zaragozaram Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 And so it begins, http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/feb/26/financial-fair-play-clubs-threat-football-league?CMP=twt_gu The Football league needs to stay strong against the clubs, whose names we all knew were not going to comply. If they cave now it would make a mockery of the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimmu Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Blackburn lost 37 millions 2013? **** lot of chickens to be sold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal is a Ram Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Bolton announced £50m loss at year end 2013, taking their total to just over £160m http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/25559504 If they don't get hit by FFP, the system will not be worth its salt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zaragozaram Posted February 26, 2014 Author Share Posted February 26, 2014 DERBY COUNTY BLOG @derbycountyblog Follow If promoted, Leicester could be fined around £19m under FFP rules. So they're threatening to sue the Football League Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 To threaten sanctions and then to do nothing is far, far more unfair than having no sanctions at all because it punishes those who tried to comply and rewards those who ignored it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffsRam Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 DERBY COUNTY BLOG[/size] @derbycountyblogFollow If promoted, Leicester could be fined around £19m under FFP rules. So they're threatening to sue the Football League Pardon the pun but that's a bit rich. Leicester, the club who led the charge to blatantly abuse the administration system now want to flout the FFP as well. The FL should make an example of them and relegate them to non-league where they belong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 If these clubs disagreed with the rules they should have launched action before the season or withdrawn from the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeedsCityRam Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Absolutely knew this was coming. West Ham started murmuring about it last season (although hilariously want a wage cap in the Premiership now they are back to being a small fish in a big pond) & QPR were hardly going to take a punishment lying down when they weren't in the league last year to vote & were nailed on to be punished the most because of their ridiculous spending. I hope the Football League show some backbone & call their bluff, however far it goes down the legal road. Football at the level below the Prem faces enough problems without abandoning any pretence of curbing the ruinous financial mess many clubs are in. Fans of all clubs deserve better than facing the constant risk of financial extinction chasing the impossible dream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Its amazing that none of the premiership are threatening action against their FFP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CumbrianRam Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Sadly Football League has shown little backbone in previous issues so don't expect different here. Sucks, but thats capitalism for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimbeard Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I've probably misunderstood all this FFP palaver, but, whilst I agree that clubs shouldn't be allowed to make huge year on year losses , I don't see why owners, sponsors or anyone else for that matter shouldn't be allowed to give a club as much as they like. When all's said and done, it's their money to do with as they wish. If Joe Bloggs the local butcher wants to sponsor the corner flags to the tune of £10 million apiece or Ali Baba the kitchen appliance salesman wants to blow his families' fortune, then surely that's their affair. So long as there is no expectation of repayment, I can't see a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maydrakin Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 There's no halfway house with this - the FL has to remain resolute in this. Very disappointing that the Premier League opposed the fines being dished out amongst the compliant clubs, due the preference for clubs with wealthy backers (according to the Guardian). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ariotofmyown Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I've probably misunderstood all this FFP palaver, but, whilst I agree that clubs shouldn't be allowed to make huge year on year losses , I don't see why owners, sponsors or anyone else for that matter shouldn't be allowed to give a club as much as they like. When all's said and done, it's their money to do with as they wish. If Joe Bloggs the local butcher wants to sponsor the corner flags to the tune of £10 million apiece or Ali Baba the kitchen appliance salesman wants to blow his families' fortune, then surely that's their affair. So long as there is no expectation of repayment, I can't see a problem. Isn't the problem more that said owner spends x million on a bunch of players in the hope of going up. A couple of years down the line the club has not gone up, they can't afford to pay the crazy wages they signed up for and a huge debt just keeps getting bigger as the interest mounts up. The original owner has probably gone by this point and the only ones with any stake in the club ie the supporters are left with a ruined club. Spending what you haven't got is what makes the world go round. Until the bubble bursts. We need to football bubble to burst and our prudent model plus high gates would seee us become very strong again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyinLiverpool Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 There are 2 reasons for ffp as far as I can see: To try to retain some integrity in the competition - by lessening the impact one person can have over it just because they have a bottomless pit of cash. And to ensure the long term stability of member clubs by preventing one person incurring debt, often in the form of loans to payable to themselves, payable long after that owner had jumped ship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Srg Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Let's go all American. Salary Caps, competition committees etc. At least gives you a different winner year in, year out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal is a Ram Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Thing is.. the punishment for going into debt.. is putting said club into more debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimbeard Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Let's go all American. Salary Caps, competition committees etc. At least gives you a different winner year in, year out. But how would that work with so many clubs with such massive variations in size? Chelsea and Accrington can't be governed by the same financial rules, but if there are different rules then the smaller clubs can never hope to advance to the higher realms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramarena Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Let's go all American. Salary Caps, competition committees etc. At least gives you a different winner year in, year out. Player draft's??? I bagsy Messi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimbeard Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Isn't the problem more that said owner spends x million on a bunch of players in the hope of going up. A couple of years down the line the club has not gone up, they can't afford to pay the crazy wages they signed up for and a huge debt just keeps getting bigger as the interest mounts up. The original owner has probably gone by this point and the only ones with any stake in the club ie the supporters are left with a ruined club. Spending what you haven't got is what makes the world go round. Until the bubble bursts. We need to football bubble to burst and our prudent model plus high gates would seee us become very strong again. Hmm tricky, I take your point. But supposing that you or I was found to be a long lost reletive of Bill Gates, if I were to inherit his fortune, I'd be somewhat miffed to find that I couldn't give the Rams untold millions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanjwitham Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 There are 2 reasons for ffp as far as I can see: To try to retain some integrity in the competition - by lessening the impact one person can have over it just because they have a bottomless pit of cash. And to ensure the long term stability of member clubs by preventing one person incurring debt, often in the form of loans to payable to themselves, payable long after that owner had jumped ship. It's not just member clubs protecting themselves though. A proportion of the money that clubs owe will be owed to other clubs in the league - e.g. if you sign a player for £3m over 3 years (paying £1m a year) and then go broke in year 1, the selling club is out £2m that they would have budgeted for, potentially leaving them in financial trouble. That's almost more important for the sake of the league than just preventing one club from shooting themselves in the foot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.