Apparently Brendan Rodgers was on £10m a yearThey can spare this victim complex
They banked on getting into the Champions League consistently - they fucked it up on the final day of the season twice and they paid average players astronomical wages to do so
As insensitive as it sounds they’ve been ran like a shambles since their owner died, which is to be expected when a billionaires son who is not a businessman inherits a club unexpectedly
I don't think they've ever paid St John's Ambulance what they were owed from that admin. Shameful.They really think they are hard done by. One comment I read stated that 2002 or whenever they did the admin, was ok ‘cus the rules allowed. What about ‘ just doing the right thing’. They cannot see that these rules were bought in because of their clubs behaviour.
I work with a bunch of Leicester fans so hear this pretty regularly. They also shift between either “we’re European regulars so should be allowed to spend big” and “the big 6 have it out for us since we upset their apple cart”/“we’re fighting on behalf of the little guy”They really think they are hard done by. One comment I read stated that 2002 or whenever they did the admin, was ok ‘cus the rules allowed. What about ‘ just doing the right thing’. They cannot see that these rules were bought in because of their clubs behaviour.
They really think they are hard done by. One comment I read stated that 2002 or whenever they did the admin, was ok ‘cus the rules allowed. What about ‘ just doing the right thing’. They cannot see that these rules were bought in because of their clubs behaviour.
They're so deluded that they actually believe this stuff. They're a scummy fanbase.They really think they are hard done by. One comment I read stated that 2002 or whenever they did the admin, was ok ‘cus the rules allowed. What about ‘ just doing the right thing’. They cannot see that these rules were bought in because of their clubs behaviour.
Things are slowly coming home to roost for all these clubs who took the piss for years in getting an advantage over the others who didn’t have foreign tycoons, state run conglomerates or just plain oil states themselves to spend their way up the ladder.
‘But how else are you meant to succeed?’ they complain. Well, look no further than last year’s play off final. Neither of those clubs cheated their way up the table.
You don’t think they should for any of the clubs who do it to be fairI doubt they’ll be coming home to roost for the likes of Chelsea and Man City
You don’t think they should for any of the clubs who do it to be fair
I thought the same. Taking legal action into the Courts and outside football's own jurisdiction would seem to set a dangerous precedent, and doing so would surely be frowned upon by the football authorities. I would have thought that any adverse outcome would then likely be higher as a result, so it seems like quite a high risk strategy that is hopefully borne out of desperation on Leicester's part.Isn't there something in the EFL rules about not being allowed in any EFL competitions if you're taking legal action against the EFL. Sure that's why clubs have backed down from taking legal action in the past as it would have prevented them starting the next season.
I don’t get this argument.No I don’t. I cynically see this as way of killing off any competitiveness at all and protecting elite clubs
How much money gets siphoned off to the government off the Qatari and Saudi authorities, the FA don't want any provincial clubs anywhere near the champions league imhoNo I don’t. I cynically see this as way of killing off any competitiveness at all and protecting elite clubs
Man City with their sheikh paying the way have won 5 of the last 6 league titles.No I don’t. I cynically see this as way of killing off any competitiveness at all and protecting elite clubs
They're so deluded that they actually believe this stuff. They're a scummy fanbase.
I don't think they've ever paid St John's Ambulance what they were owed from that admin. Shameful.
That’s a really shitty thing to do………but how do you end up owning “volunteers“ £4K£16k owed to the ambulance service and I think it was £4k to the volunteers at St John's -
You will never destroy the brand because they will just cherry pick your best players. Mahrez to Man City etc. Make them stronger, you weaker.We destroyed their PL brand by winning it by TEN clear point; nobody outside of the big six will do it agai. Maybe we will be playing you a lot more in future than we thought⚽️
It’s not 100% full proof - the teams in the top 4/6 still have to spend wisely, but the cap makes it more significantly difficult for the likes of Villa and VBrighton etc. FFP means effectively there is a spending limit on each individual club meaning that those who benefitted from the unregulated mode have a significant advantage.I don’t get this argument.
Without FFP Arsenal would’ve been able to buy a striker in January (probably an Osimhen or Toney) to help their title challenge yet couldn’t make the accounting work to do so. This also seems to be the case for Man Utd, who could’ve strengthened if not having to meet financial targets. Since the the FFP/PSR rules have come in we’ve seen way more teams competing regularly for the top 6-8 places.
We now have Villa, Brighton, West Ham, Wolves and even Brentford in recent years regularly competing for places that used to be way more of a closed shop (Leicester also spent several years challenging for these places before they fucked themselves buying average players on massive contracts/sticking with a failing manager too long - they’d probably still be around here if their ownership was more competent).
In the same time we’ve had Arsenal spend numerous seasons as low as 7th and 8th and look way off the top 4 teams, Chelsea have now spent a couple of years in the European wilderness with no hope of looking like returning any time soon(whilst also sure to be found foul of FFP/PSR). Man Utd have also at times been slumming it competing teams around 7-10th.
If FFP was brought in to cement these clubs’ place in the top 4/6, it’s done a terrible job. The top 8 places was way more predictable before FFP.
I think if they pay ie sponsorship into the club that would be revenue, if you hired a box for 1 million per game it would be revenue. It is loans that they are supposed to be stopping. How Man U are allowed to run with a £700 million debt is beyond me. Must some kind of capital debt but for what?It’s not 100% full proof - the teams in the top 4/6 still have to spend wisely, but the cap makes it more significantly difficult for the likes of Villa and VBrighton etc. FFP means effectively there is a spending limit on each individual club meaning that those who benefitted from the unregulated mode have a significant advantage.
if I became a billionaire and wanted to spunk £1b on players for CCFC I should be able to. What I don’t agree with is clubs being saddled with owner loans which I feel should be targeted. Any investment should be a gift
But even sponsorship is capped - has to be market value. Which again is bollocks. If I want to sponsor cov 1 billion, what’s it to anyone else what I spendI think if they pay ie sponsorship into the club that would be revenue, if you hired a box for 1 million per game it would be revenue. It is loans that they are supposed to be stopping. How Man U are allowed to run with a £700 million debt is beyond me. Must some kind of capital debt but for what?
The volunteers are free, medical supplies are not.That’s a really shitty thing to do………but how do you end up owning “volunteers“ £4K
Would be a brave/stupid move to involve the laws of the land, as I'm sure HMRC would be interested as to why football clubs don't seem to think the tax laws of the land should apply to them.I thought the same. Taking legal action into the Courts and outside football's own jurisdiction would seem to set a dangerous precedent, and doing so would surely be frowned upon by the football authorities. I would have thought that any adverse outcome would then likely be higher as a result, so it seems like quite a high risk strategy that is hopefully borne out of desperation on Leicester's part.
Should the government do something so that HMRC. are treated the same? Could a law be passed that they’d be equal to the highest %of any other creditor. Leicester had to clear all football debts in full or be kicked out yet the tax payer, everybody who pays tax, got screwed over .Would be a brave/stupid move to involve the laws of the land, as I'm sure HMRC would be interested as to why football clubs don't seem to think the tax laws of the land should apply to them.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?