I remember when City got into Europe for fair play and we got in for getting into the semis of the FA cup. Glad they don't do that **** anymore, or Man U may have been getting into Europe for losing.
For anyone to stay in the Prem they need to be aiming for around 36 points, so that's 10 wins and 6 draws. Forest did stay up with 32 points one season, but you are really pushing your luck. Teams that stayed up with say 8 or 9 wins, usually had the number of draws in double figures. So if you beat the bottom three teams home and away, it leaves you with 2-4 more teams you need to beat. Then making up the difference with draws. In the lower leagues ie L1 you normally need around 51 points, but they play an extra 8 games (24 points). Man Utd are well clear of the bottom three by 14 points as it stands. So in short the bottom three teams were absolute dogshit. Be interesting to see if the three teams that come up for next season can offer anything more substantial to avoid that yoyo effect. My lot could be playing all three of this seasons bottom teams in 2026/27 if they decide to freefall, as does happen sometimes....Leicester being the most likely.
There will obviously be changes, so it's not going to be just the same bunch of wasters. No Europe, way fewer mid week games. I'd say par is top six, domestic trophy, back into europe at EL level. Which is what Ten Hag used to manage. The bloke has to aim high, or he's the next one for the axe, the knives will be out quickly enough. Season after that, higher again.
Good luck with that - the only thing that could put us down another division will be the PSR nonsense... Obviously our Billionaire owners can't afford to sustain us ... meanwhile Manchester United will pay more in interest than our breach of the nonsensical rather arbitrary loss parameters currently in force ... and Chelsea will sell sacks of Chelsea branded Unicorn manure to.... errrrrr ... Chelsea ... in order to boost their commercial income by sufficient billions to avoid any sanctions ... What a complete pile of ... Unicorn manure
It's going to require some excellent business and a bit of luck. Not being in Europe is a big boost to league form but top 6 is going to be tough. Obviously Liverpool, Arsenal and Man City are the top 3 and hard to dislodge but behind that Villa, Chelsea, Newcastle all look pretty strong (though with Chelsea that can be a touch fleeting). You'll be top 10 and I can see a 7-8th spot and getting into Europe and I'd be more willing to put money on you winning a trophy next season than us but you have so many bang average players at the moment whenever I see you play (which isn't often in fairness). For comparison I look at Palace (12th place) and think I'd happily have Eze, Wharton, Mateta, Guehi or Lacroix at Newcastle. Maybe it's just recency bias and simply how bad you've been, maybe the players you've been linked with up front will turn you around (and I kind of hope they do as watching ****ing Americans suck the life out of Man Utd hasn't been fun) but even in the middle of the park your team look par and your goal-keeper is obviously a shambles. I think Amorim will get about 8th next year and can then improve on that. I just don't know if he'll get more time than that.
I’ve just been listening to Simon Jordan talking about Leicester and now I understand a lot more. He said they’ve got a guy called Nick De Marco and he’s absolutely ****ed them. He’s tried to be clever by finding his way out down to jurisdictions on, by who and when they could be charged but now all the loopholes have been closed and the punishment will be severe because that will also be classed as aggravating factors. Apparently they wormed their way out of the championship one because they knew they’d be told to sell players etc and they didn’t want to do that. In the end it’s all been pointless and all they’ve got is a single season in the premiership out of it. Cheating bastards it sounds like and they could be ****ed for a long time, now. We’ll see.
Nick DeMarco is the Godfather of sports law, so if he can't get them out of it, they're ****ed. I can't recall him losing a case so I'll be surprised.
He is the bollocks when it comes to these things. They’ll agree on a slap on the wrists like Sheffield United got. Maybe a bit more as it sounds a bit worse but we aren’t talking a Luton kind of punishment.
Can’t even remember what type of punishment was dished out to Luton. I don’t really care if they’re punished or not tbh. It was just interesting listening to it all being broken down bit by bit about what’s been happening.
The club was docked 30 points at the start of the season; 10 by The Football Association for irregular matters involving player transfers, and 20 by the Football League for breaking the rules on exiting administration. Got 56 points minus the 30
It's going to be interesting to see what happens. As the others said Nick De Marco is the top dog for all these things but there is an added issue I can see Leicester having. When Newcastle employed De Marco it was as a reaction to the Premier Leagues "new" rules and trying to see if they were legally enforceable (how our owner was defined for the fit and proper person test and then all sponsorship rules that were brought in after we were purchased). Although Newcastle "won" both cases the onus was on the league to show not only that their tests were legally correct but also that they were reasonable (boring bit: under administrative law you not only have to have the power to make a law and have followed the correct process (substative and procedural ultra vires) but you also have to show it was reasonable to do so - just because you can make a law doesn't mean you should). Essentially, it was up to the league to show they should have done what they did. They failed to do so convincingly. The same is true of the Man City charges (To my understanding) at the moment. Before they look at whether Man City breached the rules the first thing is to establish if the rules should have existed and that's up to the league to argue. With Leicester the laws being questioned are already established and have been enforced a number of times. The league doesn't have to show any of the above, it is up to Leicester to show they didn't breach these rules, or that the rules shouldn't apply to them, and I assume the league(s) believe they have compelling evidence that they did and they do. I'd have thought that was much harder to wriggle out of, last time they relied on showing the rules didn't actually apply to themselves on a technicality (there was no suggestion the rules shouldn't exist or that they hadn't breached them). Honestly, I'd be very surprised if they wriggled out of it again but if anyone can do it then it's Nick De Marco.
