Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

[Football] The ticking Profit and Sustainability (FFP) timebomb...



Acker79

Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Nov 15, 2008
31,875
Brighton
I think my concern is that owners voting on rules may start to feel sympathetic to a club playing the victim. I think the best way to prevent this is when you uphold the appeal, you also deduct 15 points from the appealing club's next league opponents. If your club loses points, or could ptoentially be at risk of losing points because another club has cheated and then appealled, you would be less sympathetic to said cheats and would help put peer pressure on clubs to behave.

:wink:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: A1X




Weststander

Weststander

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Aug 25, 2011
64,087
Withdean area
If Everton to all intents get away with it, it’s a mockery.

They spent £100m’s more than the rules they signed up for, blamed the vast and sustained losses on behind closed doors despite ordinarily having modest match day income in a decrepit stadium, then stayed up with that improved squad by the skin of their teeth.
 




A1X

A1X

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 1, 2017
17,873
Deepest, darkest Sussex
Acker79 said:
I think my concern is that owners voting on rules may start to feel sympathetic to a club playing the victim. I think the best way to prevent this is when you uphold the appeal, you also deduct 15 points from the appealing club's next league opponents. If your club loses points, or could ptoentially be at risk of losing points because another club has cheated and then appealled, you would be less sympathetic to said cheats and would help put peer pressure on clubs to behave.

:wink:
Click to expand...
IMG_0386.jpeg
 


K

Kinky Gerbil

Im The Scatman
NSC Patron
Jul 16, 2003
57,914
hassocks
Weststander said:
If Everton to all intents get away with it, it’s a mockery.

They spent £100m’s more than the rules they signed up for, blamed the vast and sustained losses on behind closed doors despite ordinarily having modest match day income in a decrepit stadium, then stayed up with that improved squad by the skin of their teeth.
Click to expand...
I saw someone put it simply

If they played by the rules they would have had to had sold Pickford as he was out of contract

They didn't, have him an improved contract and signing on fee and he kept them up
 
Last edited:




trueblue

trueblue

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
10,422
Hove
Wardy's twin said:
People say man city's case is complicated, yep it is 115 charges so why not just take the most serious and start with that one and get a decision. Then move on to the next one. 10 points now would ensure they don't win the PL and that could be followed by more deductions as they process the next one.
Click to expand...
Like the idea but I suppose the snag with that is incremental deductions having less effect e.g. 10 points each time would potentially still keep their snout in the Champions League trough. Combined, in an ideal world, you’d be looking at relegation - possibly multiple relegations - if proven. Not that the world’s most expensive lawyers will ever let that happen.
 


W

Wardy's twin

Well-known member
Oct 21, 2014
8,448
trueblue said:
Like the idea but I suppose the snag with that is incremental deductions having less effect e.g. 10 points each time would potentially still keep their snout in the Champions League trough. Combined, in an ideal world, you’d be looking at relegation - possibly multiple relegations - if proven. Not that the world’s most expensive lawyers will ever let that happen.
Click to expand...
Sure but we could wait years for an answer on getting through 115 charges. I suspect some are major and some are small so either go big on a major one or hit a few of the low hanging fruit either way there would be seen to be some progress on dealing with potential cheating, and if they can't prove a charge it clears their name. If they are guilty then it might stop at least some new trophies going their way. Seeming to do nothing in terms of real action only makes the whole thing seem unfair for the club(s) who have been deducted points.
 


Audax

Audax

Boing boing boing...
Aug 3, 2015
2,945
Uckfield
Wardy's twin said:
People say man city's case is complicated, yep it is 115 charges so why not just take the most serious and start with that one and get a decision. Then move on to the next one. 10 points now would ensure they don't win the PL and that could be followed by more deductions as they process the next one.
Click to expand...

Nobby Cybergoat said:
Great shout. I just wonder how interconnected the charges are.
Click to expand...

I suspect @Nobby Cybergoat has the answer. Just because there's 115 individual charges, doesn't mean those charges are independent of each other. I suspect we'll find (once this all plays out) that most of those charges being proven or dismissed will all hinge on very similar, if not identical, evidence and arguments. As such, they will need to be as certain as they can be that the first charge they push through is as robust a case as they can make it. Because that first one will probably trigger a domino effect that rapidly sees the rest of the charges resolved in the same way.
 






Acker79

Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Nov 15, 2008
31,875
Brighton
Acker79 said:
I think my concern is that owners voting on rules may start to feel sympathetic to a club playing the victim. I think the best way to prevent this is when you uphold the appeal, you also deduct 15 points from the appealing club's next league opponents. If your club loses points, or could potentially be at risk of losing points because another club has cheated and then appealed, you would be less sympathetic to said cheats and would help put peer pressure on clubs to behave.

:wink:
Click to expand...
For the record: I don't currently believe this to be a suitable approach.
 


Grizz

Grizz

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
1,251
I'm sure they'll squeeze out of it somehow with the amount of homegrown talent they've got. The thing I took for that is that Sanchez got a 7 year contract! Man, no wonder he was keen to move.
 




M

Mancgull

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2011
4,790
Astley, Manchester
Hilarious. Wasn’t aware that the European rules mean that amortising can only be done over 5 years for PSR.
The thought that they may qualify and then be banned is hilarious/ amazing and down right stupid from the Chelsea perspective.
 




A

Arthritic Toe

Well-known member
Nov 25, 2005
2,400
Swindon
It is a mockery - just random numbers. I don't really get what they were making such a fuss about with the 10 points. They weren't going to go down and won't qualify for Europe, which is still the case now. On the face of it it was a substantial penalty which send the right messages, but in reality is was never going to affect them too badly. To knock a few off now is just a shambles.
 








Nobby Cybergoat

Nobby Cybergoat

Well-known member
Jul 19, 2021
7,026
Hiheidi said:
Could be an interesting Summer...

Click to expand...

Chelsea, Leicester Forst etc, we know about.

Villa? Surely £100m for Grealish will keep them safe for a bit

Leeds. Now i'll keep my eye out there.

I'm always quite surprised Man U aren't there. Now I know they have a massive commercial operation, but their player spending has been eye watering for years on end. Arsenal also, to a lesser degree
 


Simster

Simster

"the man's an arse"
Jul 7, 2003
54,221
Surrey
I am not making excuses for those breaking the rules as they are now, but surely football needs to think of a better way to police its spending? This model is uncompetitive and almost locks everybody into their current status.

We all know the answer - there needs to be a salary cap. Chance of it happening? Zero.
 




Nobby Cybergoat

Nobby Cybergoat

Well-known member
Jul 19, 2021
7,026
Simster said:
I am not making excuses for those breaking the rules as they are now, but surely football needs to think of a better way to police its spending? This model is uncompetitive and almost locks everybody into their current status.

We all know the answer - there needs to be a salary cap. Chance of it happening? Zero.
Click to expand...
3 years ago. Us, Villa and Newcastle were fighting relegation. Now we're all in Europe and looking to kick on.
 


Simster

Simster

"the man's an arse"
Jul 7, 2003
54,221
Surrey
Nobby Cybergoat said:
3 years ago. Us, Villa and Newcastle were fighting relegation. Now we're all in Europe and looking to kick on.
Click to expand...
You may not have noticed but Villa and Newcastle are both backed by billionaires. The Grealish transfer might have held off any issue with Villa and Newcastle have been reasonably prudent, but I think both might find themselves in trouble down the line like Everton did and Chelsea probably will.

We are the exception, owing to Uncle Tony's genius. Our wage bill is in the bottom 4 in the league I think.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here