Premier League 2023/24

[Szumi]

Very happy to report back that after hours of effort, was able to get everything scheduled how we need to still make the trip! My girlfriend got incredibly lucky that the schedule coordinator hadn't released the schedule yet, or else she would have been pretty much screwed out of getting off and either would have not gone, or would have had to wake up probably 4am UK time for us to take the first flight out of Manchester, land at JFK 1330 EST, get through customs, and have pretty much just enough time to get to the hospital for a 13 hour night shift (essentially be up for 34 hours straight outside of hopefully getting sleep on the plane/car). 

Yesterday was way too freaking stressful but very, very happy to say we somehow got everything changed, and the plane company didn't even charge us to rebook our flights. We're losing a day in England which sucks, but at least we're getting to make the trip and see the match!

[DavidMarrio]

Absolutely buzzing for you @Szumi 

If you want any advice in terms of getting the ground etc or ideas of places to go or things to do whilst in the city lemme know The place has changed massively over the last 10/15 years and I know I'm biased but I absolutely love Liverpool. So much to do 

[Colly]

With all football rivalry aside Liverpool is one of my favourite cities, to the extent that if this Man City game falls favourably I might do the weekend there with the Etihad as a stop-off.

[Lineker]

Quote

Premier League clubs will meet on Thursday to discuss ditching existing profit and sustainability regulations and adopting a Uefa-style framework of financial rules.

Under the league’s rules clubs must not exceed losses of £105m across a three-year period, but executives are braced for a soft launch of new ­regulations next season with a view to implementing fully the proposed model from the 2025-26 campaign.

An overwhelming majority of teams are thought to have backed proposals to mirror Uefa’s structure at the previous shareholders’ meeting, with as many as 19 clubs thought to support the switch.

Uefa announced two years ago plans to scrap the previous ­financial fair play system in favour of a squad‑cost ratio setup, which links a club’s spending in areas such as wages, transfer fees and ­settlements to turnover. Next season such ­spending must not exceed 90% of turnover, dropping to 70% from 2025-26. The Premier League is widely expected to adopt a similar cap, with a figure of 85% mooted.

Richard Masters, the Premier League’s chief executive, said recently that clubs were being consulted on the move. Last month he told the culture, media and sport select ­committee that more than a third of the league’s clubs play continental football every season and have to abide by Uefa’s laws. “Over time we have historically aligned with Uefa, because seven or eight of our clubs play in European competition,” he said. “We need to consider whether that is an appropriate move for us, how we do that and when.”

Everton and Nottingham Forest have been found to have breached the league’s rules, with the ­former deducted 10 points before their successful appeal resulted in the punishment being reduced to six. Forest’s hearing is expected to begin next week, with a key part of their defence hinging on the £47.5m sale of Brennan Johnson to Tottenham on transfer deadline day last summer, outside the 2022-23 financial year.

Forest rejected lower bids from Brentford earlier in the window but held out for maximum profit. A verdict is expected at the beginning of April and Forest would probably appeal against any sanction. Everton could yet face another deduction after being referred to an ­independent disciplinary ­commission owing to a second charge relating to the three‑year period up to 2022-23.

Top-flight clubs expect next season to be transitional in terms of implementing new rules. There is some confidence within clubs that a move to such a system would encourage real-time monitoring of finances and more scope for in-season sanctioning, to limit the possibility of protracted sagas. Uefa says “breaches result in pre-defined financial penalties and sporting measures”.

 

[Szumi]

6 hours ago, DavidMarrio said:

Absolutely buzzing for you @Szumi 

If you want any advice in terms of getting the ground etc or ideas of places to go or things to do whilst in the city lemme know The place has changed massively over the last 10/15 years and I know I'm biased but I absolutely love Liverpool. So much to do 

Absolutely man, thank you. I will definitely reach out when the trip gets closer. Since we have such a limited time in England, we're trying to do as much as we can Wednesday night and Thursday before the match. Very much appreciated.

[stokeriño]

7 hours ago, Lineker said:

 

I get this is kind of moot for the top teams who have/want to follow UEFA's rules anyway, but doesn't switching from a fixed figure for allowed losses to a % of revenue calc just serve to widen the gap between the bigger and smaller clubs *even more*?

[The Lusophone]

3 hours ago, stokeriño said:

I get this is kind of moot for the top teams who have/want to follow UEFA's rules anyway, but doesn't switching from a fixed figure for allowed losses to a % of revenue calc just serve to widen the gap between the bigger and smaller clubs *even more*?

Yes, but this is what they want. You should've seen what Rick Parry revealed about what the Prem wanted in terms of % spending allowed for relegated clubs vs clubs not receiving parachute payments.

[stokeriño]

In fairness, even though it's always been pretty obvious FFP rules are meant to increase the gap, I was still a bit surprised they're being so flagrant about it. 😂

[Lineker]

13 hours ago, FestiveJack said:

Yes, but this is what they want. You should've seen what Rick Parry revealed about what the Prem wanted in terms of % spending allowed for relegated clubs vs clubs not receiving parachute payments.

Somewhat related to this: 

Quote

Premier League clubs have been warned that if they fail to reach a funding deal with the English Football League it will be imposed on them by the new Football Regulator.

The warning came from Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer, who was speaking at the FT Business of Football Conference.

Top-flight clubs met for two hours to discuss the issue on Thursday and have agreed to meet again on 11 March.

It is still not clear if there will be a vote on EFL funding at that meeting.

Premier League chief executive Richard Masters pulled out of his own speaking engagement at the FT event in order to prioritise Thursday's meeting.

Frazer repeated on a number of occasions that the new regulator, who she insisted will be appointed 'in this Parliamentary session' was chiefly tasked with ensuring financial stability across the game rather than becoming involved in disputes.

But if they fail to reach agreement, she outlined what will happen.

"We don't want this to be an issue for the regulator," said Frazer. "It is clear football should resolve the issues for football.

"It is in the Premier League and EFL's interests to come to a deal but it is clear if they don't the regulator will."

Agreement over how the 'New Deal' should be financed has proved elusive over the past few months.

Some clubs have felt the 'bigger' members of the top flight should pay a greater percentage.

The overall sum, which will be partly tied to future TV revenues, is expected to be around £900m over six years.

There has also been disagreement over financial regulations to be implemented in the Championship.

Frazer said the regulator will have 'limited powers', which would not involve having a view on whether nation states are the right bodies to own Premier League clubs.

"All the regulator is doing is looking at financial stability," she said. "That is appropriate. Foreign investment is part of the economy and makes the game competitive.

"The Premier League is a massive cultural export. We don't want to do anything to damage that. Whether a foreign state should own the club is not in this bill. We want people who run clubs to run them well."

 

[stokeriño]

Have I ever mentioned how Chelsea are actually pretty bad

[Szumi]

This is amazing

 

 

[stokeriño]

Yes, that marginally makes up for their first goal where Disasi forgot what being a defender entails.

[Szumi]

I LOVE YOU SO MUCH DARWIN NUNEZ!!!

[Hobo]

well that was nice in the end

[Szumi]

Rough couple of minutes for Evertonians, with this just making the day all the funnier!

 

 

[Hobo]

Darwin Nunez is pretty good for a shit Andy Carroll too

[Colly]

Andy Carroll was good.

[DavidMarrio]

Worth the money just for that goal at Wembley against Everton

[Hobo]

10 minutes ago, Colly said:

Andy Carroll was good.

the shit one is good too!

I did like him and wanted him to do well at Liverpool but it just didn't really work.

[Adam]

"Nottingham Forest referee analyst Mark Clattenburg" has objected to the Liverpool winner.

Since when did clubs have their own "referee analyst"?