...You obviously don't know beyond doubt whether Inda violated FIGC rules but your are willing to accept what that Twitter user said. I always aspire to have higher standards regarding what I read in social media.
problem is that i never said that inda violated any rule. i said i didn't know how figc could let inda start the season as this is a company that's been having a negative shareholders' equity for years and is drowning in debt. financial rules were established to prevent that. inda
most probably (
i don't know, i assume) didn't violate any rule, because figc changed the rules post covid. they changed it after the lockdown when clubs found paying wages and inda was about to violate it, and they changed them again for the next seasons so that clubs (
probably not just inda,
i don't know) could participate.
see, this is your game and that's why i'm reluctant to talk to you lately: you assume stuff, you judge, then you ask your questions accordingly
one other small remark:
the twitter user i quoted never said anything about the rules either. he quoted some relevant numbers from the financial report inda recently released and added what gds commented on inda's financial report. again, i said that i didn't know how figc could let inda start the season, and it was an opinion, not a fact. so an other thing you just assumed and it turned out you were completely wrong about it. it's all right, it's just a bit funny especially with your moral high horse on your standards (or i'm wrong, and your extremely high standards only apply to social media, and you don't consider tuz a social media)