iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Yeah probs for news PR, but often it's funded too

Reposted by Kev Lawson

Stephen Bush @stephenkb.bsky.social · 1h

Spending my sabbatical deleting every 'just hoping that Reform will implode is not a strategy' take about the Tories from the Internet.

131056

Reposted by Kev Lawson

Hudl Statsbomb @statsbomb.com · 1h

We're delighted to announce that Leander Forcher will be speaking at Hudl Performance Insights 2026 Leander is a Data Scientist at TSG Hoffenheim, and has published over 15 research papers on data-driven approaches to football. Tickets and more information here: hudl.com/performanceinsights2026

031

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 1h

The commission's verdict is under appeal, i guess

100

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 1h

I'm suggesting that the advantage they gained from spending more money than the teams around them is routinely enjoyed by large sections of the football pyramid who spend more relative to their peers.

010

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 3h

The rules were called Financial Fair Play, so I think fairness is at the heart of the matter. City did challenge some of the rules & had them changed (owner loans being charged under FMV) and that's just the start. Ashley didn't pay NUFC FMV for the Sports Direct adverts, no rules about underpaying

020

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 3h

That's not City could do. All of the top teams in the EPL field teams that are expensively assembled. Man Utd regularly confound their sporting advantage over teams like Hull City. Ref's blowing in your favour at key times s entirely different

200

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 3h

City's is the same advantage that a Man Utd enjoys over a Hull City, Juve's is more insideous

120

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 4h

They did, but the representation of them as the same as Juve bribing refs is a false equivalence. Bigger clubs enjoy big revenue/wage bill margins over smaller clubs every week in the EPL and down the pyramid.

100

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 4h

Did the rules exist when Man Utd built that advantage? Should Blackburn's EPL title count considering they'd have def bust FFP?

100

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 4h

I think the rules are getting better slowly, Id like to see some guaranteed funding in an escrow account mechanism for clubs if they wanna go a bit faster. Keiran McGuire has mentioned that. Best rule change would be nation states not being allwoed to own football clubs

110

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 5h

We had no chance while that bloke was in charge. None.

000

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 5h

The advantage that City had over the likes of Arsenal/Liverpool/Man Utd is the one they enjoy over nearly every club they face every weekend.

000

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 5h

Nor did the rules - until very, very recently - contain any sort of provision like F1's ADUO system to allow clubs with lesser revenues an avenue to bridge the gap to make the competition better 2/2

200

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 5h

You won't get blocked for that. My ire is not because I want my club to be able to spend, I hate being owned by KSA. It's because the 'Fair Play' rules didn't give a single shit when Ashley turned our club into a shell of a club to be a billboard. 1/2

100

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 5h

City has done the same, but with sponsors tied to strategic government spending rather than the 'open market'. When relationships with heritage brands are so entrenched, how can any club break the hegemony without working with a disrupter who overspends to disrupt? 2/2

100

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 5h

If you look at how Liverpool paid Salah's wages. 400k on their own books, then over double from sponsorships related to the image rights of the player. That's entirely above board because of the 'arms length' nature of sponsorship money 1/2 www.nytimes.com/athletic/540...

nytimes.com

How Mohamed Salah makes his money (Published 2024)

100

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 5h

Plenty of those players have gone on to have amazing careers elsewhere; they benefitted from the facilities and training, just as Manchester benefits from the regeneration of areas like Ancoats, etc.

000

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 5h

They did, but if the rules were about fairness for all, not just a few, I'd be more sympathetic, but they're not

100

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 5h

If there were a concerted attempt to make things 'fairer' for the non-big clubs I'd have more time for it all, but FFP was a Platini-cooked up regime at the beheast of the biggest clubs in Europe worried about what their future looked like with PSG/City & the rest of the EPL

030

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 5h

The EPL isn't some paragon of virtuous rulemakers; they denied NUFC a takeover for god knows how long until they finally conceded that there was a difference between PIF/KSA gov. Then they tightened APT in an emergency meeting right after. Transparent bias over & again.

230

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 5h

Prior to 2009, they were just spending as the rules allowed. Post-2009, the initial set of rules were found to be too harsh, got chnaged. Then later in the whole gambit of EPL regulation, City won a case that showed the rules favoured interest-free loans, etc.

100

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 5h

That last bit is where the rules leave us now. Entrenched. Relying on big revenue teams to fuck up enough for long enough while the rest get their major organs taken on the regular.

100

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 5h

All of the bug clubs make a mint selling youth players, Chelsea especially, but they are do it to some degree. City/Chelsea's investment in British football youth has been significant and not bad for the domestic game as a whole.

100

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 5h

That's a distinction I agree with, but I also don't think it's close to bribing refs either

000

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 6h

Based on what happened to Everton/Forest, City are bang in it, but max I see is them going down a division for a season tbh

200

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 6h

But I don't think suppressing competition is a good thing either. The most recent regs look better for that for teams that haven't qualified for Europe, but I'd like to see a few more levers available to ambitious owners to catch up 2/2

100

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 6h

For every sport throughout the history of forever, whoever pays the most for its talent wins more over a sustained timeline. Not always, of course (especially in a low-scoring, high-variance sport like football). To be clear, I don't think free spending is the answer 1/2

100

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 7h

It’s not the answer. But claiming that somehow the games weren’t fair because the team with most resources won is all of football history forever

440

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 7h

Absolutely no one gave a shit about fairness when a businessman turned Newcastle United into a billboard for his tat and systematically underfunded us for 15+ years or cared about fair market value when he plastered adverts for his brands at no cost to himself. 3/3

2162

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 7h

No post rules reset or F1 like engine development credits catchup methods were put in place to ensure a chance at a level playing field. They still don’t exist. All that exists and can exists under the rules is a heritage brand hegemony. Which is entirely why the rules were bought in. 2/3

141

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 7h

Performance enhancing drugs materially impact the ability of the players in a way money does not. Paying to have the best players on your team is how the game has been won forever. In all sports. The rules allow for different levels of spending based on an era when they did not exist. 1/3

120

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 8h

Man Utd play Hull with god knows how much more in wage spend and the game is fair 🤷‍♂️ City’s rule break creates an advantage others enjoy every week. Bribing refs is much more serious in my view and would be in any era of football.

130

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 8h

They are not equivalent in my eyes.

100

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 8h

Man Utd spent 272m less over the investigated period and spent it way, way, way worse and made way worse decisions generally.

010

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 9h

I totally get that. I hate that Elliott Anderson/yankuba Minteh play elsewhere because NUFC would have been sanctioned otherwise. But I don’t think the rules are about “fairness” overall.

010

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 9h

You’d still get have and have nots because the systems aren’t designed for fairness. What if a club that had the same revenues as spurs pre regulations was artificially deflated for over a decade because all the owner wanted was essentially a cheap billboard at lower than fair market rates? Fair?

120

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 17h

It’s the same sporting impact whenever a Hull play a Man Utd, have and have nots is a part of the pyramid, it’s not the same as having the ref paid for.

130

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 18h

Each game started with 11 v 11 players. Not 11 plus the referee, that’s the difference in the scenarios. One team spent more money on those players, which is the reality for most teams when they play a top six side. Hence why I don’t feel like it was the same sporting advantage.

210

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 22h

It has def helped save some clubs and less go into administration, but it is stifling competition at the top of big leagues across Europe too, which is made worse by the EPL’s entrenched financial advantages. 2/2

110

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 22h

Before sept 2009, it was totally normal and legal for owners to spend what they liked. Only reason this changed was because the biggest clubs in Europe lobbied Platini (who himself was later found to be a bribe taker) to stop more Chelsea/PSG/City’s 1/2

131

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 22h

None. But my view is around the sporting advantage that city enjoyed, which seems similar to Wrexham when they were down the divisions or Man Utd vs. hull city in terms of wage bills. It’s normal have and have not stuff to me.

120

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 22h

I think in the normal run of football it’s reasonable to think some teams have more money than others to spend (which is what city achieved). I don’t think it’s reasonable to think the referee won’t call the game evenly. The latter is way, way, way more serious to me.

320

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 22h

It def will. Years and years more.

110

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 22h

The second part is what big clubs do to small clubs all the time. They took up space where they weren’t ‘supposed’ to. I don’t think nation states or their proxies should be allowed to own football clubs and think caps on max/min spends on wages should be around.

100

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 22h

So about 100-130m a season, which is of course a lot but it’s not the same as bribing refs to me. It’s a team that’s not supposed to have a financial advantage enjoying financial advantage. Like Blackburn in the 90s but times a bundle. Football has always been won by who pays the most wages.

140

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 22h

My argument is that spending more than allows is not the same as bribing refs.

150

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 22h

It’s the difference between what I see as an administrative vs. Sporting sanction. The juve (referee bribes) vs. Spending more than the other team. Agree they cheated, but on paper. Semantics maybe 🤷‍♂️

210

Kev Lawson @editkev.football · 22h

I’m not convinced the titles will be changed. I agree rules were broken off the pitch, but on the pitch it seems to me the sporting advantage they got is similar to big club/small club we see regularly 🤷‍♂️

130