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.

How should the Premier League and its clubs respond to Ratcliffe?
Rather than give more favour to the elite, arrogant and over privileged few, perhaps enable the others to catch up, positive discrimination anyone? Set rules in place that cap players wages, cap transfer amount spends, (if you are doing the same for loses then look at the other side of the ledger)
Limit game substitutes back to 3. It disadvantages lower clubs without resources to have an opposition who can field two teams never mind one.
Make one European place (Conference league) a random out of the bag pick for one of the other clubs in the league outside the other qualifiers. (what a lift to any other Premier league team selected)
Abandon PSR. The setting of spend criteria above makes a more even playing field rather than a percentage of income which totally disadvantages clubs outside the elite.
An independent commission / arbitration of sport for clubs to appeal to if they are unjustly charged for offences by the league to hear complaints.

A proper rule book, not one open to interpretation or influence, that guides, informs and outlines what will not be condoned. Not an interpretation of a rule.

Just a start..

I am sure there are others...

Christine, Ratcliffe says "The success of the six clubs".

I can only think of five: Man City, Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool, so I can only assume the sixth one being Spurs ("Big club? My arse!"), simply because they have spent a few seasons playing Champions League football.

Because let's be honest, they have won sweet FA during the Premier League era, and in fact they won next to nothing in the pre-Premier League era.

Problem with the suggestions is the problem which caused so much furore back in 2021.

Capping wages of the teams in the Premier League will just see the move to the big European teams of their star players who are not restricted by wage caps. With the stars heading for Spain and Italy and France, then yes we will have a more competitive league but gone (2005-24 = 15 of 40 finalists) will be days of English teams in the Champions League Final.

That is what the big 5 are looking at. Not the Premier League. The Premier League for them is just a stepping stone to the Champions League.

Would I want a European Super League. Too right! And with a rule that says any player who has played for a club in that ESL cannot be signed for an EPL team.
All the armchair fans can sit at home with their Sky Package watching teams play each other 4 times a year, while the rest of us enjoy the drama of the Premier League. Get rid of them.

Rob,

31st January 1898
is 23,086 days before

17th April 1961 (day Spurs last won the League)
is 23,086 days before

1st July 2024

Big Club 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Premier League: Clubs must sell players to balance their books.

Club: Okay, we're selling player X because he doesn't get much game time anyway, in order to balance our books.

Premier League: No, not that player; sell one of your better ones who adds value to your squad and your ability to compete.

Club: Get fucked.

What a ridiculous set of rules. It's an absolute farce.

Why are Everton and all the other clubs outside the Top 6 going along with this? Waving through a system that prevents them from ever being able to compete? It's nonsensical.

Yes, if your intention is to compete, then it makes no sense. If, however, your intention is to make money, then it all makes sense. Keep the big boys happy, play our part, and watch the money roll in.

It reminds you of all that horseshit about Bill. 'He works round the clock, he goes around checking the lightbulbs, he just loves the club. Such a shame he doesn't have the proper money cos we know he just wants the best for Everton.”

And then he eventually sells his shares to gangsters and, oh look, our hero has made £40 million!!! God Bless Everyone.

Phil,

Whilst there is no specific wage cap at an individual level, Uefa have introduced a revenue limit, similar to what the Premier League are looking at:–

"The new rule limits spending on player and coach wages, transfers and agent fees to 70% of club revenue. We will roll out the new threshold progressively: 90% in the 2023-24 season and 80% in 2024-25, before applying the permanent 70% ceiling from 2025-26. Breaches will result in predefined financial penalties as well as sporting measures."

I also agree with Christine in limiting subs. As well as limiting the number you can use, I would limit the bench to 6, one of whom has to be a keeper.

I'd also limit the number of players over the age of 21 that can be loaned out to 4. That should reduce the ability of clubs to "hoover up" volumes of players.

Kevin # 91,

It is because also-rans believe they can earn more in a non-competitive league geared up for big global TV audiences, than they can as very occasionally successful sides in a more competitive league.

Robert, yes absolutely.

As far as the Premier League is concerned, it's all about the money.

Kevin #91 – nail on head.

The Premier lLeague is not about winning stuff – it's now only about being a member to many of the other 14. Just being there. It guarantees you huge money.

If by chance you put a team together that gets you into Europe then even better. That's the limit of expectation and hope for the also-rans. The name of the game is money, not success. Success is just being there.

The other 14 are just hangers-on, bit players, irrelevant but a necessity, a means to an end for the likes of Man Utd. A stepping-stone to greater wealth. Success to them is the accumulation of wealth, not necessarily by winning anything, that's just the cream.

This is the very reason the Premier League is no longer fit for purpose. It is the very reason clubs want to be in it. The spiral and race to the bottom.

The Super League is a formality, but those very same clubs realise that they want their cake and eat it. They want a Super League but also to still be in the Premier League.

It can't work like that, it's one or the other, not both.

Christine,

Yes, in their greed, they have sowed the seeds of their own destruction. The Premier League is being gradually exposed for the grotesque money pit that it is.

I agree with all the last few posters on the state of the Premier League and yet, unless I'm wrong, the attendances at games are staying steady or increasing.

Although many, including me, are increasingly disillusioned by the quality of the performances where possession of the ball rules — no matter how boring it gets and looks.

We moan about the Premier League…

But we don't want to be out of it.

Paul #98

Yes, we moan about the way the Premier League has been regulated and the (financial) rules etc that surround it. They are legitimate moans.

We don't want to be in the Premier League per se: we want to remain in the top flight. It's an important distinction.

Paul, of course we want to be part of the top flight of English football.

It is just not many are happy on how it is being run and their favouritism.

Brian # 85 - fair comment but the odd post does disappear into cyberspace occasionally. 😉

Ricky # 69 - “Fuck corruption and the dark forces of evil in every shape and form.”

A sentiment I agree with especially in high places. Viva the little folk throughout the world. Their day will come.

Christine, I think the Idea is to enter the Super League and boycott the Champions League. Whether the Uefa competitions will continue in some format remains to be seen.

I see Fifa have thrown their hat into the ring by demanding all major leagues are reduced to 18 clubs to accommodate their new Club World Cup format.

Shock Horror — Simon Jordan Has done a U-Turn and admitted the present PSR system is to keep the Sly 6 at the top.

Christine @95,

I see you've gone off on one again. I'm becoming more concerned for you than I am for the Premier League, if I'm honest.

I feel duty-bound to do something to forestall the massive and inevitable frustration you are piling up for yourself down the road…

Those very same clubs realise they want their cake and eat it. They want a Super League but also to still be in the Premier League. It can't work like that, it's one or the other, not both.

It will be horrific, Christine, when they come out and say all they want to do is replace the Uefa competitions, and put a European Super League in their place, while all clubs remain in their domestic leagues and continue with their domestic competitions.

Perhaps you read it here first!

Unfortunately Phil Big Club these days means rich not successful. Thank you for all your of interesting stats, these may also interest you.
!959-1965, 7 different league title winners, a sequence repeated 1966-1972 11 different winners in total, 1973-2024 12 different winners.
1963 -1972 11 different FA cup winners. 1973-2024 13
different winners.1981- 2024 10 different winners.
League cup first 12 years, 12 different winners only 18 teams have won it since.
in total 65 teams have played in the English top flight, 51 of them in the premier league.

I'm not sure that is all they want to do though, Michael.

I think there is a long-standing plan to gradually have a European league where, eg, Bayern Munich play Barcelona in a full time league. And that league will expand, and the PL will shrink in importance, a la the FA Cup.

You may ultimately be proved right, Kevin, in the fullness of time.

But I don't think that forms part of their published plans, does it?

It is interesting that, since the European Court of Justice reversed its decision and said that Uefa's ban on clubs joining such a league was against EU law, not much more seems to have happened — although Juventus finally withdrew just last month.

Perhaps the plotting goes on behind closed doors in smoke-filled rooms…

This is simply untrue from TeamTalk:

The sales of Lewis Dobbin (£9m) and Ben Godfrey (£11m) reportedly got Everton on the right side of the Premier League's profitability and sustainability rules before they submitted their accounts on Sunday.

It takes months for the accounts to be prepared — and then audited — before they are submitted, with the deadline brought forward last time from 31 March to 31 December.

Michael, I think you or perhaps Lyndon said that Team talk or Goodison news were click bait sites run by kopites.
There about 5 Blues near where I live and it immensely frustrating to get a call saying " "Have you heard the latest, Ronaldo is interested in coming to us. Just read it online mate"

£35m for Elliot Anderson & Elanga. Words fail me.

The Premier league can call the transfers in. Juventus got done for fiddling transfer fees melo, pjanjic, danilo and cancelo. If it's not arms length, then they will get done.

Is Dobbin a £10m player, probably not. But not that immaterial compared to a Samuel's Smith or a Tom Cannon.

Elliot Anderson for £35m, then I am struggling here to see that not being called in. It's at least £20m over his fair market value.

I have just seen my earlier post and realised a couple of mistakes.
FA Cup !973-2024 15 winners not 13, 1981-2024 12 winners not 10. !963=1980 14 winners in 18 seasons.

Michael, don't be concerned about me, despite your condescending remarks about me going off on one "again"..patronizing? Or what?

You may disagree with much of what I say but, on balance, my contributions to this site over many years have, in my opinion, been pretty dammed accurate.

You may disagree but that's your right and opinion, as much as they are mine.