Jump to content

Financial Fair Play (FFP)


Mattoon

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, Mase said:


Is that true? 6 teams voted against it but it was still brought in?
The Premier League doing everything the American owners want without realising it will be the end of the PL as we know it!


Yeah 12 6 was the vote, with villa and palace abstaining 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anybody else just not be arsed with it now. Just read Ashworth’s first priority (were he to stay) would be to sell a top player. Literally exactly what we were under Ashley. I’m not comparing these owners to Ashley, they’re the complete opposite but as soon as our takeover was confirmed it seemed like rule after rule was brought in to stop us in our tracks.

 

If our top board members are jumping ship to a team we should be  looking to overtake  then what actually has changed. It’s a closed shop and it will remain that way without successful legal challenges. 
 

I thought our days of being a “stepping stone club” were over but it appears not with Bruno, Isak, Joelinton, Trippier etc being linked with moves away and us seemingly having no choice in the matter because of PSR. 
 

Our academy needs gutting and restarting which will take years. Any gain we make is instantly evaporated by some edict from the red two. The ONLY chance any club had is to be taken over by a sovereign wealth fund and now that isn’t even enough. We need to fuck off the PL and start a new league with the other 14. Leave the 6 to eat each other alive. 

 

 

Edited by Joelinton7

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Joelinton7 said:

Can anybody else just not be arsed with it now. Just read Ashworth’s first priority (were he to stay) would be to sell a top player. Literally exactly what we were under Ashley. I’m not comparing these owners to Ashley, they’re the complete opposite but as soon as our takeover was confirmed it seemed like rule after rule was brought in to stop us in our tracks.

 

If our top board members are jumping ship to a team we should be  looking to overtake  then what actually has changed. It’s a closed shop and it will remain that way without successful legal challenges. 
 

I thought our days of being a “stepping stone club” were over but it appears not with Bruno, Isak, Joelinton, Trippier etc being linked with moves away and us seemingly having no choice in the matter because of PSR. 
 

Our academy needs gutting and restarting which will take years. Any gain we make is instantly evaporated by some edict from the red two. The ONLY chance any club had is to be taken over by a sovereign wealth fund and now that isn’t even enough. We need to fuck off the PL and start a new league with the other 14. Leave the 6 to eat each other alive. 

 

 

 

A large part of the other 14 are complicit with owners happy to trundle along and not have to invest.

 

Until an independent regulator seizes control self interest and greed will rule.

 

On a positive note we will get there it’s just going to take longer than we want.

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Joelinton7 said:

Can anybody else just not be arsed with it now. Just read Ashworth’s first priority (were he to stay) would be to sell a top player. Literally exactly what we were under Ashley. I’m not comparing these owners to Ashley, they’re the complete opposite but as soon as our takeover was confirmed it seemed like rule after rule was brought in to stop us in our tracks.

 

If our top board members are jumping ship to a team we should be  looking to overtake  then what actually has changed. It’s a closed shop and it will remain that way without successful legal challenges. 
 

I thought our days of being a “stepping stone club” were over but it appears not with Bruno, Isak, Joelinton, Trippier etc being linked with moves away and us seemingly having no choice in the matter because of PSR. 
 

Our academy needs gutting and restarting which will take years. Any gain we make is instantly evaporated by some edict from the red two. The ONLY chance any club had is to be taken over by a sovereign wealth fund and now that isn’t even enough. We need to fuck off the PL and start a new league with the other 14. Leave the 6 to eat each other alive. 

 

 

 

If we don’t challenge FFP/FMV legally we’ll just have to be happy with who we are. PL have now voted in stronger FMV rules to strangle our revenue streams.

 

At the PL meeting last week I honestly believe it was us who threatened legal action…..mind that’s based on absolutely fuck all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, andycap said:

So could the club not just take out loans to buy players? Would that affect ffp? As they don't mind debt. 

It would still affect FFP because what goes on the books isn't the transfer fee, its the reduction in the value of the player over the course of his contract (up to 5 years).

 

So you can buy a £40m player on a four year contract however you like - cash, installments, getting a loan from HSBC - he's still going to cost you £10m per year (plus wages obviously) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still think the fact we're hindered by 'sustainability' rules despite being owned by the richest cunts on the planet is a bit ridiculous mind. Like "oooooooooohhh, can the Saudi's afford this amount of money or are they risking the club's future???"

 

Fuck. Directly. Off

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't see a way it doesn't make football a lot more boring in time when everyone learns their place and realises they're stuck with it as a rule.

 

Even not having to worry about being overhauled will be nullifying. 

No more venting at clubs for not showing more ambition - because they can't. 

 

Basically I guess it's imagine a PL without Blackburn, Chelsea and Man City being financed, Leeds for better and worse under/after Ridsdale, Boro's over extracagance, Shearer coming home, where Ashley's are encouraged.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Feels rank that a 15 year spell can define a club's history and now the ladder is being raised and no-one else is allowed the opportunity. 

 

Liverpool had a 17-18 year spell early 70s to late 90s and it's set them up for the rest of their lives. They were always an historic club but up until they beat us in the '74 Final they were no bigger than us. They'd won 9 major trophies up to that final, we had 10. Something needs to change.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

Feels rank that a 15 year spell can define a club's history and now the ladder is being raised and no-one else is allowed the opportunity. 

 

Liverpool had a 17-18 year spell early 70s to late 90s and it's set them up for the rest of their lives. They were always an historic club but up until they beat us in the '74 Final they were no bigger than us. They'd won 9 major trophies up to that final, we had 10. Something needs to change.

 

 

Money always corrupts sadly, now football is about hyper capitalism the owners rush in with the protectionism.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FloydianMag said:

You’re correct, however this is there to allow fair competition and the sooner some club has the balls to use it the better.

 

https://www.catribunal.org.uk

 

I'm sticking to the idea that it will be Forest if they get a points deduction, using the fact that they sold BJ to Spurs within a transfer window that spanned 2 accounting periods, but by delaying the sale they got £15m more than thy would have if they had sold before the 31st July.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Colos Short and Curlies said:

 

I'm sticking to the idea that it will be Forest if they get a points deduction, using the fact that they sold BJ to Spurs within a transfer window that spanned 2 accounting periods, but by delaying the sale they got £15m more than thy would have if they had sold before the 31st July.

 

Forest, City, Everton or us I’m not bothered as long as there’s a challenge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It feels likely to me that the regulations will have to be relaxed soon, in some way anyway. It doesn't suit the PL to starve itself of money and have deadline days where nothing happens. It's meant to be the most glamorous league in the world. 

 

I know top clubs don't like others to catch up, but the PL as a whole doesn't benefit from keeping money out. I guess because of the members-club nature of the organisation, maybe it doesn't have the capacity to make decisions for the benefit of the whole.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, FloydianMag said:

Forest, City, Everton or us I’m not bothered as long as there’s a challenge.

 

City are tying the PL in legal knots, they have no real desire to challenge FFP knowing they will win in court if and when needed.

 

Everton don't really have a leg to stand on as they blatantly played a game with FFP expecting the PL to roll over. They can only challenge the concept of it which may be tricky and take a long time

 

We have no real appetite to be the ones challenging it, I think we know that any challenge by us would just result in other rules being put in their place

 

Forest, as above have a real tangible challenge on how the FFP rules contravene competition law and also go against the principles of why transfer windows remain post Bosman. They'll appeal first and then challenge the rules in court if needed. The worry with this (for the likes of us) is that the PL buckle under appeal and make a soft provision for sales and purchases within the summer transfer window which lets Forest off the hook but does no good to anyone else

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

 

City are tying the PL in legal knots, they have no real desire to challenge FFP knowing they will win in court if and when needed.

 

Everton don't really have a leg to stand on as they blatantly played a game with FFP expecting the PL to roll over. They can only challenge the concept of it which may be tricky and take a long time

 

We have no real appetite to be the ones challenging it, I think we know that any challenge by us would just result in other rules being put in their place

 

Forest, as above have a real tangible challenge on how the FFP rules contravene competition law and also go against the principles of why transfer windows remain post Bosman. They'll appeal first and then challenge the rules in court if needed. The worry with this (for the likes of us) is that the PL buckle under appeal and make a soft provision for sales and purchases within the summer transfer window which lets Forest off the hook but does no good to anyone else

I think you’re wrong on City, if FFP was found to be anti competitive a lot of their charges could disappear, there lawyers would have a field day.

 

Now us, we have good reason to challenge FFP and especially FMV rules that strangles our sponsorship deals. As I said earlier when the PL met last week and introduced the new more onerous rules a club threatened legal action and I don’t think it was a bluff and I don’t think it was City. Time will tell.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is even more infuriating is it's not about the competition and winning for these red owners, they aren't in it for the glory, they're in it for the dividends.  These American business owners just want to milk the tit at the highest table yet have the audacity to say that the state owned clubs will ruin football.

 

State owned clubs don't care about the prize funds, the balance sheets and their healthy end of year financial pat on the back. They want to be the best, to flex their might against the best teams, they're in it for the prestige.

 

It's all very clandestine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FloydianMag said:

I think you’re wrong on City, if FFP was found to be anti competitive a lot of their charges could disappear, there lawyers would have a field day.

 

Now us, we have good reason to challenge FFP and especially FMV rules that strangles our sponsorship deals. As I said earlier when the PL met last week and introduced the new more onerous rules a club threatened legal action and I don’t think it was a bluff and I don’t think it was City. Time will tell.

 

I don't disagree on City, but I don't think they will rock the boat and challenge FFP unless the PL starts trying to apply sanctions from the charges. The legal Beagles know the position and know they would likely win, but taking a concept to court as being unfair and uncompetitive is different to taking a judgment to court as part of the that challenge.

 

Same with us, yes we may take a view that we need to go legal down the line but we'll be more than happy to wait and see how the Everton and Forest cases play out first

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seen on Talksport and Twitter City Fans saying they were "cleared" by CAS and there is an untrue narrtive..

2 second google shows that to be unture.

They didn't clear City.

Judgment rules that much of Uefa’s case was ‘time-barred’ Basically the charges were brought late. Never cleared them of wrongdoing.
The Cas panel of three European lawyers decided by a majority 2-1 also (1 appointed by City)

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Wolfcastle said:

Can't see a way it doesn't make football a lot more boring in time when everyone learns their place and realises they're stuck with it as a rule.

 

Even not having to worry about being overhauled will be nullifying. 

No more venting at clubs for not showing more ambition - because they can't. 

 

Basically I guess it's imagine a PL without Blackburn, Chelsea and Man City being financed, Leeds for better and worse under/after Ridsdale, Boro's over extracagance, Shearer coming home, where Ashley's are encouraged.

 

Since Forest and Clough had the audacity to win the league in 77/78 you would have had the following champions:

 

78/79 - Liverpool

79/80 - Liverpool

80/81 - Villa

81/82 - Liverpool

82/83 - Liverpool

83/84 - Liverpool

84/85 - Everton

85/86 - Liverpool

86/87 - Everton

87/88 - Liverpool

88/89 - Arsenal

89/90 - Liverpool

90/91 - Arsenal

91/92 - Leeds

92/93 - Man United

93/94 - Man United

94/95 - Man United

95/96 - Man United

96/97 - Man United

97/98 - Arsenal

98/99 - Man United

99/00 - Man United

00/01 - Man United

01/02 - Arsenal

02/03 - Man United

03/04 - Arsenal

04/05 - Arsenal

05/06 - Man United

06/07 - Man United

07/08 - Man United

08/09 - Man United

09/10 - Man United

10/11 - Man United

11/12 - Man United

12/13 - Man United

13/14 - Liverpool

14/15 - Arsenal

15/16 - Leicester

16/17 - Tottenham

17/18 - Man United

18/19 - Liverpool

19/20 - Liverpool

20/21 - Man United

21/22 - Liverpool

22/23 - Arsenal

 

45 seasons and 39 titles won by three clubs. That is exactly what Richard Masters' puppeteers want the league to look like.

 

Important to note I only changed one winner from 1978/79 through 2003/04. In the last 19 seasons I had to change 12 of them. They had a firm grip on the game and they lost it when Roman and then Sheikh Mansour turned up. They are now frantically trying to pull up the drawbridge before anyone else threatens their standing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

 

Since Forest and Clough had the audacity to win the league in 77/78 you would have had the following champions:

 

78/79 - Liverpool

79/80 - Liverpool

80/81 - Villa

81/82 - Liverpool

82/83 - Liverpool

83/84 - Liverpool

84/85 - Everton

85/86 - Liverpool

86/87 - Everton

87/88 - Liverpool

88/89 - Arsenal

89/90 - Liverpool

90/91 - Arsenal

91/92 - Leeds

92/93 - Man United

93/94 - Man United

94/95 - Man United

95/96 - Man United

96/97 - Man United

97/98 - Arsenal

98/99 - Man United

99/00 - Man United

00/01 - Man United

01/02 - Arsenal

02/03 - Man United

03/04 - Arsenal

04/05 - Arsenal

05/06 - Man United

06/07 - Man United

07/08 - Man United

08/09 - Man United

09/10 - Man United

10/11 - Man United

11/12 - Man United

12/13 - Man United

13/14 - Liverpool

14/15 - Arsenal

15/16 - Leicester

16/17 - Tottenham

17/18 - Man United

18/19 - Liverpool

19/20 - Liverpool

20/21 - Man United

21/22 - Liverpool

22/23 - Arsenal

 

45 seasons and 39 titles won by three clubs. That is exactly what Richard Masters' puppeteers want the league to look like.

 

Important to note I only changed one winner from 1978/79 through 2003/04. In the last 19 seasons I had to change 12 of them. They had a firm grip on the game and they lost it when Roman and then Sheikh Mansour turned up. They are now frantically trying to pull up the drawbridge before anyone else threatens their standing.

You often hear fans talking about a red cartel, you can see what they mean!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a surprising list. 

 

Leeds in 91/92 might have exceeded ffp too. They were big spenders for a 28k crowd and having been in the top division for two years.

 

Some of those would have been at an absolute canter too.

Oh the fun.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...