Match Day Thread General matchday thread.

Yes completely different. Remarkable how after all this time people don't understand that.

 

Can see Masters going soon though. Beggars belief that a multi billion pound organisation wouldn't consider the legality of regulations before introducing them. This will cost all clubs a huge wedge.

Wonder if Liverpool and United will get to vet the new person again.

 

Do people actually understand the charges, got to be honest mate I've not paid the slightest bit of interest to any of it, I just see the headline and know it makes good Sucky bait - thought that was the rules on here.

 

Some dude on here still smarting over being classed as a low cat poster….

 

@FosseFilberto

 

Don’t care or have any knowledge of the laws or rules. As long as I can laugh at fans who I don’t know but who support a club I detest. That’s the football spirit

 

Snitches get bitches

 

Tags don't work so I'm told.

 

please log in to view this image

 

The problem is they are separate, but when 115 are revenue based and city have been restricted on building revenue for 3 years via unlawful APT rules then it's basically a closed book.

 

So what you are saying is the PL could be sued by clubs, not just Man City doing the suing, for restricting revenue through unlawful rules?

 

Absolutely, I mean have other clubs been refused certain sponsorships in the last 3 years?

Everton, Forest and Leicester might not be too pleased either.

Masters just talks out his arse, and he's clearly dug himself and the PL into a great big deep hole.

 

Most of the charges are unrelated to these rules though and predate them.

 

Anything based on PSR in those 3 years will be up in smoke. I'm not sure about before though, but my guess is the Pls entire PSR case will collapse.

 

I think Libby is desperate for City to get charged...I can just sense it.

 

HHHHHAAAAAASSS ANYONE SEEN SUCKY

 

Well that last bit is a different debate. I've long thought that the financial fair play regulations wouldn't stand up to legal scrutiny should somebody challenge them.

But the 115 are nothing to do with the APT stuff as far as I'm aware and predate those rules even existing.

 

Not in the slightest, I just don't see how charges nothing to do with these rules will be affected by this decision.

I've always been against these rules and want them scrapped. In no other walks of life can owners be limited to how much they can invest into their business. It ****ing stinks.

Plus the meltdown when they get off will be hilarious.