Brigadier2
Player Valuation: £750k
That's the issue for me, no laws have been broken so why is the punishment so heavy?I think it was likely criticised for heavily leaning on article 6 of the ECHR which is irrelevant as it isn’t a criminal charge.
That's the issue for me, no laws have been broken so why is the punishment so heavy?I think it was likely criticised for heavily leaning on article 6 of the ECHR which is irrelevant as it isn’t a criminal charge.
That's the issue for me, no laws have been broken so why is the punishment so heavy?
I know people have skillsets in different areas, but how amateurish he looked speaking at the committee was a real eye opener. It looked like me when I've gone for a job interview and done no research at all.Incompetent head of organisation under intense government scrutiny, exposed for the bluffer he is, in saving face shocker… Masters knows his race is run, that’s why the suits are writing his letters. I can’t imagine there will be many clubs in the league who have any respect or confidence left for a middle manager who has been promoted far beyond his capabilities and overseen this whole charade.
It was exactly that. I couldn’t believe how out of depth and ill prepared he was, it was patently obvious after only a minute or so he didn’t belong in that room on an intellectual or business level. I genuinely don’t believe for a second that the boardrooms of Premier league clubs haven’t all watched and cringed in unison at his display, his goose is cooked.I know people have skillsets in different areas, but how amateurish he looked speaking at the committee was a real eye opener. It looked like me when I've gone for a job interview and done no research at all.
It was noticeable how quiet the PL's little choice quoting fans on here were for a few days after that appearence.
I believe premier league clubs waived that right.I’ve read consistently that going to CAS won’t be an option. Anybody know why?
Couple of things...
A: Theyre the rules that every club signs up to in order to play in the premier league.
B: Previously the rules were such that stadiums (and other items) were not included in the calculations. This appears to have changed during the three year rolling period which is 'unfair'. The loans & calculations towards the stadium is where we've been caught out.
Interesting how it didn't count while spurs were building a new stadium, Chelsea redeveloped Stamford Bridge, old Trafford was finished, the emirates was built.
But in the last 3 years just as the non cartel clubs are wanting to improve themselves the rules change.
A conspiracy theorist might look at that and think the timing seemed convenient
There has been zero new info since the IC report came out and the club were shocked and surprised, and yet the reasons and details flooding the internet change every hour.Couple of things...
A: Theyre the rules that every club signs up to in order to play in the premier league.
B: Previously the rules were such that stadiums (and other items) were not included in the calculations. This appears to have changed during the three year rolling period which is 'unfair'. The loans & calculations towards the stadium is where we've been caught out.
This is the most mature thing i have ever seen.
There has been zero new info since the IC report came out and the club were shocked and surprised, and yet the reasons and details flooding the internet change every hour.
Spending cash on a stadium has no impact on profit and loss, its capital investment, no impact on PSR. Interest on loans specifically for the purposes of stadium construction are deductible for PSR.
Interest on loans that supposedly are precluded for use on stadium expenditure but saying “if we used the other loan or Mosh’s interest free loan we wouldn’t have needed that loan that wasn’t for the stadium so we are going to allocate that interest anyway” is where we have made a mess it seems.
We haven’t been as shafted on loan interest as is often made out, CFO and Mosh cocked up but for genuine commercial reasons, so it still should be taken as genuine mitigation. They also sought to not mention any of this according to the report, with the commission concluding that it was always going to be discovered, so we were less than transparent. I think that was viewed very very badly.
I also find it weird we took loans out that supposedly say the funds can’t be used on the stadium. I would rather loan someone cash that is going into a permanent and wonderful asset rather than paying Benitez and Sammy Lee off. Odd one that.
I think our argument is fair that it was just commercially better to allocate the loan monies as was best for the club. But we did hand them loan agreements which proved our overspend as per the letter of the rules.
That all said, points deduction is still wildly inappropriate when you are talking about the wording of loan agreements.
In sporting Competitions? I strongly suspect there’s nothing illegal about it if they’ve agreed. (Loved to be proven wrong)Can you legally prohibit a business spending money in order to improve the brand?