|
|
Post by Glory Hunter on Jan 15, 2024 22:49:08 GMT
The system isn’t perfect, but let’s face it, the rules on losses are clear and if you breach them you deserve the sanction - whether it’s points deductions or other penalties. Sympathy for Everton seems nuts to me. They breached the clear rules over 2 three year periods - knowingly and probably the only reason they are still in the Prem today. Forest also, in as clear a way than any other. We have been battling to remain on the right side of the line despite a legacy of contracts that needed to be unwound. This has delayed our progress, so for clubs who frankly couldn’t give a toss and spent no effort on keeping within the rules, I say throw the book at them.
My only issue is with the likes of Man City who blatantly disregarded rules and are now playing legal roulette to avoid the charges. Their penalty should be magnified as they have been seen to avoid the obvious penalties due.
The bottom line is that those who breach rules knowingly, have to face the penalties otherwise it’s a mockery for all those clubs who manage responsibly to do so. Penalise them to the limit of the law and I say any sympathy for the likes of Everton et-al is pure bollocks.
|
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Jan 15, 2024 23:03:35 GMT
When clubs like Man City can get away with it and when teams like Chelsea bend the rules of contracts to get around it, yeah, I do feel sorry for other teams that are simply trying to compete.
|
|
|
|
Post by jesusmcmuffin on Jan 15, 2024 23:03:57 GMT
The system isn’t perfect, but let’s face it, the rules on losses are clear and if you breach them you deserve the sanction - whether it’s points deductions or other penalties. Sympathy for Everton seems nuts to me. They breached the clear rules over 2 three year periods - knowingly and probably the only reason they are still in the Prem today. Forest also, in as clear a way than any other. We have been battling to remain on the right side of the line despite a legacy of contracts that needed to be unwound. This has delayed our progress, so for clubs who frankly couldn’t give a toss and spent no effort on keeping within the rules, I say throw the book at them. My only issue is with the likes of Man City who blatantly disregarded rules and are now playing legal roulette to avoid the charges. Their penalty should be magnified as they have been seen to avoid the obvious penalties due. The bottom line is that those who breach rules knowingly, have to face the penalties otherwise it’s a mockery for all those clubs who manage responsibly to do so. Penalise them to the limit of the law and I say any sympathy for the likes of Everton et-al is pure bollocks. Everton playing hard done by but broke the rules and the ongoing Man City investigation doesn't make it better |
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Jan 15, 2024 23:05:34 GMT
The gap between the prem and championship is getting greater and greater so when you come up if you want to try and stay up you have to spend to try and compete otherwise whats the point? We may as well not have promotion and relegation because soon it will be the 3 that go up will come straight down and the other 17 will be a given.
The premier league in general has been good but it needs to take a look at it's self and ask it's self if 17 teams that don't change is good for the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glory Hunter on Jan 15, 2024 23:08:56 GMT
When clubs like Man City can get away with it and when teams like Chelsea bend the rules of contracts to get around it, yeah, I do feel sorry for other teams that are simply trying to compete. I agree Man City should be under heavy scrutiny and penalised to the hilt. But the others did what they did knowingly, Forest signing 40 players gambling on staying up despite the clear rule break (they spent £250m in a year!) Everton also did what they did in full awareness that they had to avoid the drop while investing in the new stadium they clearly can’t afford - if they find themselves outside of the Prem. |
|
|
|
Post by jesusmcmuffin on Jan 15, 2024 23:11:44 GMT
When clubs like Man City can get away with it and when teams like Chelsea bend the rules of contracts to get around it, yeah, I do feel sorry for other teams that are simply trying to compete. I agree Man City should be under heavy scrutiny and penalised to the hilt. But the others did what they did knowingly, Forest signing 40 players gambling on staying up despite the clear rule break (they spent £250m in a year!) Everton also did what they did in full awareness that they had to avoid the drop while investing in the new stadium they clearly can’t afford - if they find themselves outside of the Prem. Man City haven't got away though. Still ongoing |
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jan 15, 2024 23:12:16 GMT
I am totally on board with the principle of FFP.
Without it success is simply something you go out and buy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glory Hunter on Jan 15, 2024 23:13:44 GMT
I agree Man City should be under heavy scrutiny and penalised to the hilt. But the others did what they did knowingly, Forest signing 40 players gambling on staying up despite the clear rule break (they spent £250m in a year!) Everton also did what they did in full awareness that they had to avoid the drop while investing in the new stadium they clearly can’t afford - if they find themselves outside of the Prem. Man City haven't got away though. Still ongoing Good. And let’s hope that when they are caught up with, they get double penalties for perverting the system and delaying the result (possibly hoping for a change in rules). |
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Jan 15, 2024 23:16:33 GMT
I agree Man City should be under heavy scrutiny and penalised to the hilt. But the others did what they did knowingly, Forest signing 40 players gambling on staying up despite the clear rule break (they spent £250m in a year!) Everton also did what they did in full awareness that they had to avoid the drop while investing in the new stadium they clearly can’t afford - if they find themselves outside of the Prem. Man City haven't got away though. Still ongoing It is and if found guilty they should be looking at demotion to the conference like Rangers had but alas because of their mega rich owners they'll just get well nothing! |
|
|
|
Post by jesusmcmuffin on Jan 15, 2024 23:21:20 GMT
Man City haven't got away though. Still ongoing It is and if found guilty they should be looking at demotion to the conference like Rangers had but alas because of their mega rich owners they'll just get well nothing! Rangers deserved it ...was all for that one 👍 Was a good piece earlier on Sky re Man City. I agree re the sanctions but some jumping the gun re the alleged charges perhaps, will be interesting |
|
|
|
Post by Laughing Gravy on Jan 15, 2024 23:22:14 GMT
Man City haven't got away though. Still ongoing It is and if found guilty they should be looking at demotion to the conference like Rangers had but alas because of their mega rich owners they'll just get well nothing! And lose all their trophies which should be handed to the runners up in a special ceremony at ...say....the bet365 on the last day of the season.  |
|
|
|
Post by jesusmcmuffin on Jan 15, 2024 23:23:10 GMT
It is and if found guilty they should be looking at demotion to the conference like Rangers had but alas because of their mega rich owners they'll just get well nothing! And lose all their trophies which should be handed to the runners up in a special ceremony at ...say....the bet365 on the last day of the season. With you there Gravers Hand it over |
|
|
|
Post by coldtuesdaynight on Jan 15, 2024 23:28:15 GMT
I’ve got no real sympathy but the rules themselves are terrible, even if the general intent behind them has merit. They just seem to achieve bizarre accountancy practices rather than actually stopping clubs from spending too much money.
Off the top of my head:
Clubs (including us for a few seasons after relegation) loaning out players instead of selling them (because the few million the club might receive is classed as a loss if the player was bought for more money)
Clubs tying themselves into very long player contracts (because the transfer fee is divided by the length of the contract)
Owners buying the stadium off the club
Players getting recalled from loans where they are doing well so they can be loaned out again with a small extra % of the wages paid by the other club
God knows what else is going on, especially with the clubs where the owners have several clubs (eg City Group and Redbull) or even just ‘unrelated’ business deals with the owners of other clubs.
|
|
|
|
Post by willieeetmiout on Jan 15, 2024 23:29:31 GMT
Huge sympathy.
Because for all intents and purposes it is a huge steaming pile of shit.
The motto of FFP is, in reality, sustainability.
Spend as much as you want on your Stadium, infrastructure and youth talents. That's all free.
Procure good youth players. Sell them for a profit and repeat and infinitum.
That sounds all very wholesome and would make for a great fairytale. The problem is clubs by in large are COMPETITIVE football teams, playing in a competition.
The thought of little Forest Green Rovers being a nice feeder club for Premier League teams and just swimming around the lower echelons of football, quite pleasantly, everyone happy, for eternity is just absolute bollocks. It's boring, mundane, ill-thought out bollocks that did not for one second consider the actual life blood of the game, the fans. Fans who would naturally not be happy competitively supporting a non competitive club.
So it was never going to happen, it isn't happening and it never will happen.
So if the actual, simple and sole purpose of FFP isn't happening then what is the bastard point in complying with it?
And whats the point in issuing punishments for not complying with it?
It needs to be ripped up and chucked in the bin. Pie in the sky thinking.
The arsehole who dreamt it up should have endorsed on his headstone "The wanker who nearly ruined football" as a timely reminder to us all.
All that then needs to happen is a salary cap and a redistribution of TV money.
That was really always the right way but the greedy pigs at the top of the table didn't want that, never wanted that, couldn't possibly entertain the idea of that.
And the biggest, scruffiest, fattest, most detestable pig of them all is Man City.
And pig is an apt description as they are the absolute epitome of four legs good, two legs better.
And I will be be delighted, absolutely fucking delighted, when it all comes crashing down and their wanky, shitty, turn a blind eye fans are crying into the ashes of their own self destruction.
|
|
|
|
Post by jzime on Jan 15, 2024 23:40:40 GMT
The Premier League created the need for clubs to break the bank in order to tread water. Mad spending is no longer just for clubs who want compete for the very highest honours; now to simply stay in the division at all, clubs have to invest tens of millions every single year. Basically every club in the land who has any ambitions of ever competing in the top flight has to have a wage bill that far outstrips their turnover, including Championship clubs for whom huge debts are now the norm.
To an established PL club, the cost of going down is so monumental that it makes relegation a genuine disaster; not just in sporting terms, but in a way that it really can set your club back decades if you don't come straight back up. Meanwhile the potential dividends of only one or two seasons in the PL to a club who hasn't been there in a while is so high that it becomes justifiable to break the bank in order to chase getting there.
The PL was specifically designed to create this massive financial disparity - it was literally the entire raison d'etre for breaking away from the Football League. Clubs playing a dangerous game of go-for-broke in a frenzied panic to play in it and to stay in it was eventually going to be inevitable. If Everton and Forest, or Chelsea (handing out 7 year contracts in order do creative accountancy and to amortise all their transfers), or Man City and Newcastle (both effectively owned by nation states) are monsters, it is only because the Premier League is Doctor Frankenstein.
Introducing the Profit and Sustainability Rules, in relatively recent PL history, was to shut the stable doors after the horses had bolted. Trying to control how much money clubs keep on losing now, 22 years after the league was created, is like Doctor Frankenstein trying to control his monster only after he has let him roam across the Italian countryside and kill a few people.
I don't have much sympathy for Forest or Everton, no. But situations like these are only going to become more and more common. The Premier League created the conditions for these situation to emerge in the first place, and it is a bit late now to attempt to rein in what it has wrought.
It will obviously never happen now. We are very much in too deep with way too many vested interests involved, but I'd love nothing more than to scrap the PL and to bring back the old First Division.
|
|
mr
Youth Player
Posts: 420
|
Post by mr on Jan 16, 2024 0:11:11 GMT
I am totally on board with the principle of FFP. Without it success is simply something you go out and buy. But with it, success is simply bought. So does it make any difference? I guess that’s what you mean by the principles though, if it worked it would be great. |
|
|
|
Post by independent on Jan 16, 2024 0:17:51 GMT
The system isn’t perfect, but let’s face it, the rules on losses are clear and if you breach them you deserve the sanction - whether it’s points deductions or other penalties. Sympathy for Everton seems nuts to me. They breached the clear rules over 2 three year periods - knowingly and probably the only reason they are still in the Prem today. Forest also, in as clear a way than any other. We have been battling to remain on the right side of the line despite a legacy of contracts that needed to be unwound. This has delayed our progress, so for clubs who frankly couldn’t give a toss and spent no effort on keeping within the rules, I say throw the book at them. My only issue is with the likes of Man City who blatantly disregarded rules and are now playing legal roulette to avoid the charges. Their penalty should be magnified as they have been seen to avoid the obvious penalties due. The bottom line is that those who breach rules knowingly, have to face the penalties otherwise it’s a mockery for all those clubs who manage responsibly to do so. Penalise them to the limit of the law and I say any sympathy for the likes of Everton et-al is pure bollocks. Everton have been treated very harshly in an attempt to show the Government that the game doesn't need a regulator. As I understand it they would be safe under the propsed new system. Even under the present system they were found guilty because of £20m interest payments on loans that they had taken out to finance their new stadium. As has been stated by the authorities: "They gained no football advantage by this". There should have been a financial penalty for this breach, not a points deduction. I would love someone to explain how this kept them in the Premier league. The new charge is billing them twice for years they have already been penalised for. Apparently if they had accepted Brentfords bid of £30m for Gordon at Christmas they would have been in the clear. They eventually sold Gordon to Newcastle for £45m but it was a couple of days too late to be included in their books for that year. A 10 point deduction in those circumstances does seem very unfair. |
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Jan 16, 2024 0:36:07 GMT
When clubs like Man City can get away with it and when teams like Chelsea bend the rules of contracts to get around it, yeah, I do feel sorry for other teams that are simply trying to compete. Do you mean the long contracts Chelsea have done? I've got a feeling it's a big gamble for them. More likely to bite them in the arse than pay off big. Unless there's another thing they did. |
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Jan 16, 2024 2:19:44 GMT
When clubs like Man City can get away with it and when teams like Chelsea bend the rules of contracts to get around it, yeah, I do feel sorry for other teams that are simply trying to compete. Do you mean the long contracts Chelsea have done? I've got a feeling it's a big gamble for them. More likely to bite them in the arse than pay off big. Unless there's another thing they did. I think that it will likely screw them as well but it’s just another way that the biggest clubs can play with the rules. The laughable thing is that both Man City and Chelsea were nothing clubs before they squeezed in at the end of the ffp push. Now, they skirt/just flagrantly ignore the rules anyways. |
|
|
|
Post by upthefud on Jan 16, 2024 3:32:00 GMT
Huge sympathy camp.
If you've got an owner who genuinely wants to invest - why punish them? The rules are in place to stop teams like Stoke who are incredibly wealthy from challenging the status quo.
I'll use the Man City and their charges example here... how many of their signings are whopping flops? Probably Grealish and Phillips. How many of them are whopping successes or came through the academy? Haaland, De Bruyne, Foden, Silva, Aguero, Dias, Ederson (don't think any of them were household names before they were signed).
Look at Man Utd, who've spent hundreds of millions on Antony, Sancho, Varane, Di Maria, Martial, Maguire... (the list is endless). Unless I'm going mental they will undoubtedly have a higher net spend than Man City, yet they aren't being punished because they were a big club at the offset of these daft regulations.
The fit and fair ownership test should be the acid test. If you pass that then you have the right to spend your money on your club, such questions like:
1) Why do you want to buy a club like Reading?
2) Where is Reading?
3) What is the name of the Reading stadium?
4) Why do you want to buy a football club?
5) Have you committed any serious crimes?
6) Are you from a nation state that regularly beheads homosexuals and dissenters?
7) Prove you have adequate finances to fund a football club.
Some sort of test to weed out the owners who are a cancer on a local area and its football team.
If you are decent, you have a plan to invest and want to grow a club then as far as I'm concerned these rules are unfair. Wrexham and Stoke have owners who do a lot for their respective communities and should be allowed to spend their money.
|
|
|
|
Post by theonlooker on Jan 16, 2024 6:26:49 GMT
It was originally sold to us that FFP was here to help clubs keep solvent and afloat. In my opinion we've had far too many clubs either sail way too close to the wind or go out of business completely with it in place, all while the big clubs have carried on spending regardless.
Certain clubs have been pushed to the edge by sanctions imposed off the back of FFP. Relegated out of sight, financial penalties and points deductions imposed. How can that be right against the backdrop of certain clubs spending upwards towards 0.5bn on their squads?
What has come out in the wash, as it always does, is that it is here to protect the status quo at the top table and has driven a huge divide between the PL and the Championship but now also a huge divide between the haves and the have nots at the top table.
It won't belong before a promotion to the Premier League is simply a one season procession.
FFP, transfer windows and the EPPP - footballs 'triple lock' right there. Keep the small clubs small...
|
|
|
|
Post by rorymscfc on Jan 16, 2024 7:25:36 GMT
The system isn’t perfect, but let’s face it, the rules on losses are clear and if you breach them you deserve the sanction - whether it’s points deductions or other penalties. Sympathy for Everton seems nuts to me. They breached the clear rules over 2 three year periods - knowingly and probably the only reason they are still in the Prem today. Forest also, in as clear a way than any other. We have been battling to remain on the right side of the line despite a legacy of contracts that needed to be unwound. This has delayed our progress, so for clubs who frankly couldn’t give a toss and spent no effort on keeping within the rules, I say throw the book at them. My only issue is with the likes of Man City who blatantly disregarded rules and are now playing legal roulette to avoid the charges. Their penalty should be magnified as they have been seen to avoid the obvious penalties due. The bottom line is that those who breach rules knowingly, have to face the penalties otherwise it’s a mockery for all those clubs who manage responsibly to do so. Penalise them to the limit of the law and I say any sympathy for the likes of Everton et-al is pure bollocks. Everton have been treated very harshly in an attempt to show the Government that the game doesn't need a regulator. As I understand it they would be safe under the propsed new system. Even under the present system they were found guilty because of £20m interest payments on loans that they had taken out to finance their new stadium. As has been stated by the authorities: "They gained no football advantage by this". There should have been a financial penalty for this breach, not a points deduction. I would love someone to explain how this kept them in the Premier league. The new charge is billing them twice for years they have already been penalised for. Apparently if they had accepted Brentfords bid of £30m for Gordon at Christmas they would have been in the clear. They eventually sold Gordon to Newcastle for £45m but it was a couple of days too late to be included in their books for that year. A 10 point deduction in those circumstances does seem very unfair. How could they have accepted Brentford's bid at Christmas and had it included in their figures when the transfer window didn't open until the first of January? |
|
|
|
Post by LL Cool Dave on Jan 16, 2024 7:42:25 GMT
Let them spend what they want, or rather what they have. It doesn't guarantee success anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by wuzza on Jan 16, 2024 8:05:40 GMT
It’s motives were were fundamentally flawed - simply to maintain the balance of power with certain clubs.
It is overly complex and clearly open to abuse - as with most things in life the more power and influence you have the more likely you are to get away with wrong doing.
If the aim is to keep clubs solvent and have a FAIR system simply have a rigorously enforced salary cap for every tier of the game across the football world.
If that isn’t possible just forget the whole thing and let the free market run wild - the results wouldn’t be much different to what we have now , just less accountancy jiggery pokery.
|
|
|
|
Post by stokiejoe on Jan 16, 2024 8:36:38 GMT
There needs to be a system of FFP but the presentvone is flawed. It allows rich clubs to stay rich and poor ones to stay por by using percentages. There should be set limits in pound sterling which would allow poorer clubs to spend more and richer ones to spend less. That would begin to level up the clubs.
However, rules are rules and until they are changed those that break them should be punished harshly to deter others and in fairness to those that obey them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glory Hunter on Jan 16, 2024 8:36:47 GMT
Let them spend what they want, or rather what they have. It doesn't guarantee success anyway. I get that and might suit us in the Championship, however an earlier poster referred to Everton’s £20m of interest on debr, which men’s they weren’t spending what they had at all, they have racked up massive debts. |
|
|
|
Post by jeycov on Jan 16, 2024 8:48:16 GMT
I agree Man City should be under heavy scrutiny and penalised to the hilt. But the others did what they did knowingly, Forest signing 40 players gambling on staying up despite the clear rule break (they spent £250m in a year!) Everton also did what they did in full awareness that they had to avoid the drop while investing in the new stadium they clearly can’t afford - if they find themselves outside of the Prem. Man City haven't got away though. Still ongoing A fine probably the better outcome for them Deducting points should send out a message to all clubs that this will be the outcome |
|
|
|
Post by juiceandbits on Jan 16, 2024 8:53:32 GMT
I don't have any sympathy with them as they overspent. I heard last night Liverpool sold Coutinho for £100m+ to fund team investment. I don't think it is as simple as saying 'it is broken as it keeps smaller clubs small, etc'. Teams that spend a lot aren't consistently spending if they're operating sensibly.
5Live spoke about this last night at length from 7, which I recommend everyone listen to as it is very informative.
Clubs need to be smarter to stay up if sanctions will be more common. Let's also be clear: we were lucky to be up when these rules didn't exist as we spent loads of money without recouping much of that through players.
If or when we do return we have to take a long-term view and accept relegation followed by another promotion (and the associated money from promotion and relegation) is a more sustainable route to establishing ourselves there again.
|
|
|
|
Post by moon on Jan 16, 2024 9:10:40 GMT
The gap between the prem and championship is getting greater and greater so when you come up if you want to try and stay up you have to spend to try and compete otherwise whats the point? We may as well not have promotion and relegation because soon it will be the 3 that go up will come straight down and the other 17 will be a given. The premier league in general has been good but it needs to take a look at it's self and ask it's self if 17 teams that don't change is good for the game. Or go wild, and have more promotions and relegations, with the top half of the league promoted, bottom half relegated, too extreme I know - but with more movement between the leagues that gap would lessen at the cost of widening the gap between the top and bottom 10 in the premier league. These crazy rules would've seen Chelsea, West Ham, and Everton down last season. We'd probably be in the conference by now with the football we've seen in recent years!
|
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Jan 16, 2024 9:11:27 GMT
It’s motives were were fundamentally flawed - simply to maintain the balance of power with certain clubs. It is overly complex and clearly open to abuse - as with most things in life the more power and influence you have the more likely you are to get away with wrong doing. If the aim is to keep clubs solvent and have a FAIR system simply have a rigorously enforced salary cap for every tier of the game across the football world. If that isn’t possible just forget the whole thing and let the free market run wild - the results wouldn’t be much different to what we have now , just less accountancy jiggery pokery. The results would be very different without some form of FFP. The big clubs would spend more than they do now in order to force the smaller clubs to spend even more in order to deliberately bankrupt them - which is precisely what would happen. In other business sectors run on free market principles businesses going bankrupt is seen as an essential feature of the market - it is the most efficient companies getting rid of their weaker rivals making the provision of goods and services cheaper and better quality for the consumer. Apply free market principles to football and the result will be the same - football clubs who overspend to try to compete with the big boys (which is what they would have to do) will cease to exist. Even the Tory government have accepted this and setting up the new body to oversee football financing they have deliberately prevented football being run on free market principles because everyone who actually understands how a free market works knows that it will decimate the football pyramid. Those on here banging on about getting rid of FFP believe it will allow our owners to plough in more money to compete with the big boys but they either don't understand how a free market works or don't care about the fact it will drive clubs out of existence. The thing is they are also wrong about our owners ploughing money into the club to compete with the big boys. The owners won't do that. They will ensure the club lives within it's means so that when clubs do go under by getting sucked into a spending war they can't win we will be among those left standing. We will be at a higher level than we are now because there will be less teams but we will be further from the big boys than we are now - the top leagues will be just like those in the rest of Europe with 2/3/4 big hitters and the rest in a couple of professional leagues. |
|
