The rich pay more tax because they have to.The rich in this country pay more tax, because they can afford to.
The rich pay more tax because they have to.The rich in this country pay more tax, because they can afford to.
The rich pay more tax because they have to.
Everything you state above can be totally dismissed by the realpolitik of actual events.
And you really don’t have any excuse to be drawing such false frankly self congratulatory analysis after so many weeks since this Turkey was shot. You’ve always been on the wrong side of this.
Football is not broken. The rich can risk their money in a club but they can lose it too. Look at the venkys and so on. But you can’t lock in success via a Cartel, You can’t have a sporting competition without jeopardy, and you can’t have your crackpot super league.
Football is not broken? you can say that with a strait face?
- United (one of the two biggest clubs in the world) can't afford to compete with City & Chelsea
- Germany & Italy have been one horse races for a decade+, France more recently
- Spain has been a two horse race for eternity, with Atletico hoping for the occasional disaster season.
- Someone did the math, ~87% of all the trophies go to a certain set of clubs.
A whole host of sports have competition without jeopardy, and again, nothing in the domestic leagues changed.
Real question, if it was such a brick idea, if it was so absolutely going to fail, why the reaction? why did you, EPL, FA, UEFA, FIFA, Sky, BT wet the bed at the mere thought of it? why not let the clubs fudge off, go crash and burn in their "competition everyone would get bored of"?
To be continued .. it will happen, the question the next time around is will we be included ..
You can sort all that with a wage cap. Say wages can be up to 70% of turnover up to a max of £200m. For each point you go over is a point deducted. Have the other countries match suit, suddenly the games more competitive.
Champions league 50% of a countries tv rights is given to that countries fa to distribute amongst the leagues.
Scrap parachute payments. Instead have a wage level for each league. Anything over that for a player 50% is considered a league bonus, you get relegated you lose that league bonus. So if the prem wage level for a player was £40k. But west ham gave a player a £100k contract. His prem bonus would be £30k. If they got relegated the players wage would automatically be cut from £100k a week to £70k a week.
If the will is there we can make changes that are a lot fairer that will secure the futures of all clubs.
UEFA have already had to accept that they cannot win a legal battle against City in order to restrict what is counted as genuine revenue.You can sort all that with a wage cap. Say wages can be up to 70% of turnover up to a max of £200m. For each point you go over is a point deducted. Have the other countries match suit, suddenly the games more competitive.
Champions league 50% of a countries tv rights is given to that countries fa to distribute amongst the leagues.
Scrap parachute payments. Instead have a wage level for each league. Anything over that for a player 50% is considered a league bonus, you get relegated you lose that league bonus. So if the prem wage level for a player was £40k. But west ham gave a player a £100k contract. His prem bonus would be £30k. If they got relegated the players wage would automatically be cut from £100k a week to £70k a week.
If the will is there we can make changes that are a lot fairer that will secure the futures of all clubs.
UEFA have already had to accept that they cannot win a legal battle against City in order to restrict what is counted as genuine revenue.
What makes you think the PL would fare any better?
UEFA have already had to accept that they cannot win a legal battle against City in order to restrict what is counted as genuine revenue.
What makes you think the PL would fare any better?
Howany votes do they need for that? I can think of at least 3 FFP cheats that will vote against it - probably more hoping for a sugar daddy take over. Why would the independent regulator be any better at fighting City's lawyers tham CAS?The problem with city and cas was the timeframe of the offence. Uefas lawyer spent all their effort to argue the court to accept that it was 5 years ago and admissable. The court accepted that but then uefa wanted to use the 2 years prior as part of the 3 year. The judge said no. So it got thrown out.
It's why uefa are going to change it. The uk is introducing an independent regulator. If we make it law, cas can't do nothing.
Howany votes do they need for that? I can think of at least 3 FFP cheats that will vote against it - probably more hoping for a sugar daddy take over. Why would the independent regulator be any better at fighting City's lawyers tham CAS?
Edit:
The problem with CAS was that City's lawyers were better and working with an endless supply of cash to fight with. If it wasn't the timeframe it would have been any one of a number of loopholes.
If the independent regulator makes it a rule, votes wont matter.
Not saying it will happen. Just that it could and should.
What is the independent regulator? Is this something you think will come out of the supposed fan-led review?
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-announces-expert-panel-for-fan-led-review-of-football
In addition, they will assess if there is a need for an independent football regulator, charged with implementing regulation and compliance, and how that could work within the existing framework provided by the Football Association, Premier League and English Football League.
Thanks. Must admit I'll be surprised if the government goes as far as that but we shall see.
As i said. Have no idea if any of it will happen, but it could and should.
This is probably the best opportunity to change the game we'll ever have.
The mixture of covid and the esl has shown the need for change. Whether the will is there to follow through i don't know.
There was in the 80's with the taylor report.
We'll see.
I meant I'd be surprised if the government even went as far as the independent regulator route, never mind the steps you set out then being taken - I agree change is needed however, just not sure how we get there.
I meant I'd be surprised if the government even went as far as the independent regulator route, never mind the steps you set out then being taken - I agree change is needed however, just not sure how we get there.
I don't see it happening, because any real review of the game needs to address the City & Chelsea issue.
City is the media's darling, the saviours of English football, the club with a soul that worked so hard against the odds to achieve success the right way ..
Sadowitz is the guvnor. Seen him live three times, never disappoints.I've mate who is a season ticket holder at utd. Good guy, very level headed and complimentary of what City are doing for Manchester with the money they pumping in to the area.
But follows up by paraphrasing Jerry Sadowitz comparing them to Jimmy Saville. If they are doing that much good they must have loads to cover up.
Football is not broken? you can say that with a strait face?
- United (one of the two biggest clubs in the world) can't afford to compete with City & Chelsea
- Germany & Italy have been one horse races for a decade+, France more recently
- Spain has been a two horse race for eternity, with Atletico hoping for the occasional disaster season.
- Someone did the math, ~87% of all the trophies go to a certain set of clubs.
A whole host of sports have competition without jeopardy, and again, nothing in the domestic leagues changed.
Real question, if it was such a brick idea, if it was so absolutely going to fail, why the reaction? why did you, EPL, FA, UEFA, FIFA, Sky, BT wet the bed at the mere thought of it? why not let the clubs fudge off, go crash and burn in their "competition everyone would get bored of"?
To be continued .. it will happen, the question the next time around is will we be included ..