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

Register Log in

[Football] Chelsea moaning about PSR



El Presidente

El Presidente

The ONLY Gay in Brighton
Helpful Moderator
Jul 5, 2003
39,990
Pattknull med Haksprut
They are now assessed on a calendar year basis, so the real estate sales and the unusual transaction involving the women’s team may be scrutinised.

If the other story doing the rounds about Chelsea in the last few days are true it shows what a repulsive ownership they have.
 








pigmanovich

pigmanovich

Good Old Sausage by the Sea
Mar 16, 2024
1,509
London
Maresca: “Probably one thing that has to be clear, Chelsea three years ago won the Champions League. Now it is not that kind of Chelsea. So now sometimes if you don’t win it is normal.”

Tell ‘em again Enzo :lolol:
 






S

Shins

Well-known member
Aug 13, 2015
525
What's even more annoying than those dodgy sales is having an FA that allows those transactions in the first place.

If Uefa can see this stuff and ban it why aren't other football associations? Why isn't it a directive from FIFA (if they have that jurisdiction). Do FA's, Uefa and FIFA ever sit down and try to make rules as common for all leagues where appropriate.

It's so shit.
 








H

Hiheidi

Well-known member
Dec 27, 2022
1,881
Shins said:
What's even more annoying than those dodgy sales is having an FA that allows those transactions in the first place.
Click to expand...

As I understand it, it's because PL clubs vote on each rule change, and in this case - bizarrely - some chose to vote so as not to close this loophole (presumably because they fancied exploiting it themselves).

www.dailymail.co.uk

Chelsea 'AVOID breaking Premier League's PSR rules' after AGM vote

Chelsea had sparked outrage in April after the west London club sold a hotel on their Stamford Bridge site to another company the club owns - in a bid to avoid breaching PSR rules.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk
 


schmunk

schmunk

Why oh why oh why?
Jan 19, 2018
10,326
Mid mid mid Sussex
Shins said:
What's even more annoying than those dodgy sales is having an FA that allows those transactions in the first place.

If Uefa can see this stuff and ban it why aren't other football associations? Why isn't it a directive from FIFA (if they have that jurisdiction). Do FA's, Uefa and FIFA ever sit down and try to make rules as common for all leagues where appropriate.

It's so shit.
Click to expand...
The FA has nothing to do with it.

The FA Cup doesn't (to my knowledge) have any "financial fair play" type rules attached - how could it, given the huge gamut of clubs involved?

Likewise the EFL cup, but those rules are set out by the EFL, not the FA.

The Premier League rules are set by The Premier League, and voted on solely by the Premier League clubs.
 


D

Dibdab

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2021
1,071
Shins said:
What's even more annoying than those dodgy sales is having an FA that allows those transactions in the first place.

If Uefa can see this stuff and ban it why aren't other football associations? Why isn't it a directive from FIFA (if they have that jurisdiction). Do FA's, Uefa and FIFA ever sit down and try to make rules as common for all leagues where appropriate.

It's so shit.
Click to expand...
Its the Premier League that allow it. The clubs vote on the rules and unfortunately most are owned by overseas money consortium's that like the idea that they can sell stuff to themselves as a loophole. It would end if Uefa would bar clubs from Euro competition for breaches. Fines really arent going to cut it.
 




S

Shins

Well-known member
Aug 13, 2015
525
schmunk said:
The FA has nothing to do with it.

The FA Cup doesn't (to my knowledge) have any "financial fair play" type rules attached - how could it, given the huge gamut of clubs involved?

Likewise the EFL cup, but those rules are set out by the EFL, not the FA.

The Premier League rules are set by The Premier League, and voted on solely by the Premier League clubs.
Click to expand...

Dibdab said:
Its the Premier League that allow it. The clubs vote on the rules and unfortunately most are owned by overseas money consortium's that like the idea that they can sell stuff to themselves as a loophole. It would end if Uefa would bar clubs from Euro competition for breaches. Fines really arent going to cut it.
Click to expand...

Thanks. In my head I meant Premier League. Tbh the umbrella of any English/British, association/membership body that allows this sort of stuff. Be it Premier League, FA, etc.

Everything seems so reactive rules wise. It wouldn't take a couple of decent analysts and accountants very long to brainstorm various ways clubs might circumvent FFP. It's almost as if they allow it to keep clubs happy. Which defeats the object in the first place. At least that how it looks from the outside.
 
Last edited:




FatSuperman

FatSuperman

Well-known member
Feb 25, 2016
2,919
dwayne said:
Think there's another rumour about Chelsea that because in the NFL it's easy(ish) to cancel players contracts that Boehly thinks he can do the same in the EPL. He's prepared to challenge players in court.
Click to expand...
If that turns out to be the case, and he goes to court, I wonder how it would affect players considering the Chelsea 'project' once that starts happening. Knowing players and agents, they'll all be convinced it wouldn't happen to them and sign anyway.
 








Doonhamer7

Doonhamer7

Well-known member
Jun 17, 2016
1,452
dwayne said:
Think there's another rumour about Chelsea that because in the NFL it's easy(ish) to cancel players contracts that Boehly thinks he can do the same in the EPL. He's prepared to challenge players in court.
Click to expand...
He’s in for a shock like most Americans on the difference between uk and us employment law. They don’t understand why you can’t just sack someone that day and have no pay off. The fact that most Americans think ‘employment at will’ is a good thing dumbfounds me
 


Nobby Cybergoat

Nobby Cybergoat

Well-known member
Jul 19, 2021
8,617
Doonhamer7 said:
He’s in for a shock like most Americans on the difference between uk and us employment law. They don’t understand why you can’t just sack someone that day and have no pay off. The fact that most Americans think ‘employment at will’ is a good thing dumbfounds me
Click to expand...
OK, but even Todd surely recognises there’s a difference between a normal contract of employment and the type of contracts he’s giving out. When he’s given a player an 8 year contract, he surely recognises the significance of the term “8 year contract”.
 




Green Cross Code Man

Green Cross Code Man

Wunt be druv
Mar 30, 2006
20,714
Eastbourne
Nobby Cybergoat said:
OK, but even Todd surely recognises there’s a difference between a normal contract of employment and the type of contracts he’s giving out. When he’s given a player an 8 year contract, he surely recognises the significance of the term “8 year contract”.
Click to expand...
Would it surprise you if he turned out to be genuinely clueless?
 


Nobby Cybergoat

Nobby Cybergoat

Well-known member
Jul 19, 2021
8,617
Green Cross Code Man said:
Would it surprise you if he turned out to be genuinely clueless?
Click to expand...
I admit it would slightly

I think he's got a strategy. I think it's an incredibly high risk strategy and I would in no way want my club to indulge in it, but I'm prepared to concede he likely at least understands the basics, "such as contracts need to be paid for their duration" of what he's trying to do.

I could see a situation where in 2 or 3 years, just the sheer amount of money they throw gets them to the top of the PL pile and puts them in a good position to negotiate some kind of ultra lucrative superleague and uses the economic leverage from that to force smaller clubs to vote out any spending restrictions.

I could equally see it exploding in their faces
 


You must log in or register to reply here.
Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports

Share this page


Top
Link Here