https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/62548431 Mr "Big mouth, know it all" Souness talking ****e yet again. Why do Sky persevere with these twats.
So yesterday Millwall had 1 shot on target in the entire 95 mins of their match against Swansea -- but came out of it with a 2:2 draw! (And that 1 shot on target was saved.)
Wasn't sure where to put this, if anyone fancies splurging a load of money on some Geoffrey Watling stand sign lettering (or club crest) you can bid for a piece of 'history': https://shop.canaries.co.uk/auction/shop/
BBC gossip column: Aston Villa have a "strong interest" in Brighton boss Graham Potter as a potential replacement for Steven Gerrard, who has lost three of his first four league games this season. (Football Insider)
https://www.skysports.com/football/...gulations-to-replace-ffp-all-you-need-to-know Interesting changes
It's about "football sustainability" but you can still lose €60m over three years, no questions asked??? I think restricting the spend to 70% of your earnings is an excellent rule long term but is going to have the biggest impact on FL clubs. It will be interesting to see how that's handled.
Yeah the turnover to wages with some clubs is crazy and that doesn't take into account massive agent and transfer fees. I mean Norwich can just about compete with lower end Premiership in terms of signing players, however wages, no way! This is currently the statistics from the Premier League in wages https://www.statista.com/chart/22002/premier-league-wage-burden/ note, this is just wages! The cap is for all wages, transfers and agent fees. Couldn't find the Championship figures, but found this from December 2021 which shows the state the clubs are in: https://www.football365.com/news/op...e-championship-rather-than-the-premier-league Perhaps this is why Norwich are open to the American investment. They are renowned for building brands and trying to make money. Norwich can perhaps punch above their weight, by increasing income faster than the other clubs.
Leicester is really having a bad time this season. Maybe the'll have to sell Maddison to strengthen their defence? I don't know if there would be a time limit in the sell-on clause.
It simply solidifies the top clubs where they are and restricts competition. It’s good for the game and the unhealthy money sloshing around, but bad for variety.
I think they would probably have to sell within the first contract term for us to get paid out - so maybe 4/5 years