Transfer Rumours The Great Summer Splurge Transfer Window

Think the issue on net spend over the last 5 years is starting points. We are obviously way behind Liverpool as to quality and depth of squad at that starting point.

For me it is more an issue with psr being unfit for purpose. It's not doing what it says on the tin. Ask why PIF can't invest in us or why Villa have similar issues to us.

Why were the rules changed almost immediately after our takeover? Nothing to do with financially safe guarding football clubs.

There are other ways to prevent rich owners dumping clubs when they lose interest and leaving them in a financial mire eg escrow accounts. PSR is just a mechanism now used by the Greedy Six to protect their position and its not surprising to see most are owned by Americans who are most used to protecting their sporting investments although not quite in this way.

Do you honestly think psr is fit for purpose? Do you accept that the original concept of psr could still be achieved by an alternative method which does not restrict ambition from clubs such as us, Villa and Forrest?

 

PSR is a sham. It has nothing to do with financial sustainability but more to do with preserving the status quo. They will be binned off once a club grows a pair and challenges them.

APT - There is e-mail evidence that the APT rules were only brought in to stop us. They were mentioned in the APT1 arbitration hearing. It's up to NUFC to use said evidence to pursue the PL and clubs that voted the rules in.

 

Could be very good but not a first choice yet

 

No I don’t think it’s fit for purpose. But I’m also no financial expert - the thing is, before psr there was ffp so there has always been some sort of financial restrictions.

Any rule changes has to be voted in by 14 clubs so psr wasn’t brought in to protect the big 6 otherwise the other 14 would just vote against it surely? The fact that you probably have city from the big 6 who would be happy to vote against it suggests that in your mind that 15 clubs hate psr but that’s clearly not the case.

Lower teams are clearly happy with it as well as it allows them to be somewhat competitive. Teams like Brighton, Brentford, Bournemouth who operate a certain way are obviously happy with psr as they back themselves as clubs to spend little and unearth good quality and sell high to enable to keep doing that while competing for Europe.

You need some sort of financial rules in place - is psr right? Probably not, but you can’t just have free reign as otherwise teams spend more and more to try and compete and you get 2 things, either clubs bankrupting themselves trying to compete like Leeds, or clubs ripping fans off even more looking for more money - new comps, post season tours, mid season friendlies abroad, league fixtures abroad, increase ticket prices etc.

Some sort of equal spend would be more fair maybe, or overral wage limits, but then you need it across all Europe and isn’t going to happen.

 

Stuck to County Durham man, you and your tranny outfits wouldn’t last 2 mins in Northumberland

 

So Isak is training on his own at his previous club....can't see a way back for him now.

 

We should enforce his contract. He plays for us or goes abroad. He refuses, then stick him in the reserves for three years and refuse to pay him. It should be hardball time.

 

There haven't always been financial rules. They were only first introduced in 2009'ish. So no, this is a pretty recent introduction.
Should there be rules, most definitely yes. But not so as to prevent investment and ambition. These rules prevent both.
It is a facetious argument to refer to the 14 votes. Five of the six are always going to vote to retain their monopoly. The other nine come from lower to mid table clubs not wanting us and Villa progressing and improving as that would make it a Big Eight. For those other clubs they are simply desperate to stay on the gravy train (due to the now huge drop financially if relegated). Us and Villa improving would mean those other clubs would have a 3 in 12 chance to be relegated as opposed to a 3 in 14. Those clubs again are voting for their own interests albeit those interests are on a different level to the Five. Not the best interests of football nor for psr reasons.

Again, why were the rules changed immediately after we were taken over? There's only one answer. To prevent us from improving.

Yes there needs to be financial control but its amazing no one is trying to look at any new or improved more fit for purpose rules. Also, please don't mention UEFA's planned rules which are conveniently set out so as not to impact on the so called Big Clubs but again do nothing to remove the restrictions in relation to safe investment and ambition.

 

I'd definitely prefer Samu to Ollie Watkins because of his age and resale value, we should maybe try our luck and make an offer to sign Porto's wonderkid Rodrigo Mora in a double transfer along with Samu if the Saudi's wanna flex their muscle and shut the media up.

 

Agree time to put the boot in so to speak, three years is a long time in football and he'll be 28 or so by the time his contract finishes, just tell him straight up he's going no where this summer and if he ****s around he can sit in the u21's for a few years wasting away being fined every time he refuses to train.

 

We should not give in with this. Tell him straight that he is not going to Liverpool and tell Liverpool we will not be selling him to them.

We also need to take action against his agent.

 

And Liverpool.

Takes 2 to tap up.

 

I was going to type that.

We should be all over this.

 

We already have apparently. Expect the media narrative to change soon.

 

**** Isak.

 

Christ it’s repetitive, boring and incredibly poorly handled. All of it.

 

If that floats your boat….

 

Lack of leadership within the club. Someone strong would have acted

 

I’d revoke half the press passes off these ****ing media clowns.

 

And Liverpool for tapping up.