Ooooh. this could be a fun thread. What was the overspend this period for Everton. Was it more or less than Forest?
I mean there's arguments as to weather the punishments are based on how much is overspent? It's made up on a whim is what it looks like. There's also arguments as to if Everton are being done for the same crime twice......i.e double jeopardy? Likewise it's ****e that Forrest are only allowed a £60m loss because they are newly promoted. Its all bollox. What is crystal clear is football authorities are not fit to run the leagues and continental competitions effectively. They are simply there for the benefit of the TV Companies and to make money from selling broadcasting. On the one hand, You have clubs going to the wall because they can't make money, on the other hand you have transfer windows (restricting trade) and PSR (restricting trade). You have seeded competitions to try and prevent the established order playing each other in the early rounds and getting knocked out, simply because a champions league final of Anderlecht V Grasshoppers wouldn't pull in the TV audiences. Same can be said for FA Cup and League Cup. Everyone should start at same round once the competition starts. If your in Europe - tough ****. In addition you shouldn't be able to change rules mid season. The real funny one is going to come when nobody wants to buy a big club because they're not allowed to sponsor them anymore. Nobody complained when we had Fat Mike plastering his tat shop around the place for nothing.
I still think your idea of escrow (is that spelt right) is the future. I think that protects the clubs and allows the investors to spend. FFP is a farce or whatever it is going to become.
who really knows, as the rules appear to be made up as they like. If we get more than Forest it’s clearly an agenda.
Oh dear…. https://www.footballinsider247.com/newcastle-united-could-now-accept-alexander-isak-offer-sources/
it's amazing what **** you can find on there https://www.facebook.com/insiderfootball https://www.facebook.com/insiderfoo...c9EEG2ZJD6SQtEzWJvCNeGzykjbhtFXes3Bn4PAQqAWtl
I'd take the 100 million and run because he's never fit and has some absolutely dreadful overall performances. I'd rather sell him than Guimareas that's for sure.
If sales are required to assist raise funds then we would be next to stupid to sell the likes of Bruno, Isak and Botman. You don’t improve by getting rid of your best players. You improve by getting rid of your worst players. If we need to sell then we should look to be selling the likes of Longstaff, Wilson and Almiron. They won’t raise as much but should be sufficient to purchase 2 to 3 next level players and invest in promising youngsters. It would also give a message as to the aims of the Club which is important, firstly, to the current top players we have, secondly, to players we are looking to purchase and, thirdly, to the fans.
