FFP

[RichardBatchelor]

It's just a point in time. Like it or not, the Premier League is 32 years old now which means you'd need to be around 40 to even remember the old first division days. He could have said "highest finish in 30 years" but "joint highest finish in Premier League history is just as correct and relevant. The point of his piece was to emphasise how long it's been since we finished 4th, he wasn't attempting to write off our history before 1992.

Another point in time that should be used as a reference point is 2003. Since Abramovic pumped his dirty money into Chelsea and latterly we have the oil state clubs  everything has changed. Trophies are almost impossible to win now and we have the FA Cup final on Saturday which I want both teams to lose. It's like being forced to choose having my foreskin stapled to the floor or having my nuts shaved with a cheese grater.

Is the foreskin City or United though? Need to specify.

[Brazilian Villain]

When you're contextualising an achievement like breaking the top 4, I'd say it makes far more sense to do it in a Premier League era, as the game has changed at such a pace. We're all accountants now.

You wish!

[edgysatsuma89]

It's just a point in time. Like it or not, the Premier League is 32 years old now which means you'd need to be around 40 to even remember the old first division days. He could have said "highest finish in 30 years" but "joint highest finish in Premier League history is just as correct and relevant. The point of his piece was to emphasise how long it's been since we finished 4th, he wasn't attempting to write off our history before 1992.

Another point in time that should be used as a reference point is 2003. Since Abramovic pumped his dirty money into Chelsea and latterly we have the oil state clubs  everything has changed. Trophies are almost impossible to win now and we have the FA Cup final on Saturday which I want both teams to lose. It's like being forced to choose having my foreskin stapled to the floor or having my nuts shaved with a cheese grater.

Is the foreskin City or United though? Need to specify.

If you can find my foreskin, I'll staple it to the floor. May be in a pickle jar somewhere.

[Brazilian Villain]

If you can find my foreskin, I'll staple it to the floor. May be in a pickle jar somewhere.

Sorry for your loss.

[edgysatsuma89]

If you can find my foreskin, I'll staple it to the floor. May be in a pickle jar somewhere.

Sorry for your loss.

Thanks BV 🥲

[Ads]

I didnt realise that the burden of proof for Man City at CAS was "comfortable satisfaction". No wonder they got away with it with such nebulous garbage more akin to a Trip Advisor review than a legal burden.

When the time eventually comes for them to face the music here, it will be on balance of probabilities. Any casual reading of some of the documentary evidence would indicate to me years worth of hiding equity as sponsorship and should they be my client and wish to rely on witness evidence they did at CAS, my eyebrows might just rise so high they'd fall off my head. It would be useful to reacquaint myself with changes to CPR 81 if I was sat the other side of the argument too, in the event the witness evidence was relied upon.

[pablo_picasso]

I didnt realise that the burden of proof for Man City at CAS was "comfortable satisfaction". No wonder they got away with it with such nebulous garbage more akin to a Trip Advisor review than a legal burden.

When the time eventually comes for them to face the music here, it will be on balance of probabilities. Any casual reading of some of the documentary evidence would indicate to me years worth of hiding equity as sponsorship and should they be my client and wish to rely on witness evidence they did at CAS, my eyebrows might just rise so high they'd fall off my head. It would be useful to reacquaint myself with changes to CPR 81 if I was sat the other side of the argument too, in the event the witness evidence was relied upon.

And didnt they out their own lawyer on the panel, or something?

[Ads]

New PSR rules likely to be agreed next week. Extra £20-30m of permitted losses. Should keep JJ.

[dalians umbrella]

New PSR rules likely to be agreed next week. Extra £20-30m of permitted losses. Should keep JJ.

Pass the source please

[pablo_picasso]

New PSR rules likely to be agreed next week. Extra £20-30m of permitted losses. Should keep JJ.

That is some good news. More sensible than it was anyways.

Hopefully that puts a stop to all the articles about us having to sell to stay alive...

[VillaTim]

New PSR rules likely to be agreed next week. Extra £20-30m of permitted losses. Should keep JJ.

Pass the source please

Red or Brown  .

[dalians umbrella]

New PSR rules likely to be agreed next week. Extra £20-30m of permitted losses. Should keep JJ.

Pass the source please

Red or Brown  .

HPSR

[PaulWinch again]

New PSR rules likely to be agreed next week. Extra £20-30m of permitted losses. Should keep JJ.

£20-30m on the last year or on each year?

[Brazilian Villain]

New PSR rules likely to be agreed next week. Extra £20-30m of permitted losses. Should keep JJ.

£20-30m on the last year or on each year?

I'd imagine it's an increase from £105m to £125-135m of losses over a 3 year period.

[PaulWinch again]

Right thanks, is this being reported anywhere?