oldtype Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 This just ocurred to me on my walk back home yesterday. Say an owner like Abramovich decides one day to buy... Let's say Fulham and use it at the Chelsea reserves. So he'd loan out all the players in Chelsea that don't play regularly to Fulham on year long free loans with recall clauses in the contracts. Even without spending more than a few pennies on actually buying players for Fulham, it would still be just about good enough to stay in the Permiership, so Chelsea could probably have an outlet with which to get players like Mikel/Kalou Premiership first-team experience indefinitely. So, besides the fact that it would be a ****ing c***ish ting to do, is there anything stopping any rich club owner from actually doing this? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 I'm sure theres some rule to do with conflicts of interest, ie you can't have shares in more than one club. There was a case a while back, can't remember who, and he couldn't take on this new job until he sold his shares with his old one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leazes1986 Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 Ambramovich is more than welcome to buy us and loan us their rejects rather than selling them to us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 I'm sure theres some rule to do with conflicts of interest, ie you can't have shares in more than one club. There was a case a while back, can't remember who, and he couldn't take on this new job until he sold his shares with his old one. I remember NTL buying shares in our club, the papers reported that they were only allowed 10% maximum (ie they bought 9.99%) because of PL rules since they already had a similar amount in another PL club (cant remember who) as well as Celtic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gemmill Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 Aye it basically wouldn't be allowed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fugazi Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 I'm sure theres some rule to do with conflicts of interest, ie you can't have shares in more than one club. There was a case a while back, can't remember who, and he couldn't take on this new job until he sold his shares with his old one. I remember NTL buying shares in our club, the papers reported that they were only allowed 10% maximum (ie they bought 9.99%) because of PL rules since they already had a similar amount in another PL club (cant remember who) as well as Celtic. Villa? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 You can't own more than one Premier League club, I think that's a rule, otherwise Abramovich would have just bought the competition by now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 I'm sure theres some rule to do with conflicts of interest, ie you can't have shares in more than one club. There was a case a while back, can't remember who, and he couldn't take on this new job until he sold his shares with his old one. I remember NTL buying shares in our club, the papers reported that they were only allowed 10% maximum (ie they bought 9.99%) because of PL rules since they already had a similar amount in another PL club (cant remember who) as well as Celtic. Villa? Might be right there. It was another mid table club certainly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 Tell you who, it was Peter Reid. Couldn't take the Leeds job until he sold his shares in Sunderland. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Invicta_Toon Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 common ownership is barred Rafa was whinging a while ago about wanting to enter a Liverpool reserve team in the football league Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Deep456 Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 This just ocurred to me on my walk back home yesterday. Say an owner like Abramovich decides one day to buy... Let's say Fulham and use it at the Chelsea reserves. So he'd loan out all the players in Chelsea that don't play regularly to Fulham on year long free loans with recall clauses in the contracts. Even without spending more than a few pennies on actually buying players for Fulham, it would still be just about good enough to stay in the Permiership, so Chelsea could probably have an outlet with which to get players like Mikel/Kalou Premiership first-team experience indefinitely. So, besides the fact that it would be a ****ing c***ish ting to do, is there anything stopping any rich club owner from actually doing this? What happens when Fulham v Chelski. All the players won't play and Fulham won't have half a team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 i know there used to be a rule about how many loanees you could have per season,think it still applies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordie2000 Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 I think the rule is no more than 2 loan players at anyone time, sure Roeder mentioned something about using at least 1 of the 2 loans available during the Jan transfer window. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Invicta_Toon Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 Didn't Chelsea buy someone and loan him to a belgian side to get round work permit rules I thought most clubs loaned to get round the transfer windows Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brummie Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 I'm sure theres some rule to do with conflicts of interest, ie you can't have shares in more than one club. There was a case a while back, can't remember who, and he couldn't take on this new job until he sold his shares with his old one. I remember NTL buying shares in our club, the papers reported that they were only allowed 10% maximum (ie they bought 9.99%) because of PL rules since they already had a similar amount in another PL club (cant remember who) as well as Celtic. Villa? Correct, they had 9.9% in Newcastle, Villa and someone else in the Prem I think. Possibly West Ham? And there are rules about ownership of more than one club in the Premiership. Plus, why would RA bother buying an English club at some stupid inflated price, he'd just buy some cheapo French team or something and farm the players out there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superior Acuña Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 I'm sure theres some rule to do with conflicts of interest, ie you can't have shares in more than one club. There was a case a while back, can't remember who, and he couldn't take on this new job until he sold his shares with his old one. I remember NTL buying shares in our club, the papers reported that they were only allowed 10% maximum (ie they bought 9.99%) because of PL rules since they already had a similar amount in another PL club (cant remember who) as well as Celtic. Villa? Correct, they had 9.9% in Newcastle, Villa and someone else in the Prem I think. Possibly West Ham? And there are rules about ownership of more than one club in the Premiership. Plus, why would RA bother buying an English club at some stupid inflated price, he'd just buy some cheapo French team or something and farm the players out there. I think it was leeds. But they didnt have the name on their shirt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Nguyen Van Falk Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 I'm sure theres some rule to do with conflicts of interest, ie you can't have shares in more than one club. This, but only shares from the same league. So you can own more than one club but they can't be in the same league. Roman has shares in a Russian club if I remember correctly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Invicta_Toon Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 I'm sure theres some rule to do with conflicts of interest, ie you can't have shares in more than one club. This, but only shares from the same league. So you can own more than one club but they can't be in the same league. Roman has shares in a Russian club if I remember correctly. iirc he had to become a silent partner of that club for them to be allowed in the Euro cups Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NIToon Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 Didn't Chelsea buy someone and loan him to a belgian side to get round work permit rules I thought most clubs loaned to get round the transfer windows There's a difference between the number of players you can loan out and number you can bring in. Many clubs loan out players with work permit issues: Liverpool - Gonzalez Manure - Dong Only clubs outside the Prem can loan outside the transfer windows Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 I'm sure theres some rule to do with conflicts of interest, ie you can't have shares in more than one club. This, but only shares from the same league. So you can own more than one club but they can't be in the same league. Roman has shares in a Russian club if I remember correctly. His company sponsor CSKA Moscow(or Loko...cant remember) but for a sponsorship amount is a lot espec for a Ruski team so effectively he gives them ? amount a year. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest b0f Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 Reminds me of what Arsenal were up to: http://sport.independent.co.uk/football/premiership/article623363.ece Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NIToon Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 I'm sure theres some rule to do with conflicts of interest, ie you can't have shares in more than one club. This, but only shares from the same league. So you can own more than one club but they can't be in the same league. Roman has shares in a Russian club if I remember correctly. His company sponsor CSKA Moscow(or Loko...cant remember) but for a sponsorship amount is a lot espec for a Ruski team so effectively he gives them ? amount a year. It was CSKA andwas to do with a sponsorship by an oil company he had a controlling interest in. AFAIK he has since sold his share in the business Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 And there are rules about ownership of more than one club in the Premiership. It's not just about owning more than one club in the Premiership. You can't own more than one club in England. 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