Bubz27
No I won’t change your tag line
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2009
- Messages
- 22,066
Can INEOS now sponsor our shirts for whatever they like?
No. But not because of the rules.So Ineos can sponsor United for silly money now then?
Or is this going to be like United not being able to sign a player from Nice even though every other club can buy players from their sister clubs?
Yeah it seems it's not that big an update given the new rules are still being assessed?So the Premier League are basically claiming that the tribunal have ruled the APT1 laws as void and unlawful, but they actually haven't done that yet for the amended laws that APT Case 2 is about so until then these rules remain in place until that hearing.
So again both sides are coming out claiming different things. There's a lot of bright people in that room, so how hard is it just to come out with a definitive ruling on APT's in general?!
Honestly, the Premier League aren't evoking much confidence that their strategy and judgements have been right through all this.
Let's call it The Championship.In few years a breakaway league will be formed with non-entry to state owned clubs.
Let's call it The Championship.
If the first thing they do is kick out the state owned clubs, I'm all for it.Maybe there is a solution to letting the PL continually mismanage football, we could have a government appointee set rules and guidelines for the administration of the game. We need a catchy title though? Radiator? Refrigerator? Regulator?
I like it. The Championslips.Let's call it The Championship.
Wasn't this already said months ago hence the amendments made?
Not sure this is relevant to 115 but maybe a broader sign of how little power the PL has over sponsors nowadays.
Wasn't this already said months ago hence the amendments made?
Not sure this is relevant to 115 but maybe a broader sign of how little power the PL has over sponsors nowadays.
Good. Everyone involved in this fiasco should be ashamed of themselves.In few years a breakaway league will be formed with non-entry to state owned clubs.
Which is a nonsense because it’s a voluntary group and democratically voted rules.I suppose it's a decent sign of how naive they were in the first place and how little it matters that clubs agree on a set of rules when those rules can always be challenged and dismissed afterwards.
Which is a nonsense because it’s a voluntary group and democratically voted rules.
True - but you still can’t have rules that break the law
Tell that to Judas Priest.True - but you still can’t have rules that break the law
In a separate case from my understanding. If they could somehow do this for the years they are under investigation for I guess it would be relevant.I thought it was relevant because it was one of the complaints City were putting in about the league rules?
What law has been broken though? Anti-competition? Really struggle to see how that applies here and if it does we may as well all give up now.True - but you still can’t have rules that break the law
Let’s hope. I’d take the Geordies over City any day and the league is in its death throes anyway!City do realise that they are just laying the foundations for Newcastle blowing them out of the water, and then the likely demise of the PL.
In a separate case from my understanding. If they could somehow do this for the years they are under investigation for I guess it would be relevant.
Let’s hope. I’d take the Geordies over City any day and the league is in its death throes anyway!
So Ineos can sponsor United for silly money now then?
Or is this going to be like United not being able to sign a player from Nice even though every other club can buy players from their sister clubs?
I’d say it’s inevitable now. We are one more news headline away from football being dead and I will be damned if I will support a league that’s nothing but a toy for the mega rich.I'd rather hope for the PL growing a pair of testicles and fighting this tooth and nail.
The death of the PL because of State ownership will be a very sad thing.