simonsays Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 Nonsensical to have rules in place but no predetermined punishments set up for when those rules are broken. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 13 minutes ago, simonsays said: Nonsensical to have rules in place but no predetermined punishments set up for when those rules are broken. It’s like most things at the PL, make shit up as things happen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 7 hours ago, Abacus said: I agree that it would be extremely harsh to punish Everton twice this season, and that the way this whole thing is being handled is shambolic just for sporting reasons if nothing else. From what I understand (and please correct me if I'm wrong), a large part of the problem stems from interest costs on debt for building their new stadium. You'd have initially assumed that this would be outside of FFP as it relates to spending on infrastructure, but no. I mean, as well as other spending and COVID losses etc. Either way, they had owners who were prepared to invest in the playing squad, albeit badly. It now looks like they have been driven to sell to new owners in 777 who are struggling to pass the tests, with the whole thing being dragged out again by the PL. Whatever the intent of FFP, to maintain club solvency supposedly, it's had the complete opposite effect. Whatever you think about individual owners, their source of wealth etc, surely now nobody with ambition would invest in a club outside of a certain few with the intent to establish them as a major club again, as the rules are so heavily stacked against this. The stadium interest payments are one of the core issues, but the loan was given to Everton FC, not the separate entity building the stadium, and the PL argued it was used to fund the club’s operations. Importantly, the appeals board seems to agree with the PL. The appeals board basically ruled the PL went too far with the punishment and failed to use existing benchmarks. But they did not accept any of Everton’s arguments that would change the calculations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 19 minutes ago, timeEd32 said: The stadium interest payments are one of the core issues, but the loan was given to Everton FC, not the separate entity building the stadium, and the PL argued it was used to fund the club’s operations. Importantly, the appeals board seems to agree with the PL. The appeals board basically ruled the PL went too far with the punishment and failed to use existing benchmarks. But they did not accept any of Everton’s arguments that would change the calculations. From what I read as well, the loan documents also stated it was for general expenses and not for the stadium. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/ffp-rule-change-would-make-28706446 I know it’s the Chronicle but🤷♂️ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 All comes down to the what penalties are. UEFA's cost control ratio, which is what the PL might copy, also has a published set of fines for each threshold. At least for less egregious offenses it acts more like a luxury tax of sorts. If the PL implements a similar rule but the punishments are either secretive or points deductions then it's a very different system. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Jinx Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 If you get caught, the punishment should be optional.. take a points hit or if you can afford it, pay a fine where the proceeds get through to lower leagues or grassroots. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pata Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 4 minutes ago, Dr Jinx said: If you get caught, the punishment should be optional.. take a points hit or if you can afford it, pay a fine where the proceeds get through to lower leagues or grassroots. No. So many teams (like Man City, Chelsea or us) wouldn't give a fuck about paying a fine making the system even more geared towards the rich top teams. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 Just now, Pata said: No. So many teams (like Man City, Chelsea or us) wouldn't give a fuck about paying a fine making the system even more geared towards the rich top teams. No good having rich owners if the twats who are already rich prevent your owners investing. Fuck FFP and FMV off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 In all fairness, I’m not against FFP, but it needs to be implemented differently. There is no good having a ceiling of what a club can bring in and what they can spend, allowing the Sky 6 to buy who they want. Should just top the outgoings to the top teams revenue from the previous season + 10%. Any spending above your own revenues should be matched in a yearly bond held by a 3rd party incase the owner does a runner. Should also scrap being allowed to being in stupid amounts of debt, and debt should correlate to your losses. Stadiums and other infrastructure could be accounted in your costs, but you should be allowed to amortise it for 20-25 years after the completion date, so clubs can afford to upgrade their facilities. No more limits on what you can and can’t use in terms of revenue and commercial sponsorship deals. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 Just now, Stifler said: In all fairness, I’m not against FFP, but it needs to be implemented differently. There is no good having a ceiling of what a club can bring in and what they can spend, allowing the Sky 6 to buy who they want. Should just top the outgoings to the top teams revenue from the previous season + 10%. Any spending above your own revenues should be matched in a yearly bond held by a 3rd party incase the owner does a runner. Should also scrap being allowed to being in stupid amounts of debt, and debt should correlate to your losses. Stadiums and other infrastructure could be accounted in your costs, but you should be allowed to amortise it for 20-25 years after the completion date, so clubs can afford to upgrade their facilities. No more limits on what you can and can’t use in terms of revenue and commercial sponsorship deals. I'd vote for that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted February 28 Share Posted February 28 Absolutely if we talking about fairness we need to create some form of catch up mechanic to keep the playing field level. If we are the top players team others absolutely should be allowed to spend a bit more to try and compete with us. And all of this should be done whilst the future of the clubs are guaranteed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonBez comesock Posted February 28 Share Posted February 28 Doesn’t matter what happens with the premier league in regards to their version of FFP?….. if we still have to abide by UEFA version (70%) to play in european competitions? Yeah ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 28 Share Posted February 28 39 minutes ago, JonBez comesock said: Doesn’t matter what happens with the premier league in regards to their version of FFP?….. if we still have to abide by UEFA version (70%) to play in european competitions? Yeah ? UEFA FFP rules are also open to a legal challenge, EU Competition Law almost mirrors UK law. The strongest leagues in UEFA are also members of the EU any ruling by the CJEU couldn’t be ignored by UEFA if a challenge was made. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonBez comesock Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 On 28/02/2024 at 11:28, FloydianMag said: UEFA FFP rules are also open to a legal challenge, EU Competition Law almost mirrors UK law. The strongest leagues in UEFA are also members of the EU any ruling by the CJEU couldn’t be ignored by UEFA if a challenge was made. Would we have the balls to challenge or though ? Seems like we are walking on egg shells / have an agreement not to rock any boats (as part of the takeover agreement) ?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 On 28/02/2024 at 05:45, JonBez comesock said: Doesn’t matter what happens with the premier league in regards to their version of FFP?….. if we still have to abide by UEFA version (70%) to play in european competitions? Yeah ? UEFA’s punishments start with a series of escalating fines, so it’s somewhat lenient if you’re willing to pay. It’d be good if the PL’s threshold is a little higher as has been speculated. We’d be in a decent spot on that metric. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 26 minutes ago, JonBez comesock said: Would we have the balls to challenge or though ? Seems like we are walking on egg shells / have an agreement not to rock any boats (as part of the takeover agreement) ?? The cartel clubs hate us since our takeover, hence the FMV shit, I think PIF do and likely will challenge it but it will be at a time of there choosing. Court cases going on in the States re Liv golf, that doesn’t bother them, they just use the best lawyers money can buy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 7 minutes ago, timeEd32 said: UEFA’s punishments start with a series of escalating fines, so it’s somewhat lenient if you’re willing to pay. It’d be good if the PL’s threshold is a little higher as has been speculated. We’d be in a decent spot on that metric. PL clubs are meeting today re FFP and there is a vote🤷🏼♂️ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 Crystal Palace co owner says FFP rules are broken and keep established order on top. https://x.com/martynziegler/status/1763280623072878983?s=61&t=Yt8DTJJ-7Jh_ndgpdGSFKQ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbandit Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 The whole thing’s going to come crashing down soon enough Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 6 minutes ago, gbandit said: The whole thing’s going to come crashing down soon enough The noise from other clubs is getting louder by the day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 34 minutes ago, FloydianMag said: Crystal Palace co owner says FFP rules are broken and keep established order on top. https://x.com/martynziegler/status/1763280623072878983?s=61&t=Yt8DTJJ-7Jh_ndgpdGSFKQ This is a great quote: “I’ve got to somehow find a way to put Crystal Palace against Erling Haaland, and if you have an injury at Palace, you don’t get to pull a £15 million player off the bench, you’ve got to take someone from your academy, because you can’t afford to have that (£15 million) player on your bench. That is not sport. Is anyone really having fun with this? It’s broken.” Also helps dispute the quite frankly odd narrative that American owners are only interested in financial restrictions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paully Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 https://twitter.com/deadlinedaylive/status/1763274499217137730?s=46&t=FsEm6VC2ijNnTjHjyXU7DA Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mase Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 Finally, the clubs that actually voted for FFP, are seeing what the red teams forced them to vote for. Brilliant! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 29 Share Posted February 29 Just now, Mase said: Finally, the clubs that actually voted for FFP, are seeing what the red teams forced them to vote for. Brilliant! I don’t think FFP is going to be around much longer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now