SouthStandUpperTier

And money. Lots of it. Arsenal have got almost limitless resources to acquire the players needed to play Pep-ball. We haven't. We've got a mixture of bottom-half Prem players and decent Championship players. What we're doing is the equivalent trying to put on a production of King Lear, with the cast of Hollyoaks.

Enzo's dignity. He'll see this kind of tactic as beneath him.

How can they be knackered? 80% of their game is spent at walking pace. They barely break out into a trot the other 20%.

2017/18. 2-1 away win at Swansea. Michael Appleton as caretaker manager.

"Not my words, Carol. The words of The Daily Mail."

There is now no point in my future 125 year old self travelling back in time in a DeLorean to hand me the 2103 edition of Grays Sports Almanac.

Because the £105m/3yr rule hasn't budged since its inception. Just think how much transfer fees and player wages have increased in those 11 years while the PSR loss limit has remained exactly the same.

Another added bonus of a salary cap (and another reason why it would never happen) is that the 'big 6's' best players would soon start leaving for the Saudi league, making the PL more of a level playing field.

2016 The £105m allowable loss over 3 years was voted in in 2013 and has stayed the same ever since. And that's the problem. Clubs are only getting pinged for it now because the cost of making any dent in the PL is now more than £35m per season. The problem is that the PSR rules haven't changed with the times. Not that they keep changing.

The current rules have literally been in place since 2013.

Enzo said last week that he expects Cannon to be back for this.

Nor should it. Although I think the charges aimed at Man City aren't specifically PSR related.

Lets face it, whatever system of rules they decide to implement is going to be heavily loaded in favour of the 'big 6'. It won't happen, but the fairest system would be the introduction of a flat salary cap, like in the NFL. It would have to be reasonable too. Say £100m per season for your 25 man squad. Like I say though, it would never happen. The PFA wouldn't want it for starters.

And the lawyers from those clubs that are well run and actually abided with PSR rules will also have something to say I suspect.

Don't think we'll be let off that easily. We'll still get whacked for breaking the rules as they were at the time.

The KP takeover was effectively a done deal when Pearson was pushed out. Mandaric would only have allowed Pearson to leave for Hull if Vichai was OK with it.

For those of you that need help with the women's vote, you should go for Rantala or Tierney. Either of them would be a deserving and worthy winner.

The correct answer is of course KDH, in spite of half of this forum insisting he's sh*te. Can't really argue with 24 goal contributions.

PL are looking at introducing their own version with an 85% squad-cost-to-turnover ratio. https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/13092774/premier-leagues-profit-and-sustainability-rules-to-be-replaced-as-early-as-this-summer The Premier League has been looking at a model enabling clubs to spend up to 85 per cent of revenue on squad cost, with a sliding scale of penalties in place where clubs exceed that ratio.

Not really because PSR will probably be scrapped in the summer and replaced with a single-year squad cost-to-revenue system.

Are we playing Blackburn on the final day or fighting a load of animated Skeletons?

The stupid team that we couldn't beat.

Completely wrong. Akinbiyi's 11 Premier League goals came in 4344 total minutes.