Financial Fair Play / Profit & Sustainability

[Wolfcastle]

Clubs effectively lose points following these rules as well as not following them. Could probably calculate the risk if they ever get down what deduction you'd get for what "over spend" you commit which is why it'll remain random. 

 

[mighty__mag]

22 hours ago, Mike said:

 

Solution: sign Lee Kang In if he can play on the right.

 

Kubo 

[et tu brute]

5 hours ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

It'll be Leicester.

According to Borsen it's probably Leicester and possibly Chelsea, who have to curve a gap of 150 million according to him on Talksport

[timeEd32]

1 hour ago, Wolfcastle said:

Clubs effectively lose points following these rules as well as not following them. Could probably calculate the risk if they ever get down what deduction you'd get for what "over spend" you commit which is why it'll remain random. 

 

 

The main issue is the whole process is so opaque. A club could do something they anticipate will be a four point deduction and it could end up being eight. You'd have to know you're signing up for a legal battle and, fair or not, it'd be much higher profile if it was Saudi led Newcastle as opposed to Bournemouth or something.

[TRon]

8 minutes ago, et tu brute said:

According to Borsen it's probably Leicester and possibly Chelsea, who have to curve a gap of 150 million according to him on Talksport

 

 

So just Leicester then.

[Unbelievable]

9 minutes ago, et tu brute said:

According to Borsen it's probably Leicester and possibly Chelsea, who have to curve a gap of 150 million according to him on Talksport

So just Leicester then

 

edit: ffs TRon

 

 

Edited 22 hours ago by Unbelievable

[pubteam]

I'm surprised the football agents aren't challenging the legality of psr by now, it's must be costing them a fortune with the lack of transfer activity. Hopefully the premier league realise how damaging this is to the brand before it's too late.

[TRon]

3 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

So just Leicester then

 

edit: ffs TRon

 

 

 

 

 

[Mike]

1 hour ago, mighty__mag said:

 

Kubo 

 

50m release clause as well...

[Ikon]

Would love it if Chelsea were fucked, but yeah can’t see it. Fair…

[TRon]

12 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

So just Leicester then

 

edit: ffs TRon

 

 

 

 

 

Tbf, if it's just Leicester and Chelsea, they might just decide to punish Leicester twice.

[mighty__mag]

1 hour ago, Mike said:

 

50m release clause as well...

 

Let's do it, we'd claw loads back in Japanese hysteria 

[Mike]

Just now, mighty__mag said:

 

Let's do it, we'd claw loads back in Japanese hysteria 

 

@Beren

[mighty__mag]

Btw, that wasn't any historic reference, Purley they'd go wild for any Japanese hero playing in the Premier League. 

[Beren]

23 minutes ago, Mike said:

 

@Beren

 

PSR prevents me from spunking money up the wall.

[Mike]

2 minutes ago, Beren said:

 

PSR prevents me from spunking money up the wall.

 

PSR just needs you to take it up the arse a bit before you can let it go. Be a team player you selfish fuck.

[r0cafella]

8 hours ago, timeEd32 said:

 

The main issue is the whole process is so opaque. A club could do something they anticipate will be a four point deduction and it could end up being eight. You'd have to know you're signing up for a legal battle and, fair or not, it'd be much higher profile if it was Saudi led Newcastle as opposed to Bournemouth or something.

Exactly. This is why the rules and punishment were written in such an opaque way and also why Evertons initial punishment was so severe. It was a clear message to upstarts such as ourselves to not even think about it. 

[alexf]

9 hours ago, Wolfcastle said:

Clubs effectively lose points following these rules as well as not following them. Could probably calculate the risk if they ever get down what deduction you'd get for what "over spend" you commit which is why it'll remain random. 

 

 

Also an issue would be if you breach heavily and say only got 4 points. The likelyhood is then you would obviously keep breaching again and again until you sold a high value player to make up the deficit. So then you would get regular points deductions. And as others have said, the punishments are so unclear, who knows if each additional points deduction doesn't get more and more severe each time. 

 

It's all fucked really and I guess it could be argued we are doing it the right way in terms of trying to keep hold of our best players and build slowly. Rather than sell a top star and try to rebuild quicker. But for this method to be more effective, we have to try and flog the dead wood or surplus high earners better than we have and replace with cheaper and younger talent. Easier said than done. Also need more sponsors. 

[Ben]

Sounds like Man Utd are fairly close to the limit, no wonder Brexit Jim is turning off lights and putting ticket prices up