Jump to content

Now That's What I Call Transfer Rumours! 7


Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, madras said:

So we should have no FFP issues and can crack on lome Chelsea ?

 

No because we have much lower revenue. Chelsea have much more ability to spend within FFP, despite their spending they're probably still within FFP limits.

 

 

Edited by Jackie Broon

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

How's it any different to our owners buying the club and wiping out the debt the club had to Ashley?

 

As far as EPL FFP is concerned Chelsea haven't been given a clean slate, the debt to Abramovic made no difference to that.

 

Chelsea have much higher revenue than us and so much more ability to spend while staying within FFP limits.

As far as FFP that's right but it means the new owners had an extra £5bn (or whatever it was) available to them because the PL effectively wrote off the debt rather than paying it off themselves. Not against any rules but also not the same as what happened here, where the buyer was responsible for dealing with any existing debt.

 

It was the debt to Abramovic that got Chelsea to where they are, now they have a new owner who was allowed to take the club on and continue to build on that platform without having to do anything about the debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Keegans Export said:

As far as FFP that's right but it means the new owners had an extra £5bn (or whatever it was) available to them because the PL effectively wrote off the debt rather than paying it off themselves. Not against any rules but also not the same as what happened here, where the buyer was responsible for dealing with any existing debt.

 

It was the debt to Abramovic that got Chelsea to where they are, now they have a new owner who was allowed to take the club on and continue to build on that platform without having to do anything about the debt.

 

I'm not sure that this issue has been officially resolved one way or the other, but it certainly looks like Chelsea have decided that they have a strong enough legal case to go forward with their spending.

 

From the bit of research I've just done, I think the issue is that Government sanctions against Abramovich mean that he is unable to have his debt paid to him. So the accumulated spending inherent in that debt, that would normally be part of FFP considerations, are not counted in this case.

 

The counter argument is that the debt has not actually been written off and shouldn't just disappear from the ledger. The sanctions are just a temporary measure and the debt should be paid off in time. The money has still been spent, regardless of whether the new owners are allowed to pay off the debt at this point.

 

But Chelsea obviously feel that this particular situation is unusual and that the Premier League will be unable to win any legal battle.

 

This just feels like another example of legal issues, or the difficulty in enforcing them, is getting in the way of common sense. The regulations are there to protect competition, by stopping clubs from spending sums which are too much in advance of their income. That's what's happened with Chelsea, regardless of whether there are new owners, and regardless of whether the previous owner gets his money back.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Cronky

Link to post
Share on other sites

This Chelsea debt thing is as bad as the Leazes Terrace craic in the SJP thread. If Abramavic left a billion quid in cash in the kit room with a note that said ‘for transfers’ it wouldn’t negate FFP. There’s no getting around FFP by not repaying the debt. The debt is irrelevant to FFP. Stop manking on about it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest reefatoon

Couldn’t give a shit about Chelsea and its spending. This thread is going to be quality over the next month, so let’s just keep it about links to players and move the shit boring Chelsea waffle to the who gives a fuck thread. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really is super quiet on this front since DA came in. I’m excited when the eventual out of the blue signing shows up when it’s all but done. 
 

Very curious to see what route and kind of players we go for. I feel chill about it but still curious and excited. Really have no idea what to expect. 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ashworth is not the one who identifies players let’s not forget. I’m sure he’s said that himself since his appointment, it’s down to the scouts, Howe and his staff, he’s mainly a facilitator to get deals done, communicate with other clubs and knit every operation together from scouting to actual recruitment, player development, the academy, the ladies team and so on and so on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, King HTT III said:

Ashworth is not the one who identifies players let’s not forget. I’m sure he’s said that himself since his appointment, it’s down to the scouts, Howe and his staff, he’s mainly a facilitator to get deals done, communicate with other clubs and knit every operation together from scouting to actual recruitment, player development, the academy, the ladies team and so on and so on.


Don’t see anyone saying he’s scouting them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what Craig Hope thinks of Simon Jones, Hope is pretty bang on, but Jones just links us with random players. Always annoying when I see us linked in the Mail to someone and its not Hope.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, King HTT III said:

Tielemans no thanks, he’s a decent player but lacks that intensity and physical up and down the pitch type of game which is now our forte.

 

Also think he is likely a little too similar to Bruno. Whole point of getting a top quality holder is to allow Bruno more freedom to roam. Tielemans also likes to play with a similar sort of freedom, rather than just sitting deep. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TRC said:

I wonder what Craig Hope thinks of Simon Jones, Hope is pretty bang on, but Jones just links us with random players. Always annoying when I see us linked in the Mail to someone and its not Hope.

 

Aye, he seems to be happy spewing out whatever is fed to him by agents. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, sushimonster85 said:

 

Also think he is likely a little too similar to Bruno. Whole point of getting a top quality holder is to allow Bruno more freedom to roam. Tielemans also likes to play with a similar sort of freedom, rather than just sitting deep. 

Tielemans is massively overrated, really gifted footballer but he goes missing in a lot of games.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...