How 'fair' is Financial Fair Play?

[KZNSeagull]

If the fines being levied on promoted teams breaking the rules was still being distributed among the teams that did not break the rules, then it would be slightly fairer, but only slightly.

Under this new tv deal, now that the team coming bottom of the PL get +- 100m quid just for turning up, there is really no need for parachute payments anymore.

 

[KZNSeagull]

How so?

TB voted for the new rules which means that a club relegated from the PL can have allowable losses of up to £83M over 3 years compared to other clubs that will have allowable losses of less than half that figure at £39M - how is that "reasonably 'fair'"

That is for the first year they are relegated though. If they do not go straight back up, they are allowed 61m in the second year and 39m in the third. Still very unfair, but they do have to "save" a lot of money over a 2 year period once relegated which I am sure will give some food for thought. That assumes they are losing the maximum 35m per year in the PL, of course, which I would assume those in the "3rd tier" of the PL will not be, considering the vast amount they are going to get from this new TV deal.

I am assuming that this new TV deal will give some PL clubs the chance to reduce their losses substantially. I am aware, however, that this is almost certainly a false assumption!

 

[El Presidente]

Nothing in FFP is 'fair'. It astounds
me that so many people fall for it. The objective is for established large clubs to maintain their advantage over smaller ones.

 

[spanish flair]

Nothing in FFP is 'fair'. It astounds
me that so many people fall for it. The objective is for established large clubs to maintain their advantage over smaller ones.

So do you include Barber in the people that fell for it ?

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Difficult one this,when He gave that interview after the Palace debacle I ,like most was fuming with Him,looking back,did He have a point?I think it wasn't long after We bottled the Van Dijk signing that he tendered resignation,I think us not going for Van Dijk opened his eyes as to what life working with Barber would be like.

Paul Barber may have many roles, but deciding the player budget, and hence what we would pay for Van Dijk, is not one of them. That is something for the board/Tony.

If anything, the more money Paul saves, the higher the budget. So perhaps blame him for not saving enough money to enable us to sign VVD ?

 

[KZNSeagull]

Nothing in FFP is 'fair'. It astounds
me that so many people fall for it. The objective is for established large clubs to maintain their advantage over smaller ones.

I did think that when there was going to be a redistribution from fines it made a bit of sense, but when that was taken away by the PL, it reinforced your point.

 

[KZNSeagull]

So do you include Barber in the people that fell for it ?

The club decided that it wanted to play by the rules of the Football League. There is no falling for anything. El Pres's point is that the Big 4 had their noses put out of joint by the usurpers Man City, and therefore did not want anyone else threatening their Champions League money, so FFP was put in place to keep their advantage.

 

[spanish flair]

The club decided that it wanted to play by the rules of the Football League. There is no falling for anything. El Pres's point is that the Big 4 had their noses put out of joint by the usurpers Man City, and therefore did not want anyone else threatening their Champions League money, so FFP was put in place to keep their advantage.

Thank you for answering for El Pres.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Thank you for answering for El Pres.

Thank you for not allowing me an opinion different to yours.

Edit. Actually I will retract that. What I should have posted is :

Thank you for allowing me to challenge a rather strange statement.

 

[spanish flair]

Thank you for not allowing me an opinion different to yours.

How can you tell my opinion from me asking a question?

 

[KZNSeagull]

How can you tell my opinion from me asking a question?

The tone of the question suggested your opinion. It is not a question that someone that did not think that would ask.

 

[spanish flair]

The tone of the question suggested your opinion. It is not a question that someone that did not think that would ask.

For what it is worth I was interested in the opinion of a person who has spent a lot of time looking at the subject, (hence my asking El Pres) did you not pick that up in the tone?
At this risk of boring all other posters, I suggest we leave it there.

 

[KZNSeagull]

For what it is worth I was interested in the opinion of a person who has spent a lot of time looking at the subject, (hence my asking El Pres) did you not pick that up in the tone?
At this risk of boring all other posters, I suggest we leave it there.

Righto. I will not answer a post of yours in future when you have replied to another poster, even when I feel that you have asked a rather strange question and then followed it up with an extremely dismissive reply. Thanks for clearing that up

 

[Icy Gull]

Complying with FFP does give a ready made excuse for failing to perform on the pitch.

 

[El Presidente]

So do you include Barber in the people that fell for it ?

What do you mean by 'fell for it'?

 

[Stat Brother]

The club decided that it wanted to play by the rules of the Football League.

Did it?

I have always felt irrespective of the existence on FFP Tony would be running the club within his own financial framework.
I've never felt Tony would 'go for it', spend 'only' an extra say £20m, in a make or break dash for the Premier League.

All FFP has done for the Albion is give Tony a protective shield when others are spending/losing tens of millions per season.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Did it?

I have always felt irrespective of the existence on FFP Tony would be running the club within his own financial framework.
I've never felt Tony would 'go for it', spend 'only' an extra say £20m, in a make or break dash for the Premier League.

All FFP has done for the Albion is give Tony a protective shield when others are spending/losing tens of millions per season.

You are correct, yes. The club made it abundantly clear that they wanted to abide by FFP. Ideally, TB also wants the club to be self-financing, so the two are not mutually exclusive. But it is the abiding by FFP that the club made their mantra and the self-financing bit seems to get forgotten about, particularly when fans mention the club not spending enough money, for example.

Oh and I doubt that TB wants to splurge 39m over 3 years either.

 

[Tomo1794]

So you'll keep doing these questionnaires until you get a result that you want?

Yep, journalism is right for you.

Refer back to being restricted to 10 questions in the initial post. Answers to the current questionnaire open up further discussion which I wasn't able to initially do.

 

[Everest]

Refer back to being restricted to 10 questions in the initial post. Answers to the current questionnaire open up further discussion which I wasn't able to initially do.

Fair enough

 

[spanish flair]

What do you mean by 'fell for it'?

It was this statement in your post,

"Nothing in FFP is 'fair'. It astounds
me that so many people fall for it." The objective is for established large clubs to maintain their advantage over smaller ones

Did Barber feel that we were a big club and we would gain an advantage over smaller ones with FFP, as he really championed FFP in my mind like no others. Because as you stated nothing is fair about FFP. So was he taken in by it all (and Fell for it) or was he just being clever and used it as an excuse not to spend money and in fact raise prices?

Or have I just missed your point completely?