I've had it with stupidity of outdated PSR straitjacket

Thankfully the deadline for the 'soft' transfer window has been reached and one piece of nonsense is out of the way for better or worse. Now we can get on with the next bit, scrambling to juggle the rest of the transfer balls before August 30.

I mean let it all end. Let us get rid of the stupidity. The financial fair play or profitability and sustainability rules. Whichever you wish to call them. They are no longer fit for purpose and are living on borrowed time.

They might have been brought in with all good intentions to level a biased playing field but theory is one thing and practice another. What we have had of late is the absurdity of clubs exchanging academy reared players between them to get round the current problems, spruce up the books before the end of the financial year, and outwit the lawmakers.

READ MORE: Allan Saint-Maximin defends Newcastle United star in response to exit links

READ MORE: Newcastle's 'best in class' target amid 'vital' Financial Fair Play dream to save millions

We've also had Newcastle United, having spectacularly launched good signing after good signing upon being taken over, scratching round trying to do a deal for a player they signed but have never played in black-and-white. Just so the accountants can square their figures and the pious Premier League deliver a pat on the head rather than a points deduction for being naughty boys while the likes of Chelsea spend having discovered what they perceive as a loophole provided by long contracts.

Yankuba Minteh wanted to go to Everton if he had to go anywhere, United wanted him to go to Lyon, and eventually Brighton seemed a decent compromise for all concerned. More was to follow despite having the promise of £33m. Nottingham Forest came up with another £35m for Elliot Anderson who as an academy player represents total profit.

Financial Fair Play? You're having a belly laugh. For a start the PL ceiling is outdated and ought to have been revised way back. It currently stands at up to a £105m loss allowed over three years but that was set way back in 2013, a decade ago. Taking everything into consideration a more realistic limit by now would have been £218m.

Anyway next season is the last in this particular straitjacket. Then the £105m noose will be lifted from the neck of every club and replaced by what is termed a combination of 'squad cost ratio and anchoring'.

What is that? Well the anchoring limit will be five times the lowest club's revenue, which is a generous barrier, while clubs will have three transfer windows to adhere to the 85 per cent squad cost ratio by raising revenues and lowering wage bills. Still not sure what the heck is going on? Well In layman's terms the new regulations should be simpler to avoid breaching.

Restrictive rules will still exist of course but they will not be so stringent which is just as well because the Premier League have been on shaky ground.

There is a growing belief that the PL rules are in fact illegal because they override the law of the land. The challenge by Manchester City could bring this contentious point into sharp focus I am told.

A far greater financial mind than mine gave me a fascinating insight into one outlook on a vexed question. An eminent man of high reputation, he insists that as things currently stand some of the PL rules applying to FFP/PSR contravene competition laws.

An organisation (in this case the PL) can make their own rules to suit themselves but if they override the law of the land they became unenforceable ie unlawful.

There have been a few legal challenges in the past all of which were lost by the football authorities. Famously the action taken by George Eastham (against Newcastle United) and Jimmy Hill effectively killed the maximum wage rule years ago and the Bosman case ended the 'slavery' of registration retention at the end of a contract . Both were held to be unlawful.

Recently a case involving football and competition laws has actually been tested by the highest judiciary, the European Court of Justice. The hugely controversial European Super League which as yet has been a non-starter still saw the organisers take their case to the ECJ which found in their favour on the grounds that to block the Super League would be anti-competitive as defined by European law. The same laws apply to the UK.

Are the PL risking a similar challenge here? And will they get it from Man City if common sense does not prevail?

Perhaps as legal jargon is temporarily put to one side following the passing of June 30 and Geordies turn their attention to the crucial last two months of summer bartering we can also look forward to a reassessment of the 2023 close season window which was at the time viewed as underwhelming.

However if Sandro Tonali, Tino Livramento and Lewis Hall develop as we hope then their impact will go a long way to explaining and justifying why they were signed in the first place. Mind you, having committed a whopping £112m to get them it is only right that a return should be expected.

The next stage of a rebuilding programme which needs a much more positive initial impact has already started. Lloyd Kelly is through the door on a free transfer. A spate of age group kids from 14-year-old upwards have arrived to help stabilise the future and a 19-year-old right sided central defender or midfield sitter, Miodrag Pivas, is said to have visited in preparation for his transfer. Age wise he can act as a bridge between the bright youngsters of tomorrow and the first team today - as long as he doesn't go the same way as Minteh because of necessity!