QPR - now relegated, will they have to pay their FFP fine?

[Kinky Gerbil]

I'm not up on employment law but I don't think the FL would be able to, effectively, terminate the contracts of employed professionals owing to the behaviour of their employer. I'd imagine there would be monumental legal strife for the FL if they went that route.

EDIT - That's not to mention the other non-playing staff they employ.

I maybe completely wrong, but are not all players partly signed/registered to the FA as well?

Cut the registration to the FA all the time they are employed by QPR

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Because the football league are utterly gutless.

They will try and keep everyone happy, by doing that the only people that will be happy are QPR

But they are a members only club. They have to do as the majority of members decide, that is the managements remit. Failure to do so would result in them being removed by the members.

 

[Triggaaar]

I'm not up on employment law but I don't think the FL would be able to, effectively, terminate the contracts of employed professionals owing to the behaviour of their employer.

But the league wouldn't be terminating the contracts. Their contracts are with QPR, and if the league says pay the fine or leave the league, it's QPR's decision.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

But they are a members only club. They have to do as the majority of members decide, that is the managements remit. Failure to do so would result in them being removed by the members.

Do you honestly think the FL will fine them 60 million, or kick them out? And if they don't the other clubs will withdraw from the league?

 

[BBassic]

But the league wouldn't be terminating the contracts. Their contracts are with QPR, and if the league says pay the fine or leave the league, it's QPR's decision.

Yep, a good point well made.

That goes for @KinkyGerbils and @PILTDOWNMAN as well.

Honestly hadn't looked at it that way.

 

[Triggaaar]

Do you honestly think the FL will fine them 60 million, or kick them out?

No, but they could and should.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

I think QPRs defence will hinge on the league changing the rules the year after they went up as they where seen as unworkable

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Do you honestly think the FL will fine them 60 million, or kick them out? And if they don't the other clubs will withdraw from the league?

No but what I'm saying is they will need the authority of the other members, to allow this new member in with a different set of criteria to that previously voted and agreed on. The Football League management do not have the remit to just change the criteria to suit. These were items discussed and agreed on by the members. Therefore the only thing that can be up for discussion without the members approval is the "allowable" losses, to which the League has already stated was broken to the tune of 60 million.

As I posted before if I was Bloom (and we don't know he hasn't) I'd be in close contact with my other members, especially those that have swallowed the FFP book, to agree a course of action not to accept any deal apart from the one previously agreed. It's in our interests that it is upheld. Otherwise it could be argued the last two years has been a sham (accepting Bloom did want to cut the losses).

To me the League hold all the cards, moral and legal.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

No but what I'm saying is they will need the authority of the other members, to allow this new member in with a different set of criteria to that previously voted and agreed on. The Football League management do not have the remit to just change the criteria to suit. These were items discussed and agreed on by the members. Therefore the only thing that can be up for discussion without the members approval is the "allowable" losses, to which the League has already stated was broken to the tune of 60 million.

As I posted before if I was Bloom (and we don't know he hasn't) I'd be in close contact with my other members, especially those that have swallowed the FFP book, to agree a course of action not to accept any deal apart from the one previously agreed. It's in our interests that it is upheld. Otherwise it could be argued the last two years has been a sham (accepting Bloom did want to cut the losses).

To me the League hold all the cards, moral and legal.

What's to say the clubs don't want to bin it and QPR not getting a full fine is a way to speed this up?

We are all assuming owners want this rule, I'm sure a large number of clubs want rid of it

Plus the rules have changed since they got promoted

Don't get me wrong, they should be fined the max in my view.

 

[El Presidente]

I will be on Five Live at 7pm talking it through with Mark Chapman. Some good points on this thread!

 

[Papa Lazarou]

I will be on Five Live at 7pm talking it through with Mark Chapman. Some good points on this thread!

What's your take on the FL's position?

If they don't pursue the full fine from QPR and any other sanctions for non-payment, then surely they leave themselves open to a claim from numerous other clubs who HAVE been punished already?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

What's to say the clubs don't want to bin it and QPR not getting a full fine is a way to speed this up?

We are all assuming owners want this rule, I'm sure a large number of clubs want rid of it

Plus the rules have changed since they got promoted

Don't get me wrong, they should be fined the max in my view.

But the clubs voted it in....why would they now change their minds?

I also presume they will be charged under the rules in place when they were in the league.

 

[El Presidente]

What's your take on the FL's position?

If they don't pursue the full fine from QPR and any other sanctions for non-payment, then surely they leave themselves open to a claim from numerous other clubs who HAVE been punished already?

No clubs have been fined to date, so it is a case of testing the waters. However, in theory if QPR get off, then the clubs who have been subject to transfer embargoes (Blackburn, Leeds, Forest) could claim that they have been unfairly discriminated against, and their chances of promotion impacted. In theory Forest could then sue the FL.

The only winners in any of this are the lawyers.

 

[TomandJerry]

They should be made to pay up!

 

[Pavilionaire]

The bottom line is that the majority of clubs have changed their spending to comply with the rules, reducing their chances of success AND pushing greater costs onto their fans. What would be the point of paying top dollar to watch a club who comply but ultimately finishes behind the likes of QPR and - dare I say - Bournemouth who spend way beyond their means.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

But the clubs voted it in....why would they now change their minds?

I also presume they will be charged under the rules in place when they were in the league.

Different owners/realised how hard it is to stay inside the rules and stay competitive/fans annoyed at higher costs?

I know it's only one club, but Crawley blamed the FFP (among other things) as the reason they where in trouble.

 

[Triggaaar]

I think QPRs defence will hinge on the league changing the rules the year after they went up as they where seen as unworkable

In what way were they unworkable? QPR broke the rules because they brought in new, expensive players (like Austin). So they broke the rules by choice, not because they were unworkable. Other clubs, that didn't just want to buy promotion, managed to work with the rules.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

No clubs have been fined to date, so it is a case of testing the waters. However, in theory if QPR get off, then the clubs who have been subject to transfer embargoes (Blackburn, Leeds, Forest) could claim that they have been unfairly discriminated against, and their chances of promotion impacted. In theory Forest could then sue the FL.

The only winners in any of this are the lawyers.

That's my point as to why the FL will do something.... At the time they got banned from signing players they could still have made the play offs, they wouldn't have. But there is no way the FL could prove they wouldn't have

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

In what way were they unworkable? QPR broke the rules because they brought in new, expensive players (like Austin). So they broke the rules by choice, not because they were unworkable. Other clubs, that didn't just want to buy promotion, managed to work with the rules.

If they where 100 percent workable, why did they league change them after 1 season?

And that backs up my point in saying about chairman changing views on it.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

But the clubs voted it in....why would they now change their minds?

I also presume they will be charged under the rules in place when they were in the league.

We agree on something. Harmony.