Yes, they did spend a bit more than they should have been allowed.

But my point stands i.e. that they did get to spend it on the 'new team' you probably need to stay up, rather than on a big chunk of it going to their Championship team (which might well have made the difference between staying up and going down, even with the extra money).

Posted By: mr carra on November 18th 2025 at 13:10:21

Message Thread

Well I think that could have been worse (NCFC) - big member, Nov 18, 12:26:55
- I don't think we are allowed to spend any more money due to FFP (n/m) (NCFC) - tim berry, Nov 18, 12:29:06
  - Another 25M I recall MA saying (n/m) (NCFC) - thirsty work, Nov 18, 13:02:35
  - Wrong. (NCFC) - Darren Eadie, Nov 18, 12:43:17
    - I thought that Attanasio hinted in his radio interview (NCFC) - tim berry, Nov 18, 12:54:38
      - Bit limited this year (NCFC) - mr carra, Nov 18, 12:56:41
  - I think we can still tap the loan market. (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 18, 12:33:43
    - Loans are nearly always a waste of time (n/m) (NCFC) - IG88, Nov 18, 12:41:42
      - Ask Sunderland that (NCFC) - mr carra, Nov 18, 12:52:40
        
        That is an interesting observation. Although Forest did break the rules I think (n/m) (NCFC) - Knitted Jesus, Nov 18, 13:06:17
        
        Yes, they did spend a bit more than they should have been allowed. (NCFC) - mr carra, Nov 18, 13:10:21
        
        Yeah its a good point. And likewise the Sunderland example. (NCFC) - Knitted Jesus, Nov 18, 13:19:43
      - Yes, we have done so well this season without them.... (n/m) (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 18, 12:46:00

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.