Gemmill 42030 Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 Aye totally. It's the idiotic rules that are to blame though. The sooner we can get ourselves to a position where we can comfortably operate without falling foul of them, the better. But we wouldn't have made anything like the progress we have if we hadn't taken the risks that have put us the wrong side of them. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTF 7009 Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 Surely we will now absolutely piss in the PSR. If it's still close then I guess as much as it is still frustrating it makes the business we just conducted under duress even more impressive. Nottingham Forest should be a much better option for Anderson to get playing time. Minteh is a tough one, especially as it's likely we will sell Almiron and there would have been great opportunity for him here. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBlue 687 Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 so have you guys done enough to pass PSR ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 42030 Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 Sounds like we think so, but won't know for certain til Jan next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeys Fist 41165 Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 6 minutes ago, LondonBlue said: you guys 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10335 Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 7 minutes ago, LondonBlue said: so have you guys done enough to pass PSR ? c£70m, much of it is profit. We should be golden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBlue 687 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 20 hours ago, The Fish said: c£70m, much of it is profit. We should be golden. I genuinely hope you are. As a City fan we obviously have our own issues, but if i was a fan of a club nowhere near PSR issues (i'd have named one but i'm not sure i safely can) i'd be well unhappy with all these "swap" deals to make clubs compliant. I'd be like, "why did we bother following the rules when other clubs bypass the rules with these deals". Villa having to sell one of their best players in Douglas Luiz was just wrong. It actually makes me mad and i'm pretty relaxed on most things. My anger at that isn't even softened by City having a sell on clause on him. These swaps just go to show how inept the PL is. 1. The rules are wrong. 2. They don't work. I believe clubs should have a positive bottom line and thats it. A bit like how you or i live our lives, a mortgage is fine but maxing out the credit cards is bad. That's roughly how football should be. Nothing wrong with gifts from the family. When my parents pass on, i would hope that i would be allowed to spend any inheritance or if a wealthy uncle bought me a flash car. Football should be the same. What i'm saying is that i should be worried about your spending power, but thanks to PSR i don't have to yet. And thats wrong. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 29211 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 They were talking about Aston Villa on the radio yesterday. They've just had their best ever PL season and are playing in the CL next season. Now they've been forced to sell one of their best players, aren't likely to get out of their CL group and are highly unlikely to finish top 4 again next season. All because they aren't allowed to invest further. It's nonsensical and damages the PL 'brand' internationally. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 42030 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 The PL wrote to all clubs after the dodgy swap deals were going through last week, to say that the deals would be investigated for fair market value transgressions. Nowt will come of it, I'm sure. They just couldn't be seen to not do anything whilst clubs were openly taking the piss out of their rules. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 4227 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 That Chelsea hotel shit needs investigating. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 42030 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 7 minutes ago, NJS said: That Chelsea hotel shit needs investigating. It's still not clear to me whether they've actually got away with that. Am I right in thinking that it'll fall into the PSR calc for the June 30 that's just passed? So we'll find out around Jan or so next year whether it's been accepted by the PL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrRaspberryJam 548 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 21 minutes ago, NJS said: That Chelsea hotel shit needs investigating. Someone dropped a shite in Chelsea's hotel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10335 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 37 minutes ago, LondonBlue said: I genuinely hope you are. As a City fan we obviously have our own issues, but if i was a fan of a club nowhere near PSR issues (i'd have named one but i'm not sure i safely can) i'd be well unhappy with all these "swap" deals to make clubs compliant. I'd be like, "why did we bother following the rules when other clubs bypass the rules with these deals". Villa having to sell one of their best players in Douglas Luiz was just wrong. It actually makes me mad and i'm pretty relaxed on most things. My anger at that isn't even softened by City having a sell on clause on him. These swaps just go to show how inept the PL is. 1. The rules are wrong. 2. They don't work. I believe clubs should have a positive bottom line and thats it. A bit like how you or i live our lives, a mortgage is fine but maxing out the credit cards is bad. That's roughly how football should be. Nothing wrong with gifts from the family. When my parents pass on, i would hope that i would be allowed to spend any inheritance or if a wealthy uncle bought me a flash car. Football should be the same. What i'm saying is that i should be worried about your spending power, but thanks to PSR i don't have to yet. And thats wrong. I don't think you'll get any dissent on here. We are all only too aware that there has been a scramble to stymie any progress we might enjoy. Other clubs are getting caught in the cross fire (like Villa), but we're very much the cause of all these rules against who sponsors you, who you can and cannot sell your players to, etc. What was PSR's remit? To discourage reckless ownership, right? Make sure Premier League clubs were run in a sustainable way. And to prevent some wealthy owner from spending whatever they liked thereby eroding any sense of fairness and competition from the league. It was also supposed to prevent the inflation of player fees We still have reckless owners, some clubs are still not run in a sustainable way, wealthy owners are still spending whatever they like and player fees are still inflating. It needs an independent regulator to step in and codify a practical set of rules to govern spending, salaries, debt and sustainability. The established teams have successfully applied pressure on the PL to stop any threat to the status quo. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBlue 687 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 17 minutes ago, The Fish said: I don't think you'll get any dissent on here. We are all only too aware that there has been a scramble to stymie any progress we might enjoy. Other clubs are getting caught in the cross fire (like Villa), but we're very much the cause of all these rules against who sponsors you, who you can and cannot sell your players to, etc. What was PSR's remit? To discourage reckless ownership, right? Make sure Premier League clubs were run in a sustainable way. And to prevent some wealthy owner from spending whatever they liked thereby eroding any sense of fairness and competition from the league. It was also supposed to prevent the inflation of player fees We still have reckless owners, some clubs are still not run in a sustainable way, wealthy owners are still spending whatever they like and player fees are still inflating. It needs an independent regulator to step in and codify a practical set of rules to govern spending, salaries, debt and sustainability. The established teams have successfully applied pressure on the PL to stop any threat to the status quo. it failed massively to prevent the inflation of player fees. some examples. Virgil Van Dyke. ( forget the fact that Liverpool were caught tapping him up and had to wait to get him as a result ) we were in for him, but Liverpool set a world record for a defender.. We walked away. Cartel 1 New Money 0. Fred. We had a deal agreed with player and club. Man U offered substantially more, more than he was worth, and the club and player changed their mind. Cartel 2 New Money 0. Sanchez. Arsenal and the player accepted our bid. Man U came in with a late bid and money talked. Cartel 3 New Money 0. Harry Maguire. Same story. New Money Man City continually walk away if a player goes over our valuation. Think i'll start a thread on bluemoon on this subject as there are loads more that i can't remember their names and can't be bothered looking up. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohhh_yeah 2884 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 36 minutes ago, LondonBlue said: it failed massively to prevent the inflation of player fees. some examples. Virgil Van Dyke. ( forget the fact that Liverpool were caught tapping him up and had to wait to get him as a result ) we were in for him, but Liverpool set a world record for a defender.. We walked away. Cartel 1 New Money 0. Fred. We had a deal agreed with player and club. Man U offered substantially more, more than he was worth, and the club and player changed their mind. Cartel 2 New Money 0. Sanchez. Arsenal and the player accepted our bid. Man U came in with a late bid and money talked. Cartel 3 New Money 0. Harry Maguire. Same story. New Money Man City continually walk away if a player goes over our valuation. Think i'll start a thread on bluemoon on this subject as there are loads more that i can't remember their names and can't be bothered looking up. "New Money Man City" acquired the club in 2008 and now around £1.7 billion in transfers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBass 2538 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 1 hour ago, MrRaspberryJam said: Someone dropped a shite in Chelsea's hotel? Glass coffee table in reception apparently, then stacked a bunch of brochures on top. Where were you on the night of the June 7th? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobinRobin 10587 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 3 hours ago, ewerk said: They were talking about Aston Villa on the radio yesterday. They've just had their best ever PL season and are playing in the CL next season. Now they've been forced to sell one of their best players, aren't likely to get out of their CL group and are highly unlikely to finish top 4 again next season. All because they aren't allowed to invest further. It's nonsensical and damages the PL 'brand' internationally. And also impacts on the European calculations for additional places in the Champions League. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBlue 687 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 1 hour ago, ohhh_yeah said: "New Money Man City" acquired the club in 2008 and now around £1.7 billion in transfers! not sure of your point there. my point is essentially that some clubs overpay thus pushing prices up. whereas others like us, walk away at a pre-determined price. We walked from a fair few overpriced holding midfielders before settling on Rodri. Similar before settling on Ruben Dias. but of course we've spent a lot in total, as have others. that's partly why we've won a lot (but it's clearly Pep too) You have to do that to get to the top. Which is why in the last 5 years we're now being outspent by you, arsenal, chelsea, man united and even liverpool ( source ) Statista reckons we've spent €1.59b ( £1.7b ) and Transfermarkt reckons our squad is worth €1.38b so money well spent i'd say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohhh_yeah 2884 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 466 million euros. Nov. 15, 2023 "Manchester City, the Premier League’s dominant team for much of the past decade, announced on Wednesday that it had spent more on player salaries last season than any team in British football history, paying out more than $500 million as it claimed English and European championships." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBlue 687 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 5 minutes ago, ohhh_yeah said: 466 million euros. Nov. 15, 2023 "Manchester City, the Premier League’s dominant team for much of the past decade, announced on Wednesday that it had spent more on player salaries last season than any team in British football history, paying out more than $500 million as it claimed English and European championships." yep, the most in history will likely go up year on year. i wonder what percentage of that was win bonuses given we won the treble. record revenues, record wages, record trophy haul. money reinvested in the club, not withdrawn probably worth noting that our wage bill this year is being reported at £200m which compares favorably to man uniteds £205m, Of course both clubs might need to add bonuses to those totals yet. i'm sure the newcastle picture will be similar once you successfully navigate the cartels blockades. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 33830 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 10 hours ago, ewerk said: They were talking about Aston Villa on the radio yesterday. They've just had their best ever PL season and are playing in the CL next season. Now they've been forced to sell one of their best players, aren't likely to get out of their CL group and are highly unlikely to finish top 4 again next season. All because they aren't allowed to invest further. It's nonsensical and damages the PL 'brand' internationally. A bit like Leicester. They couldn’t kick on after winning the league and were a bit of a joke in the CL iirc. Which as well as being unfair, got them into the strife which saw them relegated eventually. And as Robin mentions re Villa, would have had negative implications in terms of the PL Uefa coefficient. It’s not really surprising the rules are a mess when they’ve been designed by a few clubs trying to keep themselves from being challenged by any new contenders 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 33830 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 (edited) Actually scratch that last bit. I checked and they made the quarter finals of the CL. which shows how much attention I gave it the year we were in the championship. But they still weren’t really able to invest as much as their owner would have liked and slowly stagnated as a result Edited July 2 by Alex 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 8506 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 33 minutes ago, Alex said: Actually scratch that last bit. I checked and they made the quarter finals of the CL. which shows how much attention I gave it the year we were in the championship. But they still weren’t really able to invest as much as their owner would have liked and slowly stagnated as a result Then he came a chopper, erm cropper, cropper I meant cropper 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 33830 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 2 minutes ago, Toonpack said: Then he came a chopper, erm cropper, cropper I meant cropper 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 21191 Posted July 2 Share Posted July 2 2 hours ago, Toonpack said: Then he came a chopper, erm cropper, cropper I meant cropper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now