Again, you’re not wrong. Where the money comes from is a valid, but in my opinion, separate argument from the money ruins football thing. As for the breaches, I agree, the rules may have been brought in by the current elite to limit competition or you may disagree with that. It’s irrelevant if the rules were in place and broken there should be punishments.
And Liverpool before that, Chelsea after it, and so on and so forth.
Shankly might have picked the players back in the 60’s but it was Eric Sawyer who arranged all the financing. In other words, they needed money to build the team and sign the best players.
Go back far enough and once the wage cap was lifted every team used money to buy success. Some also tried and failed.
Also in Liverpool (the city)back in the day the biggest team were 100% Everton. Once Liverpool became successful (under Shankly)those percentages began to change. In other words, there were plastic success chasing glory hunters even back in those days.
No one will ever admit this though.
But it was fine in the 70’s and 80’s when Liverpool were the richest team in England due to their owner.
I went to Manchester and didn’t see any
It’s okay, there will be no lay offs as they didn’t actually have any staff. Their purpose was to sponsor Man CIty and they achieved that already
The Super League is good for me, why don’t others want what is good for me. It’s not fair.