there was at least a modicum of sense at times. anytime the oligarch fascist stuck his beak in (torres, shevchenko) he completely funked them up. at other times he seemed disinterested and let them get on with it as a staff. boehly and whoever we is involved is on a pure and utter organisation of spend with zero thought or strategy. buying 3 or 4 players for one postion and none for another
it's a great draw for Tyler morton and a great draw for Brighton. semi finals beckon. let's face it lads we need the fa cup to be won by a manchester club. 6th will be a Europe league slot only if its passed down from the fa cup. 7th will be conference due to utd winning the league Cup and who wants that???
Just read a stat on Chelsea, doesn't put us in great light either but with a share I feel... Real Madrid have scored more goals in England than Chelsea this year
Amnesty International asking the PL to re-examine the assurances it was given that Newcastle were not in Saudi State control with it's new owners. It comes after the Newcastle chairman, who's involved in a court case in the US, was described as "a sitting minister of the government". Richard Masters, PL chief executive, said at the time of the takeover that if it was found that there was state involvement "we can remove the consortium as owners of the club". Interesting.
there's a huge leap from state ownership to a minister of state ownership. I mean just cos trump forced everyone to use trump hotels as president of the USA doesn't mean his hotels were state owned. they were merely being corrupted state sponsored. exactly how newcaslte are being corrupted state sponsored
Sky Sports cost: £40/month BT Sport cost: £22.50/month Amazon Prime cost: £9/month Over £70/month to watch football legally in the UK. Yet both Arsenal-Everton and Liverpool-Wolves were NOT televised in the UK. No wonder illegal streams are so popular.
I think the pertinent part of the court case (the LIV golf case) is that the defence lawyers are saying that PIF "is a sovereign instrumentality of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia" and thus has sovereign immunity. If it does have sovereign immunity then it is connected to the government and therefore shouldn't be allowed to own a PL club.
I think in the US court case, they've pretty much argued that they should be except from some rules Yeah this. They've argued that they are exactly what they told the PL what they are not, essentially a state body. If so it's either a massively stupid shot in the foot or that they're so confident that the PL are so toothless that they just don't give a ****.
I mean everyone knows they are part of the state. They pretty much just said to the PL no we aren’t and crossed their fingers behind their back.
