Gamble92 Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March (edited) 3 hours ago, Ric Flair said: I'd like our club to lay claims of where they've challenged the fairness of PSR previously, because if they haven't then it weakens this stance to nothing but a wet fart. The club were very resound in explaining to our fans the thought process behind trading a high value asset every season in order to progress and comply and at no point did they use that opportunity to question the financial limitations. We had an opportunity to be the shining light in succeeding and striving to comply whilst exposing the difficulty in making significant inroads in to the gap between the commercial revenue of the elite and the single outlier in PL history over several years but we didn't (publicly anyway). This is where the club has done themselves no favours with the fanbase, too closed off, too private. They could have mobilised something for others to get behind, especially at the time when the greedy 6 were trying to launch a break away. It's hubris, we've lost the plot and now crying wolf. They clearly, like Everton but to an even worse extent because it's gone on longer, thought the punishment was worth the crime. They expected a big fine for it. The late "compliance" by not signing anyone was to avoid it being a bigger fine. I think what some people aren't realising is this is going to be the worst of all the punishments. We are staring at -12 and then another points deduction for the following period. Edited 24 March by Gamble92 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john ridley Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March (edited) 29 minutes ago, Gamble92 said: They clearly, like Everton but to an even worse extent because it's gone on longer, thought the punishment was worth the crime. They expected a big fine for it. The late "compliance" by not signing anyone was to avoid it being a bigger fine. I think what some people aren't realising is this is going to be the worst of all the punishments. We are staring at -12 and then another points deduction for the following period. They've only themselves to blame ,end of.No sympathy at all ,all guilty and heads should roll.For all the good the family have done ,over the last few years all of it has gone .We are back how we were pre Mandric. Edited 24 March by john ridley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guesty Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March I doubt any points deduction will be worse than -9. Part of Everton's successful appeal to get a reduction from -10 was PSR is to stop clubs going into administration (which is the worst case). The deduction for administration in the Premier League is -9 (-10 in EFL). Therefore any PSR breach should be lower than the worst case. The appeal board agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inckley fox Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March I'm not sure, with laws and rules in general, that it's much of a defence to say that you didn't go along with them in the first place. It's not an argument which springs to mind when someone is caught with an ounce of hash. I don't personally approve of FFP in its current incarnation, and the accusation of hypocrisy - which to me seemed a valid one until I learnt that we possibly opposed these regulations - appears wide of the mark. On the other hand, as Ric says, it doesn't look like we ever pushed for change, so it's hard to convincingly get on board with the idea that our plight is something that should inspire widespread backing from others across the game. My point, though, is that we don't know enough about what has been said and done away from the public eye to be able to form an argument one way or the other regarding how valiant or culpable we might have been when it comes to the acceptance of the norms. It's plain to see that The Telegraph's argument is as unfounded as the one which says we're on morally sound footings. To me, the only argument that even the most well-informed journos or ITKs can convincingly sustain, concerns whether or not the club has been run competently enough to succeed within whatever the existing rules are. The argument about the rights and wrongs of FFP, and the argument about whether our board has presided over a disaster in its alleged failure to comply, are two quite separate things. Whether pot should be legal and whether someone who's been caught selling it can be deemed to have screwed up are also, to me, separate things. I'm not sure how much pride there is to be had from banging a drum from a prison cell, with your future in tatters all around you. Bearing in mind that the only success we're ever going to enjoy, or ever have enjoyed, has been from operating within the norms, it seems like a useless distraction to look at the mess we're in and say 'well, before worrying about how we should go about things differently, let's spend some time complaining about how unfair this all is.' 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieG Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March 3 hours ago, Ric Flair said: The elephant in the room is the commercial revenue that is far bigger than the revenue that comes from actual football. Is it unfair the biggest clubs pull in what they do? Everyone's skirting around it. The NFL is set up where all commercial sales like shirts etc are all labelled as NFL and the profits are split evenly between all the clubs and that's in a country where the survival of the fittest is their byword. Not that there's anyway such a set up would/could exist in England 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March 37 minutes ago, Gamble92 said: They clearly, like Everton but to an even worse extent because it's gone on longer, thought the punishment was worth the crime. They expected a big fine for it. The late "compliance" by not signing anyone was to avoid it being a bigger fine. I think what some people aren't realising is this is going to be the worst of all the punishments. We are staring at -12 and then another points deduction for the following period. If you read the Everton report, they take into account a huge amount of mitigating and aggravating things. From trends of losses (or up down), from selling players (or not), curtailing buying players. We'll argue greater losses due to relegation, based on sporting advantage gained by other teams found to fail PSR. We'll claim things all the way down to paying staff during COVID, rather than taking goverment funds as mitigating. They might get ignored, but the point is I don't think we can possibly know what we will get. With no formulae to follow, we are just at someone's whim. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OntarioFox Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March Club's started wiping comments on their Instagram posts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goody2028 Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March Just now, OntarioFox said: Club's started wiping comments on their Instagram posts My Jon Rudkin we want you to stay comment has been pinned 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cruzFOX Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March This is what scares me as we don’t still know all the facts nor will we if we are embroiled in litigation with the leagues. i just hope and pray the powers that be know what their doing in choosing to fight than plead mercy and take our medicine. maybe it’s posturing and we will eventually climb down but I’ve no idea. I just want us to avoid the worse possible sanctions where we become so hamstrung it leads to us spiraling spectacularly out of control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HankMarvin Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March (edited) 2 hours ago, urban.spaceman said: The SAME RULES prevented us from competing as Champions by deliberately restricting our spending power Probably just as well given the shit we were signing the following season/s Edited 24 March by HankMarvin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wasyls Pec Deck Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March (edited) This is a slant that shows another way in which the rules benefit the established order… Edited 24 March by Wasyls Pec Deck 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egg_fried_rice Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March Our position is so inconsistent, it makes no sense. For me, this is the most revealing point - I’d live to hear the club’s reasoning on why they were posturing to sue Everton (even if we later withdrew) when they knew we were staring down the barrel of this? Over the past year or two, we’ve taken the following positions at varying times. Some of them are clearly inconsistent with the others: - We can spend anything on players, to ensure we don’t breach the rules! - (6 months later) We’re going to spunk a load of money on players, rules be damned! - This other team has breached the rules, we deserve compensation! - We may be on course to breach the rules, but you haven’t made it clear enough when they can be applied and by whom, so we shouldn’t be penalised! - The rules are shit anyway, we should be allowed to pursue our ambitions! - We got relegated, so even if we did breach the rules, we didn’t get anything out of it! Forget what you think about the rules for a moment - that’s a separate debate and one the club has only conveniently decided to get involved with now it looks set to be punished by them. I’m sorry to say it, but those in charge are even more incompetent than I initially thought. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March 10 minutes ago, Wasyls Pec Deck said: This is a slant that shows another way in which the rules benefit the established order… What happens when Chelsea have to do it this june? Aren’t they one of the rich six ? and I reckon arsenal will need to move a couple on in the summer window aswell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamble92 Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March 1 hour ago, Babylon said: If you read the Everton report, they take into account a huge amount of mitigating and aggravating things. From trends of losses (or up down), from selling players (or not), curtailing buying players. We'll argue greater losses due to relegation, based on sporting advantage gained by other teams found to fail PSR. We'll claim things all the way down to paying staff during COVID, rather than taking goverment funds as mitigating. They might get ignored, but the point is I don't think we can possibly know what we will get. With no formulae to follow, we are just at someone's whim. How likely do you think it is that any of that will be acknowledged? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox forever Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March 14 minutes ago, st albans fox said: What happens when Chelsea have to do it this june? Aren’t they one of the rich six ? and I reckon arsenal will need to move a couple on in the summer window aswell. Not disputing you at all but all this talk of many clubs having to sell to balance the books, who the hell is buying and will the player want to go there? Can’t see Gallagher going to Saudi even if clubs agree a fee! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john ridley Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March Whoevers making the decisions from over spending etc to now fighting the 2 football leagues will ruin this club for years to come.History will show the gang of 4 were nothing compared to this lot. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March 15 minutes ago, Gamble92 said: How likely do you think it is that any of that will be acknowledged? Some likely, some highly unlikely. They don’t take much shit from the report I read. Very much a “you knew the rules, no excuses”. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March 47 minutes ago, Fox forever said: Not disputing you at all but all this talk of many clubs having to sell to balance the books, who the hell is buying and will the player want to go there? Can’t see Gallagher going to Saudi even if clubs agree a fee! Chelsea and their owner’s relationship with Saudi is going to be under a lot of scrutiny in June Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanSP Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March 1 hour ago, st albans fox said: What happens when Chelsea have to do it this june? Aren’t they one of the rich six ? and I reckon arsenal will need to move a couple on in the summer window aswell. Like Liverpool they seem to get hefty fees for their young players that they've brought through their academy or hoarded from other clubs. But I do wonder how they'll suffer without the European competition money. I'm guessing their owner can't keep pumping stupid amounts of money in - guessing there's rules against this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamble92 Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March Does anyone see any circumstance where Enzo now stays? We could only invest in this style of play this season by dismissing the fact we had a bunch of full backs and wing backs who needed to leave. Completely went against financial logic but it at least shown Enzo we were willing to back his vision. There is no eventuality we can do that now. We have to be really smart with how we use what we are left with and I can only see that being without this style of play. He needs a club willing to go above and beyond to make his work and we will never be that now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamble92 Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March 3 hours ago, Guesty said: I doubt any points deduction will be worse than -9. Part of Everton's successful appeal to get a reduction from -10 was PSR is to stop clubs going into administration (which is the worst case). The deduction for administration in the Premier League is -9 (-10 in EFL). Therefore any PSR breach should be lower than the worst case. The appeal board agreed. You have to laugh about it being about stopping teams going into administration. There's so much you could do to ensure that never happens but it would all involve making the league a level playing field. Something they will never entertain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunbury Fox Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March 6 minutes ago, Gamble92 said: Does anyone see any circumstance where Enzo now stays? We could only invest in this style of play this season by dismissing the fact we had a bunch of full backs and wing backs who needed to leave. Completely went against financial logic but it at least shown Enzo we were willing to back his vision. There is no eventuality we can do that now. We have to be really smart with how we use what we are left with and I can only see that being without this style of play. He needs a club willing to go above and beyond to make his work and we will never be that now. Assuming Balagué is effectively his spokesman then I think it's pretty clear from what he said on Radio Leicester the other day that Enzo will definitely be off if we stay down - and won't want to stay if we go up and it's clear he isn't going to be backed financially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest glasgowfox Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March Without reading through hundreds of posts.....am I correct in assuming we are going to be f.cked one way or another. Not trying to be pessimistic but it seems to sound like we are going to be in a position which will take several years to recover from. I will still support us through thick and thin but feel there's a lot of thin ahead of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March 7 minutes ago, glasgowfox said: Without reading through hundreds of posts.....am I correct in assuming we are going to be f.cked one way or another. Not trying to be pessimistic but it seems to sound like we are going to be in a position which will take several years to recover from. I will still support us through thick and thin but feel there's a lot of thin ahead of us. Define “f.cked”? If we get promotion we will be in a position of increased income and having our finances under control. We might get points deducted and eventually relegated. But we should be back under control and in a position to stay within any ffp we need to. We’d be back in the champ and have two years of parachutes to try and get promoted. If we don’t get promoted it’s going to be tricky. But we should be able to get things under control. It will just end up being much much harder to get out of the league as we’d only have one season of decent parachute payments left, probably have a points deduction and need to sell players. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambert09 Posted 24 March Share Posted 24 March 3 hours ago, Wasyls Pec Deck said: This is a slant that shows another way in which the rules benefit the established order… exactly what it’s intended to do. Its not like anyone outside that cartel could afford it. One thing with MGW though, is that he already cost a fortune. So how much exactly could they gain from this. He’s surely not worth more than the 40 they paid. Personally only see a 25m player there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts