Guest Chocolate Teapot Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 1 hour ago, urban.spaceman said: Everton failed FFP because of spending on players, not their stadium. That's not correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPH Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 15 minutes ago, KFS said: Please don’t lump us in with them two. We spent reasonably at least and in the context of our success. Champions League winners rocking up at newly promoted Forest with 20 mates is not what we did. what has any of that got to do with ‘breaking the rules’ a few years later Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolhandfox Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 1 hour ago, Ricey said: Encouraging/forcing clubs to sell their homegrown players is such a weird by-product of these rules. From what I've heard, plans are a step toward changing it. They are looking for a way to readdress the balance as they see it as a loophole clubs like Man C and Chelsea can exploit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KFS Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 4 minutes ago, MPH said: what has any of that got to do with ‘breaking the rules’ a few years later Because the rules are designed to stop a club trying to legitimately steadily grow, or so we thought… they should punish reckless grabs of players like Forest but should they punish a team who’ve won the FA Cup, the league and played in European competitions 3 times in 5 years? How are we in any way comparable to Everton or Forest?? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 2 hours ago, urban.spaceman said: Everton failed FFP because of spending on players, not their stadium. 13 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said: That's not correct. Everton’s official line is ‘stadium’ but they clearly overspent on players / wages relative to income and had some interesting accounting - for example their Covid losses claim of £170 million! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Flair Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 34 minutes ago, st albans fox said: IF we go up, then presumably we will be treading carefully re bringing players in. free transfers and some cheap journeymen how would this fit with enzo’s requirements which presumably require technical capable players ? You’d assume that this type player won’t be affordable? The club may decide that in the circumstances, trying to stay up with a Luton approach is more sensible than a Burnley one. O'Hare main target in that regard surely. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 3 minutes ago, Ric Flair said: O'Hare main target in that regard surely. if we look like a basket case then players may not be that keen to come ..... we certainly wont be offering the kind of packages that we have in the past (which will mean we are operating a very two tier system with players going back onto their 60-80k/week and new ones at 40k.) that's not a great recipe for togetherness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPH Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 15 minutes ago, KFS said: Because the rules are designed to stop a club trying to legitimately steadily grow, or so we thought… they should punish reckless grabs of players like Forest but should they punish a team who’ve won the FA Cup, the league and played in European competitions 3 times in 5 years? How are we in any way comparable to Everton or Forest?? I absolutely do not understand this logic at all. if we are being punished its because we spent too much money, we shouldn't get a free ride just because we won the league or the FA cup. that doesn't make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KFS Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 2 minutes ago, MPH said: I absolutely do not understand this logic at all. if we are being punished its because we spent too much money, we shouldn't get a free ride just because we won the league or the FA cup. that doesn't make sense. Oh right yeah, we should’ve just been thankful for the experience, not bought anyone, stay in our lane and just exist… 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March This is from the presser Are points deductions taking enjoyment out of football? "It’s so complicated. They tried to explain to me but I stopped them because it was so complicated. assuming that ‘they’ are those above enzo, it’s clear that the club are speaking about points deductions in house but it seems that it’s complex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPH Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 2 minutes ago, KFS said: Oh right yeah, we should’ve just been thankful for the experience, not bought anyone, stay in our lane and just exist… what nonsense. you break the rules, you face the punishment. fairly simple, really.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Gamble92 Posted 8 March Popular Post Share Posted 8 March They'll be no big speech by Gary Neville about new FFP laws. The big outcry about the Super League happened but because they haven't got their way they slowly implemented all this behind the scenes with little to no media coverage. Very sad. Even more sad that fans of clubs like ours are turning on each other instead of seeing the bigger picture. It's very much like how right wing politics works. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KFS Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 1 minute ago, MPH said: what nonsense. you break the rules, you face the punishment. fairly simple, really.. Our circumstances are wildly different to others. We broke football and now it’s breaking us. The others were reckless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aleksz Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March @BSLBPod @Ric Flair Am I right in saying you’ve had the likes of Kieran Maguire or other football finance people on the pod before? Can you try and get someone on that knows their stuff to really explain where we’re at. Theres so much guff everywhere from the likes of Dorsett and in these threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post The Bear Posted 8 March Popular Post Share Posted 8 March They (FIFA) could really do with changing the transfer window in Europe to June 1st-30th. That way there'd be no moaning about having to sell players early for FFP purposes. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UniFox21 Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 14 minutes ago, Aleksz said: @BSLBPod @Ric Flair Am I right in saying you’ve had the likes of Kieran Maguire or other football finance people on the pod before? Can you try and get someone on that knows their stuff to really explain where we’re at. Theres so much guff everywhere from the likes of Dorsett and in these threads. In all honesty everyone is looking at the exact same information. No one knows anything, they can predict things and suggest how it will play out but until the accounts are actually released and the Prem released a verdict, everything is conjecture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Ric Flair Posted 8 March Popular Post Share Posted 8 March 14 minutes ago, Aleksz said: @BSLBPod @Ric Flair Am I right in saying you’ve had the likes of Kieran Maguire or other football finance people on the pod before? Can you try and get someone on that knows their stuff to really explain where we’re at. Theres so much guff everywhere from the likes of Dorsett and in these threads. Wheels in motion for a guest who knows their stuff pal. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolhandfox Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March (edited) 17 minutes ago, UniFox21 said: In all honesty everyone is looking at the exact same information. No one knows anything, they can predict things and suggest how it will play out but until the accounts are actually released and the Prem released a verdict, everything is conjecture. If we had to follow the PL rules of submitting accounts to them by the 31st of December of 2023 for the 22/23 season, like all other clubs, there would have been a verdict or charge already. Everton and Forest were changed without officially releasing their accounts on the back of their December submission. The grey area is whether we had to submit PL on December 31st, 2023, for the 22/23 PL season because we were in the Championship. Edited 8 March by coolhandfox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPH Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 32 minutes ago, KFS said: Our circumstances are wildly different to others. We broke football and now it’s breaking us. The others were reckless. but we are not reckless for breaking the same rules as them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolhandfox Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 38 minutes ago, st albans fox said: This is from the presser Are points deductions taking enjoyment out of football? "It’s so complicated. They tried to explain to me but I stopped them because it was so complicated. assuming that ‘they’ are those above enzo, it’s clear that the club are speaking about points deductions in house but it seems that it’s complex. That makes it sound like you think the club is telling everyone internally that we are going to a point deduction when they could just be as easily explaining why we will not be getting one. Could read his comment either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthStandUpperTier Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 33 minutes ago, Gamble92 said: The big outcry about the Super League happened but because they haven't got their way they slowly implemented all this behind the scenes with little to no media coverage. I thought this too but after looking into it, it's simply not true. PSR was voted in by the Premier League clubs in February 2013 and ratified in April of that year. We won the Premier League with PSR. We won the FA Cup with PSR. We finished 5th twice with PSR. The problem was that the club deviated away from the player recruitment system that was working for them. And also the fact that the allowable losses under PSR have remained the same since its inception (£105m over 3 years) and have not increased in-line with inflation. Premier League clubs vote in favour of FFP ESPN staff February 7, 2013 Premier League clubs have voted in favour of introducing a Financial Fair Play deal and restrictions on wages. Representatives of the clubs first met in December to discuss proposals on a new system obliging teams to break even, as well as imposing some sort of cap on wages. The clubs agreed to reconvene on Thursday with 13 votes out of 20 needed to accept the proposals. Chelsea, Arsenal, Manchester United, Tottenham and Liverpool were all expected to back the new plans, while Manchester City, Fulham, West Brom and Aston Villa were expected to vote against. In actual fact, the vote for the financial regulations could hardly have been closer - as six were against with Reading abstaining. It meant that the 'yes' vote only narrowly achieved the necessary two-thirds majority of the 19 votes cast. Clubs sources say Fulham, West Brom, Manchester City, Aston Villa, Swansea and Southampton all voted against. Chelsea, who had initially been viewed as opponents of financial fair play regulations, voted in favour. In a statement, the Blues said they are supportive of moves that promote financial stability. It read: "Premier League clubs today reached an agreement to introduce financial stability rules and wage controls for the league. Chelsea Football Club is supportive of moves that promote financial stability in football. We are already subject to UEFA's financial fair play principles and will comply with those. "The new rules will be subject to further detailed discussions before they are brought in and we will play our part in those to ensure implementation is fair for all clubs in the league.'' The Premier League's legal advisers will now work on the detailed proposals and these will be brought back before the chairmen in April to be ratified. After the meeting, West Ham joint-chairman David Gold said that a majority did vote in favour of the proposals. "The clubs supported change. We've all voted and it was overwhelmingly supported. Some clubs are a little concerned, but the vast majority voted in favour," he told Sky Sports. "That will now go to the board for putting into rules, and we'll vote on that in April." Gold added: "It's not a salary cap, it's a restraint on over-spending. It's not a cap - it's a restraint. If clubs increase their revenues then they can increase their spending. "We have got restraint, that's the important thing. What's driving the whole thing is we've got to avoid another Portsmouth.'' The Premier League's expected FFP system would be less restrictive than UEFA's, which is gradually being introduced and obliges clubs to break even or face possible exclusion from European competition. At Thursday's meeting, the chairmen were presented with a proposal for owners to be allowed to cover losses up to £105 million over a three-year period. That is significantly more flexible than UEFA's which only allows losses of €45 million (£39 million) over three years to be covered by owners. If plans go ahead, the Premier League would be the first top-flight European league to bring in such a system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambert09 Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 5 hours ago, kenny said: I think Vestergaard wasn't supposed to be as good as he has been. I suspect he was in the write-off pile and took everyone by surprise with how good he has been. I reckon Cannon was signed because Daka and Iheanacho were off. When neither move materialised its left us with 4 strikers we dont really need. the last bit doesn’t make sense. We signed him with a few minutes to go… he was even injured. We knew nobody was leaving by the time we finished the deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxes96 Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 1 minute ago, Lambert09 said: the last bit doesn’t make sense. We signed him with a few minutes to go… he was even injured. We knew nobody was leaving by the time we finished the deal Imagine if we pulled the plug at the last minute. Would’ve screwed Everton out of £8m pure profit as well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 5 minutes ago, coolhandfox said: That makes it sound like you think the club is telling everyone internally that we are going to a point deduction when they could just be as easily explaining why we will not be getting one. Could read his comment either way. Absolutely wasn’t meant to read that way simply that if it was a non story then the club would have simply told enzo - ‘there’s nothing to worry about - we’ve broken no rules’. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KFS Posted 8 March Share Posted 8 March 8 minutes ago, MPH said: but we are not reckless for breaking the same rules as them? Our circumstances are wildly different. Hope you’re not a lawyer mate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts