Well... PSR and FFP seem like they're in the bin
Discussion
As the title suggests it seems the latest financial control rules have the teeth of Koi Carp and so poorly laid out/written the main offenders will get away with it. As I posted on the Everton thread I think that was obvious when the first points deductions were given out, there seemed to be no concrete basis and why a punishment was what it was, and the appeal process saw that was the case.
For all the money in the PL you'd think they have employed some people to well draft the rules, make them watertight and have the transparency of the punishments should the rules be breached.
So Leicester got some good lawyers and dodged it based on when accounts were filed.
Chelsea even better, you'd think selling your hotels and training ground to yourself would have been seen through straight away.... oh no, thats been permitted?
Does hold much hope for City being punished does it? If was Everton or Forest now I'd be feeling pretty targeted and unhappy with the current goings on.
For all the money in the PL you'd think they have employed some people to well draft the rules, make them watertight and have the transparency of the punishments should the rules be breached.
So Leicester got some good lawyers and dodged it based on when accounts were filed.
Chelsea even better, you'd think selling your hotels and training ground to yourself would have been seen through straight away.... oh no, thats been permitted?
Does hold much hope for City being punished does it? If was Everton or Forest now I'd be feeling pretty targeted and unhappy with the current goings on.
The thing is that no matter what rules are decided on, there will always be a clever lawyer who comes along and finds a loop hole and exploits it.
I agree the Leicester issue is ridiculous, but now they can close that loop hole. Same with Chelsea amortizing their transfers over 8 years.
PSR / FFP is a good thing and needs to happen. They just need to continually tweak the laws and close the loopholes as they go along.
I agree the Leicester issue is ridiculous, but now they can close that loop hole. Same with Chelsea amortizing their transfers over 8 years.
PSR / FFP is a good thing and needs to happen. They just need to continually tweak the laws and close the loopholes as they go along.
Terry Winks said:
If was Everton or Forest now I'd be feeling pretty targeted and unhappy with the current goings on.
It also affects other teams, although harder to quantify.As a Leeds fan it leaves a pretty sour taste that Leicester get away with bending the rules and pip us to promotion by 7 points, forcing us to sell our 3 best players to comply with the rules that they circumnavigated.
I don't think anyone thinks the rules are working as they currently stand. The biggest teams find ways around it, and the smaller teams can't compete. It's also wrong that points deductions should dictate promotions/relegations/titles, it should all be done on the field. Any penalties deemed necessary should be non-sporting.
Leicester only escaped the punishment because they got relegated, so it is a very specific circumstance (and which will now be closed off anyway).
Just a shame clubs will try and find a loophole rather than just trying to fight the case on its merits. I expect Man City will try the same.
Just a shame clubs will try and find a loophole rather than just trying to fight the case on its merits. I expect Man City will try the same.
Ascayman said:
City, Chelsea, Newcastle all cheating in plain sight and nobody is doing anything.
It’s killing the game.
Errm, City & Chelsea yes but Newcastle? Is that why they're having to sell off upcoming local, want to play for them talent that has come up through the academy? Desperately trying to shed players over the last transfer window.It’s killing the game.
Skyedriver said:
Ascayman said:
City, Chelsea, Newcastle all cheating in plain sight and nobody is doing anything.
It’s killing the game.
Errm, City & Chelsea yes but Newcastle? Is that why they're having to sell off upcoming local, want to play for them talent that has come up through the academy? Desperately trying to shed players over the last transfer window.It’s killing the game.
Skyedriver said:
Ascayman said:
City, Chelsea, Newcastle all cheating in plain sight and nobody is doing anything.
It’s killing the game.
Errm, City & Chelsea yes but Newcastle? Is that why they're having to sell off upcoming local, want to play for them talent that has come up through the academy? Desperately trying to shed players over the last transfer window.It’s killing the game.
That's before you start looking in to things like the various loans to Amanda Stavely (in excess of £1M I think?). Wasn't she supposed to be bringing money in to the club not taking it out?
Some very suspicious dealings going on at that club.
Ascayman said:
City, Chelsea, Newcastle all cheating in plain sight and nobody is doing anything.
It’s killing the game.
As a Chelsea fan, we may have dodged the bullet for now. But we have an FFP black hole of around £70m at the start of the next 5 seasons that needs to be plugged. If Palmer has another great season, we can sell him for £100m+ in the summer and plug the hole for a season. Then if we can get Reece James fit and not constantly suspended, his sale might plug it for another season. But sooner or later, the brown stuff will hit the rapidly rotating thing and we'll be banged to rights. I wouldn't be surprised that when it all comes crashing down, our breach of the rules will be so egregious that it'll be instant relegation rather than a points deduction. It’s killing the game.
We aren't qualifying for the CL any time soon, and no club can pay out around £100m+ for £30m players on a regular basis as we have done without running into trouble.
The stupid thing is with the amount of money in football from TV deals, sponsorships, ticket & merchandise sales, there should be absolutely no way clubs should be struggling to meet these rules.
Also, from my limited understanding, the rules are based on what a club spends vs what they generate in revenue, so a club that had assets at the point the rules were introduced (valuable players, brand new stadium, top training facilities) will now always be in a stronger position than a smaller club, so it makes it almost impossible for the hierachy to change.
Also, from my limited understanding, the rules are based on what a club spends vs what they generate in revenue, so a club that had assets at the point the rules were introduced (valuable players, brand new stadium, top training facilities) will now always be in a stronger position than a smaller club, so it makes it almost impossible for the hierachy to change.
Skyedriver said:
Errm, City & Chelsea yes but Newcastle? Is that why they're having to sell off upcoming local, want to play for them talent that has come up through the academy? Desperately trying to shed players over the last transfer window.
Newcastle are doing exactly what city did they are just at the start of the process, have a look at the sponsorship deals whereby they sponsor themselves for vastly inflated prices. Ascayman said:
Skyedriver said:
Errm, City & Chelsea yes but Newcastle? Is that why they're having to sell off upcoming local, want to play for them talent that has come up through the academy? Desperately trying to shed players over the last transfer window.
Newcastle are doing exactly what city did they are just at the start of the process, have a look at the sponsorship deals whereby they sponsor themselves for vastly inflated prices. Newcastle's shirt sponsor was Chinese betting brand Fun88 at £6.5M a year.
Then Newcastle get taken over by a company owned by the PIF.
Then Fun88 get dropped as shirt sponsor and a new deal is signed with Saudi Arabian events company Sela for £25M a year.
That's a £19M a year uplift. For what?
And guess who owns Sela? Yep, PIF.
It's exactly the sort of thing City were doing.
resolve10 said:
The stupid thing is with the amount of money in football from TV deals, sponsorships, ticket & merchandise sales, there should be absolutely no way clubs should be struggling to meet these rules.
Also, from my limited understanding, the rules are based on what a club spends vs what they generate in revenue, so a club that had assets at the point the rules were introduced (valuable players, brand new stadium, top training facilities) will now always be in a stronger position than a smaller club, so it makes it almost impossible for the hierachy to change.
Investment in infrastructure is outside of the financial rules. You can spend £5bn on a stadium if you have it. Also, from my limited understanding, the rules are based on what a club spends vs what they generate in revenue, so a club that had assets at the point the rules were introduced (valuable players, brand new stadium, top training facilities) will now always be in a stronger position than a smaller club, so it makes it almost impossible for the hierachy to change.
ETA: Everton is a weird case as they took a loan and spent money before they had planning, due to building in a UNESCO heritage site. Therefore this spend isn’t counted as capital investment - they could have spent it and been declined planning.
Edited by Dingu on Friday 6th September 13:49
48k said:
Ascayman said:
Skyedriver said:
Errm, City & Chelsea yes but Newcastle? Is that why they're having to sell off upcoming local, want to play for them talent that has come up through the academy? Desperately trying to shed players over the last transfer window.
Newcastle are doing exactly what city did they are just at the start of the process, have a look at the sponsorship deals whereby they sponsor themselves for vastly inflated prices. Newcastle's shirt sponsor was Chinese betting brand Fun88 at £6.5M a year.
Then Newcastle get taken over by a company owned by the PIF.
Then Fun88 get dropped as shirt sponsor and a new deal is signed with Saudi Arabian events company Sela for £25M a year.
That's a £19M a year uplift. For what?
And guess who owns Sela? Yep, PIF.
It's exactly the sort of thing City were doing.
The deals here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_football_spo...
You can take a teams sponsorship deal and compare that to income.
Arsenal come out with their sponsorship deal being 11% of income
NUFC's is 10%
Yours is s
t, it's only 7%Here's what it looks like with the current deal. Wow, look how outrageous that deal looks:
With Fun88 that deal would be worth only 3% of income, and look like this:
Like I say, it was a s
t deal.I think you're just demonstrating your own bias.
48k said:
Ascayman said:
Skyedriver said:
Errm, City & Chelsea yes but Newcastle? Is that why they're having to sell off upcoming local, want to play for them talent that has come up through the academy? Desperately trying to shed players over the last transfer window.
Newcastle are doing exactly what city did they are just at the start of the process, have a look at the sponsorship deals whereby they sponsor themselves for vastly inflated prices. Newcastle's shirt sponsor was Chinese betting brand Fun88 at £6.5M a year.
Then Newcastle get taken over by a company owned by the PIF.
Then Fun88 get dropped as shirt sponsor and a new deal is signed with Saudi Arabian events company Sela for £25M a year.
That's a £19M a year uplift. For what?
And guess who owns Sela? Yep, PIF.
It's exactly the sort of thing City were doing.[/quot
This was checked and signed off because it met market value for such a deal. Also hadn't Newcastle just been in the champions league so had a higher profile and could command more money for the shift sponsorship.
Yes its a PIF Company so they didn't have to go far to find a sponsor, but its was approved as market value.
48k said:
Ascayman said:
Skyedriver said:
Errm, City & Chelsea yes but Newcastle? Is that why they're having to sell off upcoming local, want to play for them talent that has come up through the academy? Desperately trying to shed players over the last transfer window.
Newcastle are doing exactly what city did they are just at the start of the process, have a look at the sponsorship deals whereby they sponsor themselves for vastly inflated prices. Newcastle's shirt sponsor was Chinese betting brand Fun88 at £6.5M a year.
Then Newcastle get taken over by a company owned by the PIF.
Then Fun88 get dropped as shirt sponsor and a new deal is signed with Saudi Arabian events company Sela for £25M a year.
That's a £19M a year uplift. For what?
And guess who owns Sela? Yep, PIF.
It's exactly the sort of thing City were doing.
It’s as corrupt as a corrupty thing. No different at all to city.
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff