The Fish

The clubs voted for these rules because the prior rules were worse. You're conflating voting in favour of something, with actually wanting that thing. All it takes is a step back to realise who benefits most from the current rules. It's not the...

Ask Aston Villa fans. Ask Everton, or Forest. Then tell me these concerns are restricted to fans of clubs who're stuck with a foreign state owning their club.

I'm guessing you're a little older? But the new breed of Brentford fans will see where you are now as the new groundfloor. The newer fans will grow frustrated by the limits put on you.

Yeah, all clubs can recruit shrewdly, can have succession plans in place, coach well and improve players, but until the rules change all of that serves simply as an affordable scouting department for the entrenched elite. They definitely...

Nice.

I'm old enough to remember financially and emotionally invested owners. I remember with great fondness those times. But I'm old enough to know that owners aren't permanent.

Aye that's fair and I'm honestly not looking to rally Brentford fans to my cause or owt. I just think what's important from all of this is that Man City are guilty and should be punished, but the rules are bullshit. Like, say Brentford continue...

No, I misspelt " There should be Debt-Linked Anchoring rules put in place so that clubs can be free to speculate, but protected from recklessness. Clubs shouldn't be allowed to operate with huge non-capex debt. The rules shouldn't premiumise the...

Few things there to unpack. You say we could be title challengers in one paragraph, then concede the current rules entrench existing hierarchies in the next. It can't be both. I don't know which transfer decisions you see as daft, but I'd wager...

I've not read the thread, so forgive me if I'm repeating anything, or re-opening stuff that's been done to death. The consensus among the Newcastle fans I've talked to about this are; the rules are protectionist bullshit, and Man City should be...