Premier League threatens punishment for ‘fraudulent player transfers'

The cheek of Masters and his great unelected mates.

So I ask will they look into Liverpool / Man City reserves going for many millions? I very much doubt it.

Fucking Masters and his clowns.

Firstly how can they have an argument when it comes to the Dobbin deal. Come on then Masters make a case that £10m for a 21 year old former England under 19 international and premier league player who's scored in the premier league is too much. Ridiculous!

Ok we know the deal suited both parties for the purpose of PSR but so what as long as it's within the rules. It's the ridiculous rules that force clubs to do deals like this and I just cannot see anything coming of the deal, though I'd love Everton to take 'em to court if they try to do us.

If any club needs to have a think it's Newcastle who value Minteh at over £30m after buying him last season for £6.9m.

No rules have been broken in the deals between Everton and Villa so Masters and his media hacks can get stuffed.

Look at Rhiannon Brewster, £23.5M from Liverpool to Sheffield United without a Premier League goal and has stunk the place out since going there.

Investigate that, Masters.

Chelsea are still throwing money around. They got around PSR by selling a hotel to themselves and still keep the profitability of the hotels through a service company.

Friedkin may as well sell the stadium to himself for £1B, and let Everton keep all the gate money on a 200-year deal.

Ray,

Exactly mate.

According to the Telegraph via the Echo:

Now, according to the Telegraph, the Premier League has written to all 20 clubs to remind them that they will be punished for transfer activity that is deemed fraudulent. The report adds the Premier League will be able to request details from clubs on how negotiations took place, to ensure the transactions were conducted in "good faith".

If in any case the Premier League decides that a transfer was not conducted at "arm's length", they will be able to impose fair market value rules on a deal to ensure there is no "false inflation" on transfers and commercial deals.

As a result, the Premier League can demand a return of a transfer fee, in full or in part, if it is judged that the fee has been inflated and the deal was not conducted in "good faith".

Good faith... do they even know the meaning of the phrase? They are a laughing stock... how about the extension of players contracts, the sale of assets at inflated prices to themselves, or a Newcastle player being transferred to a Saudi club for an enormous fee?

The paucity of guidelines has left clubs searching for what is allowed or not. Masters is a disgrace. Instead of fixing the problem, he keeps digging deeper holes for himself.

If no rules have been broken, there's no issue and no reason to issue a warning letter.

It's all noise and trying to worry potential buyers intended to allow the elite to take the cream at low cost.

Once again, if Everton do something, it becomes an issue for Masters to investigate.

We should sue him and the Premier League for persecution and victimization.

The sooner that man and his corrupt attitude are vanquished the better.

It's clear to me that the recent transfer activity was a swap deal, masquerading as two separate transfers for PSR reasons. That's obvious; neither club would have bought these players under any other circumstances, and certainly not for the sums paid.

What's not clear to me is how this type of arrangement contravenes the rules. For all intents and purposes, these are two separate transfers. It's a loophole and we've exploited it, fair and square.

Fair market value transfer fees. Don't make me laugh.

That ship sailed a long time ago.

So the Premier League are basically saying who a club can buy and who they can sell.

Tell them to Fuck Off......... Corrupt Bastards!!

I think the one that draws the most scrutiny is Omari Kellyman: £19 million for a guy who's played 2 games and cost £600k last summer.

I suspect the Premier League are making this statement as a deterrent if anything in case other teams start doing the same thing and getting more and more outrageous deals done. The £10 million for Dobbin shouldn't be difficult to justify in the inflated world of Premier League deals.

Dobbin has played 60 professional games, 15 in the Premier League, and scored 1 Premier League goal. Brewster at the time of his £23 million move, had played 20 professional games, none in the Premier League.

Spot on, Jay 9, time to take the gloves off with these clowns.

Enough is enough.

I can recall second-rate teachers being matey with the bullies, getting them on board and cowardly colluding with them. They showed their authority with the decent kids who did their best. It is how inadequate, over-promoted nonentities operate.

The Premier League are self-serving, greedy, obsequious filth.

It's always bothered me how "nice" Everton are.

They're lauded as an institution. A good Club that is active in the community. A "proper" Club as you fine English would say.

Then! The powers that be continually go after them, making an example of them at every turn simply to send a message to the Big Boys. A message the Big Boys promptly ignore and the flaccid authorities then let slide.

Enough is enough. As Jay @ 9 says, it's time to fight back. No more Mr Nice Guy. No more appeasement. No more soft under belly.

I hope the new ownership hires attorneys and proactively sue the Premier League for defamation or some such thing. Find a charge and hit them first. It's time we put our shoulders back, stood up straight, dropped the gloves, and told the Premier League we're ready to fight and you're simply not going to fuck with us any longer.

Scorched earth. They need to know if they pick on Everton – who have done nothing wrong here within the rules at all – they will enter into a fight that will be nasty as hell.

You want to enforce your P&S rules? Then you write rules without loopholes, and don't you dare selectively attack clubs that aren't your darlings.

Fight back, Friedkin. Fight them like a cornered animal and strike swift, hard, and unrelentingly.

Ooh, areas of concern…

This is a fucking psyops campaign. One that wears big clown shoes.

If the Premier League are now going to retrospectively set ‘fair market value transfer fees', does that mean we can claim back money for the many players we have vastly over-paid for in the last few years?

Fair market value ...anyone remember how much Richard Arlison was sold to Spurs for?? £60M? Probably £15-20M short.

What a bunch of horrible clowns.

Bullies.

Err… In the meantime, any news on a date for the Man City ‘independent' hearing on their 115 charges? Is it in the diary?

Oh of course, it's got nothing to do with ‘gaining an advantage' has it? (As another £4B stadium sponsorship deal is signed with ‘the owners').

Anyway I agree with the views above, enough is enough, time for Everton to start punching back.

How about 14 Premier League teams will not start the season unless they sack Masters, rip up the PSR rule book, put pepper on it and start eating it now?

Fed up of these self-elected protectors of the Sly Six am I.

Also, what's the outcome to Man City taking the Premier League to court over restricting their income opportunities (or whatever the charge was)?

It's been a media blackout on this subject — I would love to see the Premier League get charged and found guilty themselves.

Stupid Premier League — and PSR is the problem, not clubs trying to get round the selectively applied, made-up-as-you-go, adjusted-on-the-fly rules.

Rhian Brewster's transfer fee really is the only response these clubs need.

An eerie silence and an abundance of tumbleweed accompanied the January transfer window, accusations of transfer deals being struck as if it were kids in the playground swapping football cards.

Why does Masters only rear his ugly head when he smells the little rats? I would have thought that the bigger rats would give off a much more pungent stink.

Are the Euros stealing his limelight and he's beginning to feel useless. Aw, what a shame! What a gobshite this cretin is!!!

Just take the “Football” out of the business description because whatever Masters comes up with has got nothing to do with football, it's just slimey, self-centred, egotistical bullshit. The sheister is so full of his own importance, he alone should be held in contempt for bringing the game into disrepute.

Piss off back to the gutter from whence you came, moron.

Sometimes the powers that be have got no fucking power whatsoever, and this is definitely the case here.

They opened up a can of worms, when they went after Everton, with both barrels, but it seems to have backfired, with clubs now having to watch their backs and spend less, which will slowly make an uneven playing field, even less competitive.

No English teams played in any of the major European this season, and if this isn’t a blip, it won’t be long before the rules are changed because the premier league needs their teams to be very competitive in Europe

Is the trick here the amortisation of the cost of buying a player?

Unpopular opinion here but I'm not convinced Brewster was massively overpriced. £22M possibly overcooked by up to about £5M but he looked an outstanding prospect at the time.

Liverpool pinched him as a talented youth player from Chelsea age 15 when he was already playing England U16s (where he got 4 in 4 games).

He was the top scorer at the U17 World Cup and got 20 in 23 games for England at that level. He then got 10 in 20 for Swansea in the Championship at age 19.

By comparison, we got £6M for Ellis Simms when he had only 12 months left on his contract.

Simms (at the same age as Brewster) on loan in the division above got 10 in 24 for Blackpool in the third tier and had no caps for England youth at any level.

We released him age 22 when it looked fairly clear his level was going to be Championship - albeit with the potential to return to the Premier League at some point probably through promotion.

So in a nutshell, Man Utd have complained to the Premier League about this transaction in order to force us to sell Branthwaite on the cheap.

I wouldn't sell them a virus, and if they come back for Onana, simply tell them we have no interest in doing business with them for any player.

Tony,

I agree, Masters and the rest of his team have made a complete dog's breakfast with their P&S rules and now threatening clubs about fraudulent player transfers.

Clubs in danger of falling foul of the P&S rules have seen an easy way to get round this by selling young academy players that so far haven't nailed down a regular place. I would imagine it would in most cases be impossible to prove the deals being fraudulent.

Seems they are intent to completely demolish the idea that the Premier League is the biggest and best when most clubs are more concerned about staying inside P&S rules, rather than buying the best players to improve their team.

Also. how can you allow Chelsea to sell 2 hotels to themselves? Now that is fraudulent, yet Masters has taken no action.

Also, the current Chelsea board informed the Premier League months ago that Abramovich when in charge spent money that didn't go through the books as it should have done. Again, despite the admission of guilt, nothing has been done.

Player's value is set by the club's willingness to sell and the desire of the buying club to get the player on their books.

For example, we massively overpaid for Sigurdsson, would Masters have looked at that deal then?

It is bizarre to say they know the value and worth of any player.

Time for 14 clubs to tell the Premier League Executive to pull their head in.

“So in a nutshell, Man Utd have complained to the Premier League about this transaction in order to force us to sell Branthwaite on the cheap.”

Is this a fact or just speculation?

The PSR rules force clubs to sell players they might not otherwise be in a rush to part with in order to comply. Masters & Co then say that it all looks a bit dodgy, as if these deals are only being done so as to comply with P&S rules!

Btw, I look forward to the review of the Richarlison transfer when the fee gets adjusted upwards as it was clearly distorted by the fact that the deal was rushed through in order to comply with P&S rules – as if!

Mark (34),

Pure speculation on my part, purely based on the spade principle. If it looks like a spade, and digs like a spade, then it's generally a fucking spade.

Maybe there is a way to find out who made the complaint, but I doubt it.

What is becoming more embarrassing is the standard and impartiality of the press.

The press was all about being neutral, reporting facts and providing a balanced opinion.

That's gone out through the window with journalists being in the pocket of the Sly 6. The journalists are happy to report absolute shit as facts, as they're so desperate for the crumbs to feed the articles that cater for the numbers.

David Ornstein and Co.

Ian, without meaning to contradict you, when have the press ever been fair or balanced? They've always been in the pockets of the wealthier clubs, it's just FAR more obvious now.

On a separate note, it's impossible not to be impressed by Everton's rumoured business so far this summer. We're buying young upcoming talent, rather than wasting our money on "proven", tired rubbish. For years, we've been a dumping ground for overpriced players.

Now we're looking at development. It's a wonderful break from the past. Notable that it's coming under Thelwell, who's copped quite a bit of slack from a few muppets on here, despite the fact that he's steadily reduced the average age and wage of the squad.

Even the rumours are encouraging this summer.

Lotta dummies being thrown around me thinks.

Agree with Danny 10. This was/is obviously a loophole that’s been exploited by us and other clubs to help with PSR. However, exploiting a loophole doesn’t make it wrong or illegal. Millions of tax advisers make a living doing this every day.

Up to the league to come up with a new rule to stop it going further. I’m guessing their lawyers are working overtime to draft something to put in place asap. The statement put out is a warning to clubs to stop taking the piss whilst they scramble for a concrete solution.

Ships sailed for this year with tomorrow the last day of the financial year. They’ll come up with something new no doubt and some of the clubs will again get inventive to try to get around it. Just like Chelsea offering 8 year contracts before and the league then limited the amortisation period to 5 years.

Funny to watch tho and should at least help our PSR this year.

Well done Everton (and Villa) I say.

Oh dear, any punishment would be like suing someone for dumping you by text!

Valuing the two players concerned at around £10 million isn't exploiting this particular loophole, it's simply pushing the envelope a little. A £20 million valuation... that's exploiting.

The Premier League letter, if it even exists, isn't aimed at Everton.

For those thinking we lost out on £20M for Richarlison because of PSR, then a mate who is a Spurs supporter thinks we robbed them of at least £30M if not £40M.

Don't think I would want to be the Premier League Judge who has to hear the evidence for a fair price on this one.

Good isn't it, they make the rules and now because they perceive some might be taking advantage of that rule they are spitting their dummies out.

How do they prove clubs are taking advantage intentionally? They can't just say it was done to bend the rules, it could be coincidental, couldn't it?

So Chelsea get around PSR rules by selling a hotel to themselves and because us and Villa do a deal that is good business for both clubs (and certainly for us selling under market value in the case of Dobbin) Masters and his cronies throw their toys out of the pram and have a hissy fit.

Let's wait for the ban on selling any academy players for any club that don't feature on the media favourite list, lol.

I seriously hope the government (whoever that may be in a few days time) tells the Premier League that it is not fit to manage and puts powers in place to install something fit for purpose.

Excellent! We are saved!

"the Premier League can demand a return of a transfer fee, in full or in part, if it is judged that the fee has been inflated"
Which refunds shall we ask for first? My top 3 are maybe:

Gbamin €25M
Davy Klaassen €27M
Niasse €18M

Brent 28, that is how I interpret the two steps.

Trade with a club holding roughly equal talent, switch places and adjust the books. Whether it is good business on the pitch or motivated by the books is difficult for the Premier League to sort out given their byzantine methods. And so they whine about it.

Sorry if that was stating the obvious, I'm a Yank. Which brings me to a cultural question: So you English gentlemen say “pull your head in” rather than “pull your head out (of yer ass)”?

Tom,

I would add £45M for Sigurdsson, plus what ever we paid for Bolasie, Tosun, Walcott, Maupay to that list.

Good one, Dale.

The more rules they make, the more creative the contestants. Look at the history of motor racing.

Dale @46

“Pull your head in (or out) of your ass”..

I don't hear that expression often old boy, not knowing anyone who owns an ass. But I suppose if one is desperate one could always contact a Donkey Sanctuary but I doubt if they'd allow that sort of behaviour.

Well, they keep digging and exposing their lack understanding of the game.

Clubs have always done swap deals.

They really don't know what they're doing or understand football.

Ray, opinions are like asses, everyone has one.

Dale, yes, if I understand it correctly "adjusting the books" as you put it means we could sell a player for £10m and immediately improve our profit and loss account by £10m for that year (year ending 30 June 2024 in this case).

At the same time, we buy a player for the same amount, £10m, but use amortisation so that our books for the same financial year, ending 30 June 2024, show expenditure of only, eg, £2.5M on the player we've bought.

Overall, a benefit in terms of how we look for PSR for 2024. Assuming I understand that correctly.

It's less than £2.5M, Brent. You wouldn't charge a full year's amortisation.

It would be a couple of days divide by 365.

Ian #53,

"You wouldn't charge a full year's amortisation.
It would be a couple of days divide by 365."

Not sure I follow, Ian?

I think Ian is saying, if you buy a player before the end of the financial year, then the amortisation in that first financial year would be pro-rated to the number of days remaining in that year.

I'm not convinced that's true, however. Usually with financial stuff, if you do something at any time in that one year, it counts in full, so I think (in the example of a £10M fee amortized over a 4-year contract), if it's completed before 30 June, then it counts for a full quarter of the fee, £2.5M.

However, since the new contract won't start until 1 July, there is a possibility that the whole thing is amortized over future financial years, and nothing in the financial year just ending.

All guesswork by me. Happy to be corrected.

Michael,

That was my understanding also and, despite much searching, I just can't find any reference to amortisation being calculated on a daily basis.

Ian #53 is correct although he didn't express it too clearly.

A club's accounts will generally only reflect in any financial year the length of time that a player has been on the books for that year, be it 1 day or 365.

There may be exceptions where clubs only begin to reflect a player's cost on a weekly basis but, given the cost of Premier League players, this approach would be very unlikely.

So our "swap" with Villa looks even better then!

Well, not really, Brian #58.

Accounting doesn't do swaps. Both clubs would be expected to reflect "whole" realistic selling and purchase prices in their accounts rather than the net difference.

Unless you think circa £10 million for each player was a massively inflated fee... we haven't really exploited the loophole. If the figure had been £25 million... different story.

You misunderstand me, Brendan. By not overly inflating the price/s then we've done things sensibly and well IMHO and have around £10M towards our PSR balance, will we not?

And "swap" was a figure of speech.

In a nutshell, Villa and Newcastle breathing down the big boys' necks and instead of weakening their teams, they are both finding an alternative way to keep hold of their big players.

Everton no longer having to sell Branthwaite for peanuts, to one of their darlings, has really pissed them off.

Finally, the Premier League should not be saying certain teams need to be selling players before the end of June.

Keep out of it until they receive the final accounts, if a club has miscalculated and gone over, then that's down to the club.

It does not help when the Premier League leak it to the media, then the vultures circle and put low bids in.

Brian #60

Spot on.

Thewell played a good game...yet again to be fair.

Brian #61.

Look for that wanker Jim Ratcliffe's interview. An eye-opener!

Brian #63, read his comments earlier, embarrassing!

Neil, Brian, where can we see these comments etc?

Let's extend Sir Jim's theory and give some people multiple votes in the election depending on how subjectively important or powerful they are.

Fascist twat.

Ray, from social media:

Man Utd owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe: “The Premier League need to be careful that the top 6 clubs are not disadvantaged, they don't get a reasonably strong say. At the end of the day, it's those 6 clubs that drive interest in the league, that's what the world is interested in.”

Michael 55 - it is the case of calculating amortisation on a daily basis.

For my sins I've been buying and selling g financial services businesses for the last 25 years, and dealing with intangibles and goodwill is something I know well enough. Every business we've bought has seen a daily charge of amortisation in the year of acquisition or disposal.

Most acquisitions of a good size would be calculated on a daily basis. If you're buying the work filing cabinet, then a monthly is good enough. Multi million pound intangible player contracts will be calculated daily.

EFC might have a policy to charge a full month, but that can be changed if daily is a more accurate reflection. And if they're skirting around PSR, it would make sense to charge as low as possible under accounting principles.

They might not charge any as you point out being so late in the financial year. That's indeed possible if it falls under audit materiality.

The lad from Villa cost £9m and I think he signed a 3-year contract. So £3m a year. That's either £250k a month, or £8k odd a day. The auditors would be looking for a mimimum of £8k times number of days he's been on the books. About £80k of PSR amortisation.

Apologies if this comes out wrong, or wrong thread, language etc – no offense implied or intended.

I fucking love this site and every single person that posts here. Laugh like a loon everytime.

We're back, Mortimer! The worm has turned. Fuck corruption and the dark forces of evil in every shape and form.

Hope this comes across alright, got a bit damaged.

Ricky, cracking post mate, love it!

The only bit you missed is to say Kopites are Gobshites and UTFT!

Hahaha, I was trying to get an explanation about head in or out of ass, and all having one, in, so all rs are arseholes, excluding people's loved ones obviously lol oh and UTFT!!!

Thank you, Neil. 🤣

Ricky, it's arse mate. An ass is a horse-like animal very similar to a donkey – and no, I don't mean Beto.

Yeah, couldn't write what I was trying to say, Neil (damaged).I knew I would probably mess up if posting at all tbh, let alone, consecutively, lol.

Also, I didn't even get in that kopites are gobshites either, did I — apologies, brudda blue.

Lifeline this site, will again enjoy looking in, rather than proving that I'm a moron lol, albeit an Everton one, there are a few of us around…

Will we be having a Live Forum for the PSR Transfer Deadline Day?

It's worth having a read of The Esks latest updates including reference to Utd's Ratcliffe pushing for more control for 6 clubs in determining voting rights.
Esk rightly points out that the very reason they are successful is because of the competitiveness of the Premier league itself, not as Ratcliffe would have it, due to the success of the six clubs rather than the league itself.
The league doesn't exist because of the 6 clubs, they are only successful because of the popularity of the league itself.
If you follow Ratcliffes logic, he is stating we of the lesser clubs should be thankful. That the league should be careful in how it treats the six.
Well, newsflash. The league would be a better, more competitive place without you, this symbiotic relationship is fleeting, today's top 6 will not be tomorrow's. Money doesn't always buy success.
They have more money to buy the better players, the facade of fairness of treatment has already been trodden in the mud, on the pitch and off it. The sheer scale of their transgressions leave the other 14 clubs in their wake. Any comparison of a level playing field is but a memory that never was, but now, never can be.
Tony A said in a recent post that football as we knew had gone ceased to exist. Spontaneity lost, excitement traded in for controversy on every chance, every goal, every offence.
So Mr Ratcliffe, I bet you aren't looking forward to a football governance act in place, perhaps when you have gathered your toys and put them back in the pram, you can walk on to the pitch, pick up your ball and play somewhere else, we aren't all happy to kowtow to you or anyone as mercenary, arrogant or just dismissive of the game itself..
The day of the Premier league is coming to an end, greed of the few, favoritism to the elite and subjective application of their own rules. Change or die.

It's worth having a read of The Esks latest updates including reference to Utd's Ratcliffe pushing for more control for 6 clubs in determining voting rights.
Esk rightly points out that the very reason they are successful is because of the competitiveness of the Premier league itself, not as Ratcliffe would have it, due to the success of the six clubs rather than the league itself.
The league doesn't exist because of the 6 clubs, they are only successful because of the popularity of the league itself.
If you follow Ratcliffes logic, he is stating we of the lesser clubs should be thankful. That the league should be careful in how it treats the six.
Well, newsflash. The league would be a better, more competitive place without you, this symbiotic relationship is fleeting, today's top 6 will not be tomorrow's. Money doesn't always buy success.
They have more money to buy the better players, the facade of fairness of treatment has already been trodden in the mud, on the pitch and off it. The sheer scale of their transgressions leave the other 14 clubs in their wake. Any comparison of a level playing field is but a memory that never was, but now, never can be.
Tony A said in a recent post that football as we knew had gone ceased to exist. Spontaneity lost, excitement traded in for controversy on every chance, every goal, every offence.
So Mr Ratcliffe, I bet you aren't looking forward to a football governance act in place, perhaps when you have gathered your toys and put them back in the pram, you can walk on to the pitch, pick up your ball and play somewhere else, we aren't all happy to kowtow to you or anyone as mercenary, arrogant or just dismissive of the game itself..
The day of the Premier league is coming to an end, greed of the few, favoritism to the elite and subjective application of their own rules. Change or die.

It's worth having a read of The Esks latest updates including reference to Utd's Ratcliffe pushing for more control for 6 clubs in determining voting rights.
Esk rightly points out that the very reason they are successful is because of the competitiveness of the Premier league itself, not as Ratcliffe would have it, due to the success of the six clubs rather than the league itself.
The league doesn't exist because of the 6 clubs, they are only successful because of the popularity of the league itself.
If you follow Ratcliffes logic, he is stating we of the lesser clubs should be thankful. That the league should be careful in how it treats the six.
Well, newsflash. The league would be a better, more competitive place without you, this symbiotic relationship is fleeting, today's top 6 will not be tomorrow's. Money doesn't always buy success.
They have more money to buy the better players, the facade of fairness of treatment has already been trodden in the mud, on the pitch and off it. The sheer scale of their transgressions leave the other 14 clubs in their wake. Any comparison of a level playing field is but a memory that never was, but now, never can be.
Tony A said in a recent post that football as we knew had gone ceased to exist. Spontaneity lost, excitement traded in for controversy on every chance, every goal, every offence.
So Mr Ratcliffe, I bet you aren't looking forward to a football governance act in place, perhaps when you have gathered your toys and put them back in the pram, you can walk on to the pitch, pick up your ball and play somewhere else, we aren't all happy to kowtow to you or anyone as mercenary, arrogant or just dismissive of the game itself..
The day of the Premier league is coming to an end, greed of the few, favoritism to the elite and subjective application of their own rules. Change or die.

Well that's odd.. 3 times no less.. not sure what happened there..

In fairness, Christine, you're spot on, as usual, so the site let you have three posts.

Rob, more like 3 strikes and your out lol

You are bang on Christine. The guy is spouting condescending nonsense.

Now, I know they are one of the biggest clubs in the world. They always were, even when we were enjoying our most successful period and they hadn't won the league since 1968 and got relegated in the early 70s.

But I'm guessing he knows they finished 8th last time out and have no guarantee of making top 4 this coming season?

But to disrespect the rest of the league is just out of order. Every club should have a say.

City came from the 3rd tier of English football to where they are now. Chelsea were an up and down club. Villa likewise. Allow all clubs to develop.

Everton is a huge club and once we win something, the football world will realise that.

I don't mind Manchester United, but his words grate.

Christine,

32 years of the Premier League = 7 different winners and 3 of them were for the only time. The other 29 shared among 4 teams.

32 years after the 2nd World War = 14 different winners.

Says it all about the Premier League. The only unpredictability is which one of 5 are going to win it

The Premier League writing to clubs threatening punishment for fraudulent claims stinks at the very top, and as Christine said about Ratcliffe saying the top 6 should be treated more favourably, the same clubs who put greed above their fans, and only got a slap on the hand, from the same corrupt leaders. Just a question, Dobbin who played first team football last season was sold for a small fee of £10m, how is that supposed to be excessive? The RS sold Brewster to Sheffield Utd a few years ago, for over £23m, having only played in domestic cups, and no league appearances, am I missing something?

Ricky, the beauty of this site is Mike and Lyndon are brilliant admins, we all blow a fuse once in a while, let off steam, just to get it off our chest and they let it slide.

Other sites you only have to say shit and the political brigade are out in force, handcuffs and two Day ban, not that I have ever had a ban on any site or social media, but the admins get that the odd time we get frustrated and give both barrels and as long as it’s not personal or attacking another poster everyone on here gets along great.

Met some great people on here, love other posts, it like one big family.

We are truelly blessed with Mike and Lyndon, I’m sure they know just how much we appreciate this site

Kopites are gobshites

Up the Toffees.