Financial Fair Play / Profit & Sustainability - New APT Rules Approved by Premier League

[madras]

12 minutes ago, Stifler said:

In all honesty I see Man City’s point of view.

Every club before them who had any extended period of success has done so by being able to be funded by owners without the need to go through sponsorships. One of those clubs shares the same city as them and has probably taken a fair chunk of their supporters base because of it, another of those clubs is in the same region as them.

Flip the situation around and say Sunderland and Boro did it to us, we’d rightfully be biting back saying what goes around, comes around.

 

To a lesser degree, you also have to remember that these sponsors are not just sponsoring Man City, but they are usually City football group wide sponsorship deals which represents 13 clubs or so world wide.

 

As we have seen ourselves, it’s absolutely fucking shambolic that the Premier League have done fuck all to protect clubs from bad owners, aside from keeping the red tops happy, what the fuck is the point in protecting clubs from good owners?

Even the Everton situation is on the Premier League. If they allowed them to spend when their owner, be that Moshiri or who he was funded by to invest, then Everton would have done what we did last season, and Villa did this season. Even if their owners did get caught up, they would have had a team ready to compete, going into a new stadium, they would have easily been able to sell them for about £1bn, instead of attempting to sell to Ponzi schemes, and every want to be ‘Investment consortium’.

Were Man Utd funded through their owners in the same way ?

 

 

 

Edited June 9 by madras

[madras]

1 minute ago, FloydianMag said:

There’ll be the inevitable leaks, always is but transparency has to be the way to go to avoid suspicion etc.

I'd have used the word "corruption" instead of "suspicion".

[FloydianMag]

Just now, madras said:

I'd have used the word "corruption" instead of "suspicion".

Ok……the corrupt cunts.

[Ghandis Flip-Flop]

1 hour ago, bobloblaw said:

 

It's pretty obvious why those are two different things, aside from any shady Chelsea stuff.  They aren't deals from affiliated companies.

Any deal of this nature always has an element of quid pro quo involved, directly related party's or not. It’s naive to expect otherwise

[madras]

3 minutes ago, FloydianMag said:

Ok……the corrupt cunts.

Yeah ! Sounds much better than the suspicious cunts.

[nufcnick]

26 minutes ago, madras said:

"The case will be heard in private and there will be no public acknowledgment of any outcome, nor the reasons behind it"

 

Sounds reasonable. You'd never think this was an organisation desperate not to have an independent regulator imposed on it.

This is why it will end up at CAT, the the PL arbitration committee will automatically find in favour of the PL 

[FloydianMag]

4 minutes ago, nufcnick said:

This is why it will end up at CAT, the the PL arbitration committee will automatically find in favour of the PL 

The make up of the panel is one arbitrator nominated by the PL, one by City and one independent. All will be experienced lawyers who when considering their decision will have to take into account UK Competition Law.

[madras]

6 minutes ago, nufcnick said:

This is why it will end up at CAT, the the PL arbitration committee will automatically find in favour of the PL 

Then on the the high courts.

[The Prophet]

Stick it all of it in the bin.

[Nucasol]

Just now, The Prophet said:

Stick it all of it in the bin.

So the Football Group directed by Chelsea sign him, place him with Strasbourg and then buy him like City have done with Savio if he’s any good.
 

Stinks.

[gbandit]

Great job regulating football you stupid fucks. Let Chelsea get away with murder for literally three decades while clamping down on clubs who actually try and build more sustainably. The game is absolutely fucked right now 

[r0cafella]

25 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

Stick it all of it in the bin.

As I’ve mentioned many times, it’s absolutely baffling we don’t have this structure in place at this point, you can leverage a club outside of PSR rules balance sheet and ensure only the best talent makes it to the big leagues. 
 

I get this is unsavoury but it’s about competing. 

[The Prophet]

1 minute ago, r0cafella said:

As I’ve mentioned many times, it’s absolutely baffling we don’t have this structure in place at this point, you can leverage a club outside of PSR rules balance sheet and ensure only the best talent makes it to the big leagues. 
 

I get this is unsavoury but it’s about competing. 

 

It's been reported we've been talking to clubs in France and Belgium. I'm glad we decided against investing in 777 though

[gbandit]

Would much prefer that people weren’t allowed to game the system like fuck. How is that fair on other teams? I don’t want some system where we just join the five or six clubs that have it all sewn up. I watch sport because I want it to be competitive and relatively fair. If PSR rules actually made football fairer they’d be great but I don’t think that’ll happen. In all likelihood our only route to success will be about essentially cheating our way there through things that shouldn’t be allowed. Think I’d stop watching us if that was the case 

[r0cafella]

Just now, gbandit said:

Would much prefer that people weren’t allowed to game the system like fuck. How is that fair on other teams? I don’t want some system where we just join the five or six clubs that have it all sewn up. I watch sport because I want it to be competitive and relatively fair. If PSR rules actually made football fairer they’d be great but I don’t think that’ll happen. In all likelihood our only route to success will be about essentially cheating our way there through things that shouldn’t be allowed. Think I’d stop watching us if that was the case 

The ship set sail ages ago, unfortunately in football we don’t tend to go back the good old days only spiral further into degenerate behaviour. 

[Menace]

5 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

The ship set sail ages ago, unfortunately in football we don’t tend to go back the good old days only spiral further into degenerate behaviour. 

I agree. Seems you have to play dirty to win. Chelsea are scooping up a lot of talent and have serious money to find loopholes to let them get away with it. Once they stop being so trigger happy with managers they'll be a dangerous unit for sure.

[80]

3 minutes ago, gbandit said:

Would much prefer that people weren’t allowed to game the system like fuck. How is that fair on other teams? I don’t want some system where we just join the five or six clubs that have it all sewn up. I watch sport because I want it to be competitive and relatively fair. If PSR rules actually made football fairer they’d be great but I don’t think that’ll happen. In all likelihood our only route to success will be about essentially cheating our way there through things that shouldn’t be allowed. Think I’d stop watching us if that was the case 

I know this sounds upside down, but just to put the alternate case that got us into this situation, the claim is that it's unfair if the clubs/businesses that generate the most revenue and global interest don't get the lion's share of the money. That if Man United disappeared tonight, the Singaporeans would just stop watching rather than transferring their support to Southampton. And it's only fair that a club with 40k supporters like Sheffield Wednesday should be smashed to bits or ignored by one in the millions like Liverpool.

 

Basically, that we need to make football less fair to make it more competitive and enjoyable.

 

I guess I'm just saying this to help clean up our argument a bit. Words like fairness are easily twisted and used to distract from what we really want.

[TRon]

38 minutes ago, gbandit said:

Great job regulating football you stupid fucks. Let Chelsea get away with murder for literally three decades while clamping down on clubs who actually try and build more sustainably. The game is absolutely fucked right now 

 

It's weird how all of it barely raised a few grumbles prior to our takeover. It would have been a lot easier to stop the spending if the PL hadn't decided it was a bad thing retrospectively once clubs outside of the cartel hadn't come knocking.

[pubteam]

49 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

Stick it all of it in the bin.

So utter bullshit like this is ok, but investing money into your own club with zero debt is a big no no. Makes sense.

[Erikse]

3 hours ago, Stifler said:

In all honesty I see Man City’s point of view.

Every club before them who had any extended period of success has done so by being able to be funded by owners without the need to go through sponsorships. One of those clubs shares the same city as them and has probably taken a fair chunk of their supporters base because of it, another of those clubs is in the same region as them.

Flip the situation around and say Sunderland and Boro did it to us, we’d rightfully be biting back saying what goes around, comes around.

 

To a lesser degree, you also have to remember that these sponsors are not just sponsoring Man City, but they are usually City football group wide sponsorship deals which represents 13 clubs or so world wide.

 

As we have seen ourselves, it’s absolutely fucking shambolic that the Premier League have done fuck all to protect clubs from bad owners, aside from keeping the red tops happy, what the fuck is the point in protecting clubs from good owners?

Even the Everton situation is on the Premier League. If they allowed them to spend when their owner, be that Moshiri or who he was funded by to invest, then Everton would have done what we did last season, and Villa did this season. Even if their owners did get caught up, they would have had a team ready to compete, going into a new stadium, they would have easily been able to sell them for about £1bn, instead of attempting to sell to Ponzi schemes, and every want to be ‘Investment consortium’.

 

But they also didn't have laws in place to limit potensial competitors. No club has dominated the PL like Man City is doing now. The current system itself is also protecting them, despite limiting them from spending insane amounts of money. You can't just look at them being limited while ignoring the fact that every other team is being limited spending wise, most of them way more, without having much chance of changing that fact.

 

 

Edited June 9 by Erikse

[Maggies]

At the top, Man City will continue to dominate for the foreseeable. Other clubs may pick up the odd trophy, but to call it a ‘Big 6’ is false.

 

Mid table teams e.g. West Ham, Brighton will never win the league. They may pick up a low profile trophy every 10-15 years.

 

Newly promoted clubs don’t have a hope in staying up unless they gamble like Forest and accept a points deduction is coming. Clubs like Forest, Palace, Everton have zero hope of ever winning the league again.

 

If you predict what the league will look like in 10 years time, I bet majority would be correct.

 

Clubs literally need to win the lottery like we have to progress and even then, show patience during the process.

Football is screwed unless drastic changes are made. I don’t understand why more fans aren’t pushing back against these rules like they were for the Super League.

 

 

[Wolfcastle]

Just now, Erikse said:

 

But they also didn't have laws in place to limit potensial competitors. No club has dominated the PL like Man City is doing now. The current system itself is also protecting them, despite limiting them from spending insane amounts of money. You can't just look at them being limited while ignoring the fact that every other team is being limited spending wise, most of them way more, without having much chance of changing that fact.

 

 

 

Manchester United did, more so probably. Pre Abramovich the lowest they'd finished in 12years was 3rd once and won 7 of the previous 9 titles (Man City 8 in 13) and by 18points in 99/00, only twice were they taken to the last day. With plenty of cups along the way trebles and a couple doubles, whilst being the richest club in the country.

(Liverpool probably likewise in the 70s and 80s).

Funnilly enough there was no talk I recall about changing rules then, and pre Abramovich there was no signs that that dominance wouldn't continue.

 

 

 

Edited June 9 by Wolfcastle

[Erikse]

36 minutes ago, Wolfcastle said:

Manchester United did, more so probably. Pre Abramovich the lowest they'd finished in 12years was 3rd once and won 7 of the previous 9 titles (Man City 8 in 13) and by 18points in 99/00, only twice were they taken to the last day. With plenty of cups along the way, whilst being the richest club in the country.

(Liverpool probably likewise in the 70s and 80s).

Funnilly enough there was no talk I recall about changing rules then, and pre Abramovich there was no signs that that dominance wouldn't continue.

 

 

 

 

 

First team to win 4 years in a row, and point wise Man Utd didn't ever manage to get the 98-100 points that City has managed on 2 occasions. Their highest is 92. If you add together the points accumulated by Man City in the last 6 seasons, no consecutive 6 seasons by any team would come close. I would guess that Liverpools total in the last 6 years is closer to what Man United achieved at their best, and may even be better than Man Utds strongest 6 consecutive seasons. Yet, also Liverpool are far off of Man Citys total.

 

If FFP existed pre Abramovich, Man Utd would still dominate. Probably even more. How would you feel if they still complained about being restricted, saying it was unfair towards them?

 

 

Edited June 9 by Erikse

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Wolfcastle said:

Manchester United did, more so probably. Pre Abramovich the lowest they'd finished in 12years was 3rd once and won 7 of the previous 9 titles (Man City 8 in 13) and by 18points in 99/00, only twice were they taken to the last day. With plenty of cups along the way trebles and a couple doubles, whilst being the richest club in the country.

(Liverpool probably likewise in the 70s and 80s).

Funnilly enough there was no talk I recall about changing rules then, and pre Abramovich there was no signs that that dominance wouldn't continue.

 

 

 

 

 

There's been several last day title wins for City too. It's not like they're doing a Celtic and winning by 10-15 points every season. Liverpool and Arsenal had chances to win at least a title each in the last few seasons. 

[The Prophet]

Right City, at these corrupt, status quo loving, ambition hating cunts.