Villa, Chelsea, Brighton, West Ham, Nottingham Forest, Bournemouth, Sheffield United and Crystal Palace all have owners with stakes in foreign clubs, while incoming Manchester United co-owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe owns French team Nice. 

Plus Brentford who own that Danish team.

[All the Germans 1,085]

1 hour ago, Commonsense said:

 Is there any logic at all tO your posts?

No.

[Nuff Said 5,240]

1 hour ago, Commonsense said:

Is there any logic at all tO your posts?

Wibble

[Yobocop 1,105]

1 hour ago, Commonsense said:

So Norwich lose a relatively small amount of money and this board goes into meltdown. Everton exceed the total borrowing allowed by the Premier League, during a period when they continued to buy players for large fees and you claim they just broke a couple of regulations. Is there any logic at all tO your posts?

There is a logic, it’s usually whatever Cambridge believes to be the popular opinion at the time or whatever jack or Chris Reeve say, which is why and how he trips up with things like this. 

Loveable rogue but a bit of a yes man to the popular opinion. 

[Commonsense 665]

4 hours ago, Pyro Pete said:

I'm fairly sure Everton not getting relegated only meant one of those clubs went down.

Also, good luck proving that in a court, anyway.

No it’s 2. Leicester from last season, Burnley from the one before. You’re right though that Leeds don’t have a case.

[cornish sam 968]

5 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Of course they will. There was never any threat of them not being allowed. It was all just a show to try and pretend like the FA cared.

 

We all know the rules. The big clubs and rich clubs can do whatever they like whenever they like. Man City breaks over 100 regulations and rules over many years? 'Ohhhh you naughty boy let me give you a little slap on the wrist you cheeky cheeky man!'

 

But Everton breaks just a couple? 'HOW DARE YOU POINTS DEDUCTION RIGHT HERE RIGHT NOW!'

Only it wasn't the FA it was the premier League that voted against it due to overriding self interests. The most surprising thing here is that they got 13 votes in favour as more than 7 club owners have interests elsewhere...

[shefcanary 2,503]

16 hours ago, cornish sam said:

Only it wasn't the FA it was the premier League that voted against it due to overriding self interests. The most surprising thing here is that they got 13 votes in favour as more than 7 club owners have interests elsewhere...

I mean, when Sheffield United vote in favour, something strange is going on. Turkeys voting for Xmas, or is there something we've all missed?

[TheBaldOne66 722]

So all those above moaning about the EPL and what it stands for never want us to be promoted again? 
 

 

[canarydan23 4,118]

Is there anything stopping Newcastle loaning players and letting the Saudi team pay all the wages, to circumvent the FFP rules? Or are there safeguards in place to stop that?

[shefcanary 2,503]

2 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Is there anything stopping Newcastle loaning players and letting the Saudi team pay all the wages, to circumvent the FFP rules? Or are there safeguards in place to stop that?

Only what they can't hide from the auditors? But if the Saudi's use those auditors to audit some of their other enterprises then that should be fairly straightforward to hide from them - he said cynically. 😉 

But seriously (no really 🙂 ), the EPL clubs now have to submit lots of data, including players contracts, almost in real time to the EPL and then the EPL auditors go through them with a fine toothcomb. It would be pretty difficult to hide something like a third party paying a players wages, other than through dodgy sponsorship deals, which the EPL seems to have gotten on top of now.  

[Google Bot 3,380]

7 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

It would be pretty difficult to hide something like a third party paying a players wages

You can loan a player and the parent club still pays their wages though, there's nothing new in that is there?

I think that's what was being suggested.

The only way around the monopoly is to have a league structure more based around ELO style scoring, so if a small team beats a massive one they get a huge points tally, whereas the big team gets sod all for beating the little one.

That's the only true way to fair it out and declare who's best, if the gap continues to widen.   It'd then mean the only way larger teams can get a decent points tally is to defeat a rival with similar standing.

It'd also ruin the entire tradition of the game, but that's going out the window anyway.  It's a bit like X Factor and christmas number ones really.

Edited November 22, 2023 by Google Bot

[shefcanary 2,503]

17 hours ago, Google Bot said:

You can loan a player and the parent club still pays their wages though, there's nothing new in that is there?

Agreed nothing new, but who is paying the player will be stated in the player's contract which has to be lodged with the EPL. 

 

Edited November 23, 2023 by shefcanary

[norfolkngood 1,095]

10 hours ago, shefcanary said:

Agreed nothing new, but who is paying the player will be stated in the player's contract which has to be lodged with the EPL. 

 

How will that work say the Saudi team is paying a player 400k a week but as same owners they agree he can loan to Newcastle and the Saudi team pays 350k and Newcastle pay 50k for the loan  o keep them in FFP hardly fair is it ? 

Saudi team can pay what ever they want in fees and wages and let Newcastle have him cheap on loan 

[RobJames 905]

it is ever moving away from any reals ense of competition. the top six in the PL are pretty much always in the CH L. The final rounds of that competition almost always feature the same 8 or so cliubs. That way the same clubs get ticher and can affird the best player.... meaning the finish in the top six in the PL and ad finitum

Only when those clubs not in that elite group dcide to break away will football in England have any hope of remaining in any way meaningful. Dump those six and they are left with 3 games at the weekend, and having to play each other 8 times in a season to complete a 40 game season. Becoming totally meaningless.

Once the 'rest' grasp that they are only there to make up the numbers, and give some semblance (false) of the PL being a competition will it might happen.  Make the top tier one of 24 clubs as before. Sure it night mean a huge cut in TV money, but English football survived when it was not there, admission was more realistic and there was not the stagnation there is now.

[Haus 260]

1 hour ago, norfolkngood said:

How will that work say the Saudi team is paying a player 400k a week but as same owners they agree he can loan to Newcastle and the Saudi team pays 350k and Newcastle pay 50k for the loan  o keep them in FFP hardly fair is it ? 

Saudi team can pay what ever they want in fees and wages and let Newcastle have him cheap on loan 

They also get players on the books without the 50m+ transfer fees counting towards ffp