Financial Fair Play penalties?

[AZ Gull]

A transfer embargo won't guarantee relegation. You can still buy players but need league permission.

You keep repeating this, but are you sure about that? I know that the transfer "embargo" that was applied to Watford allowed them to transfer in players with the League's permission, but what makes you think that the same rules will apply to the FFP penalty?

 

[nwgull]

Ultimately, the price of FFP will be paid for by the spectator. I can imagine smaller clubs having to up their ticket sales in order to keep afloat. FFP is undoubtedly aimed at stifling the progress of English football, but will effect most of Europe.

FFP is all about clubs keeping afloat without needing a billionaire owner subsiding wages. It'll take a few years, but the idea behind it is to reverse the trend of paying mediocre footballers tens of thousands a week.

 

[Creaky]

Not relevant as clubs now have to submit accounts to the league by 1st of December.

Precisely the point being made - this season's accounts won't be published until December 2014 - halfway through next season - so if the club were liable to be sanctioned for this years finances we could still make player transfer deals during next summer's break and probably during the January transfer window as well unless the league were very quick with their financial analysis of all the league clubs.

So essentially clubs probably won't face transfer penalties for transgressions this season until the season after next.

The whole system is ridiculous!

 

[Creaky]

FFP is all about clubs keeping afloat without needing a billionaire owner subsiding wages. It'll take a few years, but the idea behind it is to reverse the trend of paying mediocre footballers tens of thousands a week.

Fine sentiment but what about the good players in the lower leagues - If FFP does drive down players wages, (something that is debateable), then it will also drive the exceptional players out of the lower leagues, either upwards in the leagues or out of the country, again widening the gap between them and the EPL.

 

[drew]

Precisely the point being made - this season's accounts won't be published until December 2014 - halfway through next season - so if the club were liable to be sanctioned for this years finances we could still make player transfer deals during next summer's break and probably during the January transfer window as well unless the league were very quick with their financial analysis of all the league clubs.

So essentially clubs probably won't face transfer penalties for transgressions this season until the season after next.

The whole system is ridiculous!

Surely you appreciate that this is a new system and therefore there has to be a lead in time. Irrespective of when they file their company accounts, they have to submit accounts to the league by 1st December and when this happens next year, the first transfer embargoes will be imposed from 1st Jan 2015, ie 31 days later. So penalties are being imposed halfway through next season.

 

[Creaky]

Surely you appreciate that this is a new system and therefore there has to be a lead in time. Irrespective of when they file their company accounts, they have to submit accounts to the league by 1st December and when this happens next year, the first transfer embargoes will be imposed from 1st Jan 2015, ie 31 days later. So penalties are being imposed halfway through next season.

Yes I do realise this is a new system but that doesn't change the time delay in any penalties - also the idea that the clubs financial reports lodged with the league on the 31st Decemebr can be analysed so quickly that penalties can be imposed the following day is just not realistic - and that ignores appeals that will undoubtedly be started by any clubs that the league tries to impose penalties on.

The rules in effect gives clubs at least a two season window to try and spend their way up the divisions - I don't see how such a system is likely to reduce the number of clubs getting into financial difficulties - I would have thought it would be likely to increase the number if anything.

 

[drew]

Yes I do realise this is a new system but that doesn't change the time delay in any penalties - also the idea that the clubs financial reports lodged with the league on the 31st Decemebr can be analysed so quickly that penalties can be imposed the following day is just not realistic - and that ignores appeals that will undoubtedly be started by any clubs that the league tries to impose penalties on.

The rules in effect gives clubs at least a two season window to try and spend their way up the divisions - I don't see how such a system is likely to reduce the number of clubs getting into financial difficulties - I would have thought it would be likely to increase the number if anything.

Try reading my post again!!!!!!!

 

[Creaky]

Try reading my post again!!!!!!!

Yes - you are right - FL will have 30 days, (including the Christmas period), to analyse the accounts - doesn't really change my argument though, does it?

Less than 31 days to analyse the accounts, check for 'loophole breaches', request clarification etc lodged by 72 league clubs, impose penalties, hear appeals - not very realistic is it?

 

[AZ Gull]

Yes I do realise this is a new system but that doesn't change the time delay in any penalties - also the idea that the clubs financial reports lodged with the league on the 31st Decemebr can be analysed so quickly that penalties can be imposed the following day is just not realistic - and that ignores appeals that will undoubtedly be started by any clubs that the league tries to impose penalties on.

The rules in effect gives clubs at least a two season window to try and spend their way up the divisions - I don't see how such a system is likely to reduce the number of clubs getting into financial difficulties - I would have thought it would be likely to increase the number if anything.

Creaky, you are not understanding what drew is trying to tell you. Clubs have to submit their accounts by Dec 1st; any transfer embargo will be enforced from the following transfer window, ie Jan 1st, one month later. There is NOT a "two season window" to spend their way up the divisions.

 

[Gazwag]

A good penalty would be any team breaking FFP rules isn't allowed any penalties for the following season.

I like that. You could hack down their forwards in the box with complete impunity.

Add to that "only allowed to use half your squad until Christmas". It would be just like us this year.

 

[Acker79]

Yes - you are right - FL will have 30 days, (including the Christmas period), to analyse the accounts - doesn't really change my argument though, does it?

Less than 31 days to analyse the accounts, check for 'loophole breaches', request clarification etc lodged by 72 league clubs, impose penalties, hear appeals - not very realistic is it?

December 1st is the deadline. Some will probably have theirs in before this, so will probably be assessed as they come in rather than waiting until after the deadline.

 

[Creaky]

Creaky, you are not understanding what drew is trying to tell you. Clubs have to submit their accounts by Dec 1st; any transfer embargo will be enforced from the following transfer window, ie Jan 1st, one month later. There is NOT a "two season window" to spend their way up the divisions.

Well I guess only experience will demonstrate whether I am right or wrong - I just cannot see the FL being so efficient and decisive as to be able to impose a transfer embargo on any club that does try to spend their way up the leagues - with all the potential loopholes such as sponsorship deals, non-football related income, changes in accounting periods, third party player sponsorships etc that a club could employ to distort the accounts 30 days does not strike me as a realistic period.

Whilst I accept that the 1st of December is the deadline for filing accounts and some clubs may file them before that date, you can be sure that those teams breaching the FFP regulations won't be amongst them.

 

[drew]

Well I guess only experience will demonstrate whether I am right or wrong - I just cannot see the FL being so efficient and decisive as to be able to impose a transfer embargo on any club that does try to spend their way up the leagues - with all the potential loopholes such as sponsorship deals, non-football related income, changes in accounting periods, third party player sponsorships etc that a club could employ to distort the accounts 30 days does not strike me as a realistic period.

Whilst I accept that the 1st of December is the deadline for filing accounts and some clubs may file them before that date, you can be sure that those teams breaching the FFP regulations won't be amongst them.

The accounting period will be for the football season 2013/14. Clubs know this. I'm not sure that necessary means they have to change when they file their company accounts to Company House as that is a totally separate issue.

 

[Creaky]

The accounting period will be for the football season 2013/14. Clubs know this. I'm not sure that necessary means they have to change when they file their company accounts to Company House as that is a totally separate issue.

Changing the accounting period of a club can distort FFP figures - if a club for instance changes its financial accounting period from the end of June to the end of August it is possible to move various costs incurred from earlier in the year quite legally to July and August in the companies books - doing so would mean that they wouldn't appear in the FFP calculations for that season.

 

[north stand seagull]

Bugger all will be done and then we'll all be gutted that we actually tried to play by the rules

 

[Thunder Bolt]

You keep repeating this, but are you sure about that? I know that the transfer "embargo" that was applied to Watford allowed them to transfer in players with the League's permission, but what makes you think that the same rules will apply to the FFP penalty?

It wasn't just Watford, but similar to teams going into admin like Pompey & Palace.

 

[drew]

Changing the accounting period of a club can distort FFP figures - if a club for instance changes its financial accounting period from the end of June to the end of August it is possible to move various costs incurred from earlier in the year quite legally to July and August in the companies books - doing so would mean that they wouldn't appear in the FFP calculations for that season.

I don't think they are changing the accounting period of the business just that the clubs have to produce a set of accounts for the football year. Therefore your suggestion about changing the period to the end of August would apply because the season has already started. As yet, I haven't located whether there are specific dates for the football year but would suspect they are likely to be 1st July to 30th June which would dovetail with players contracts (unless they are of course on a short term contract).

Many clubs will have a separate business entity above that of the football club as I believe we do. Their accounting periods, as I understand it, do not need to change. I will try and find out more and post if I can.

 

[Creaky]

I don't think they are changing the accounting period of the business just that the clubs have to produce a set of accounts for the football year. Therefore your suggestion about changing the period to the end of August would apply because the season has already started. As yet, I haven't located whether there are specific dates for the football year but would suspect they are likely to be 1st July to 30th June which would dovetail with players contracts (unless they are of course on a short term contract).

Many clubs will have a separate business entity above that of the football club as I believe we do. Their accounting periods, as I understand it, do not need to change. I will try and find out more and post if I can.

I'm sure you are right that the accounting periods for Companies House and FFP can be different but that opens up the accounting loophole whereby costs can be kept within the companies accounting period thus producing accurate company accounts but shifted to a later or earlier FFP accounting year.

 

[AZ Gull]

It wasn't just Watford, but similar to teams going into admin like Pompey & Palace.

I think there are different types of embargo. Watford's was a Regulation 19 embargo - Duxbury: Football League rule changes will have no impact on Watford. This type of embargo DOES allow players to be signed, with the permission of the Football League.

However, I believe other embargoes are exactly that - they don't allow players to be registered at all. That would certainly seem to be the case with Bury last year - [URL="http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/3268/league-one/2012/12/10/3592515/bury-placed-under-transfer-embargo-by-football-league]Bury placed under transfer embargo by Football League[/URL] - when they were unable to sign a free agent in December.

 

[El Presidente]

December 1st is the deadline. Some will probably have theirs in before this, so will probably be assessed as they come in rather than waiting until after the deadline.

All this assumes that the FL has the competence to review 24 sets of accounts in 31 Days. Whilst it could have a quick flick through them there is no way it could uncover some of the more unusual accounting activities.