Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

sussexpob wrote:Yes, this is ridiculous, but since when has justice not been based on cash.

indeed

Durhamfootman wrote:

sussexpob wrote:Yes, this is ridiculous, but since when has justice not been based on cash.

indeed

Sad but true.

The Premier League and Football Association also have to be acutely worried about how this case pans out if it goes to legal courts. Its very easy to see how Man City equipped with the world's best corporate lawyers (they apparently hired a guy who is earning more than Kevin De Bruyne per week) will turn the narrative from whether City breached the rulebook, to the legaltiy of that actual rulebook. Sporting rules tend to operate in complete parallel to common law principles, and the past tells us that it is very hard to justify historical conventions that ignore or are illegal when placed alongside normative rules for contracts or businesses. Bosman is a great example; once the normal football system of contracts was exposed to the highest courts, it was torn up. It wasn't legal, and was in complete opposite to the normal freedoms that employees enjoy.

Its not exacly hard to see how the Premier Leagues Profit and Sustainability model is completely against normative business law. How many other businesses are subjected to restrictions on their own shareholders or owners investing their own money for the good of a business and the purchase of assets?? It's remarkably easy in a legal sense to demonstrate why PSR is, when compared to every other sector in the economy, totally illegal when argued in the scope of normal rules. The only real restriction on investments for business comes in the form of Anti-Trust/Monopoly laws, but do the FA want to get into arguing that City's conduct should be restricted to prevent a performance monopoly? The Premier League, which distributes almost its entire revenue stream to only 20 clubs in the league, is itself a form of a monopoly.

Richard Masters, the CEO of the Premier League, was quoted a while back questioning Man City's ability to hire such legal power when doing so would also be of astronomical cost to them, which in turn would risk them overspending. This is another example of where the case fractures into insane complexity - City, quite rightly, would argue that they are well within their rights to a legal defence. The very idea of the PL sanctioning a club for defending themselves against a legal action brought by the PL themselves ends in a spiralling legal rabbit hole. That premise alone would serve as the basis of a protracted legal battle.

The Premier League isn't really itself much of an entity. All the money the Football Association generates belongs to the clubs in essence, so the PL are not fighting City with their own resources or mandate, the PL is essentially just the 20 clubs with a vote and the FA with another (who only have a veto on the governance of the PL, and not its decision making). The botton line is, if the PL want to spend 10 years and millions upon millions of pounds in a protracted and dirty legal battle, its actually the 20 PL clubs who in essence pay for it. The one laywer city are known to have hired is on a yearly wage akin to the about 20% of the FAs entire yearly profit.... So its not at all simple. The FA might want to laywer up and go to battle with City's legal dream team, but the reality is the money to pay for those lawyers is coming from grassroots football. Its coming from the pot they pay the clubs for their participation in the football league.

The FAs job is to safeguard English football interests at all levels of the game, so at what stage in the process does their role itself come into question?? Blowing the money you would distribute to impoverished League Two sides to fight a megaclub, all in the name of affirming a rule that was originally put in place to protect clubs from overspending and going bankrupt, when said club is owned by the royal family of the richest nation state in the world and someone who owns like 1-2% of all the worlds wealth....

At that point it descends into farce.

If I had to guess, there is more chance the courts will rule PSR is itself illegal and ends being disbanded, than City being banged to rights. If City are also taken to the cleaners, I wonder how long it will take for the Qatari's to go full on super league.

Haven't they just voted on changing PSR to something else?

maybe they're already thinking along your lines

Oh crikey... I wasn't expecting that

a 4-0 drubbing of Spurs and with a makeshift team too

Newcastle up to 6th place, which is where they should have been before today's match had they not thrown away 2 points conceding a stupid penalty against Everton

Joelinton signing another deal is another reason for celebration

If Gordon has been our best player this season, then Joelinton is the player we've missed the most

sussexpob wrote:Ah but yes, I forgot the rule that says Liverpool need to be given a penalty everytime they arent winning past the 75th minute, so I guess those the rules (arent they)?

It still makes me chuckle a while back that I said that to a Liverpool supporting friend, and he got really angry. I then jokingly said I predicted the penalty this week would be 86th minute....

I was bang on Thats how predictable its become. Liverpool need a goal late, you caan guarantee a dodgy penalty is coming.

Liverpool trailing 1-0 to Palace and a couple of mins to go plus 45 mins time added on or until they equalise

time to test the penalty theory

7 mins added on

7 mins are up

we're still playing

Liverpool have a free kick

not this time

Fulham beating WH 2-0 deep into stoppage time, which is further good news for Newcastle, who will remain in 6th place

Bayer Neverkusen can become Bayer Finallykusen tonight, with 5 matches still to play

Durhamfootman wrote:Bayer Neverkusen can become Bayer Finallykusen tonight, with 5 matches still to play

And hopefully that Boniface goal will be the one that seals it...

Autrefois unioniste, toujours unioniste!!!!

Arsenal concede 2 late goals and are just minutes away from handing the title race advantage to Man City

Leverkusen 5-0 Bremen

Ended Munich 12 year reign in style.

sussexpob wrote:

Durhamfootman wrote:Bayer Neverkusen can become Bayer Finallykusen tonight, with 5 matches still to play

And hopefully that Boniface goal will be the one that seals it...

Autrefois unioniste, toujours unioniste!!!!

wrong thread, of course, but 5-0 is the way to do it

the FA's announcement that it is to scrap FA cup replays from round 1 feels remarkably harsh, to me, on the lower league teams for whom the early rounds and potential replays represent the kind of cash windfall that can help sustain them for years. They seem to be citing the expansion of the CL as part of the reason, which suggests to me that the potential revenue for lower league clubs is to be cut to facilitate and further enable the top clubs to feed their faces

maybe I'm completely wrong