Blackburn could face a transfer embargo

[Insel affe]

Blackburn could face the possibility of a transfer embargo for failing to comply with the new Financial Fair Play regulations, according to the club's managing director Derek Shaw.
Last month Venky's London Limited, the parent company for Rovers, posted losses of over £27million with the club's accounts, due later this year, expected to paint a similarly bleak picture.
And, earlier in September, it was revealed Blackburn were far and away the biggest spenders on agents in the Championship as the club struggled to cope with their relegation from the top flight two seasons ago.

Speaking at a fans' forum hosted by BBC Radio Lancashire on Monday night, Shaw revealed that even promotion back to the Premier League could see the club hit with a fine once the new FFP rules come in.
"If we are promoted I think we'll have a substantial fine and, if we're not promoted at this stage, we'll probably have an embargo," said Shaw.
"It's a difficult balance because we've got to try to and change a team around that almost got relegated to a team that we want to get promoted."

Rovers have had a more prudent summer transfer window, allowing high-earners such as Morten Gamst Pedersen to leave on free transfers.
Shaw himself is not a fan of the FFP rules, and added: "It's very difficult for clubs who have come down from the Premier League with quite a number of big contracts that are in place, but we're working on it.

"I think there will be a lot of clubs creating a lot of noise over the next few months because nobody's really been hit with it yet.
"Clubs like ourselves and the Leicesters, and probably clubs like Middlesbrough, who have got big wage bills, won't be wanting transfer embargoes."

 

[Rugrat]

They won't be alone but will it stick?

Haven't seen it anywhere but how would the embargo last?

 

[Baron Pepperpot]

I feel a popularity surge coming on for Mr Barber

 

[Insel affe]

I feel a popularity surge coming on for Mr Barber

We are towing the line, and in the long run this could all work out very well for us.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

They won't be alone but will it stick?

Haven't seen it anywhere but how would the embargo last?

I'm pretty certain the embargo lasts until they can show they are FFP compliant.

 

[nwgull]

A good example to show that parachute payments don't mean automatic success with the millstone of a squad on premier league contracts hanging around a club's neck.

QPR are another example. Fair enough, they look likely to go straight back up, but even with their parachute payments it seems to be a given they're going to massively overspend and have to pay a large fine.

 

[Papa Lazarou]

We are towing the line, and in the long run this could all work out very well for us.

Where are we towing the line to?

 

[Rugrat]

We are towing the line, and in the long run this could all work out very well for us.

Except there's still the parachute teams to compete with which could be nearly half the league.

Not sure how much I buy the argument that teams coming down struggle with higher wage bills. To some extent obviously, but if they manage it properly they will be able to sell or loan a decent number and replace with high earners by Championship standard and still be uber competitive

 

[Nathan]

I thought Derek Shaw was sacked by Blackburn earlier this year.

 

[Rugrat]

I'm pretty certain the embargo lasts until they can show they are FFP compliant.

Which would have to be until the next set of accounts produced, so 1 year minimum

 

[deletebeepbeepbeep]

"I think there will be a lot of clubs creating a lot of noise over the next few months because nobody's really been hit with it yet.
"Clubs like ourselves and the Leicesters, and probably clubs like Middlesbrough, who have got big wage bills, won't be wanting transfer embargoes."

Tough shit that didn't stop you spending 8m on Jordan Rhodes.

 

[Sarisbury Seagull]

So from what he's staying, if they get promoted they will just be given a substantial fine which will probably work out nothing compared to the fortune they will earn in the Premier league. I can see now why the likes of them and Forest are not fussed about FFP and are still signing big money players. Why aren't they also given an embargo if promoted? From those comments I think you can take it that them, Leicester and Middlesbrough don't actually give a damn about FFP.

And if the fine is very large, then surely that's not going to help them get back into a healthy financial position for the following year and so on.

To make FFP actually work I really think they needed to bring in harsher punishments that weren't just financial like embargo's across the board and maybe even relegation or being barred from promotion. The way it reads to me, a lot of clubs will just carry on spending regardless.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Getting promoted with a loss of 27m would mean a fine of 15,681,000 under this year's rules. In 2 years time, that fine will go to 18,681,000. I think we will happily accept some of that for being good boys and girls.

"Shaw himself is not a fan of the FFP rules, and added: "It's very difficult for clubs who have come down from the Premier League with quite a number of big contracts that are in place, but we're working on it." Aw, diddums.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

"SShaw himself is not a fan of the FFP rules, and added: "It's very difficult for clubs who have come down from the Premier League with quite a number of big contracts that are in place, but we're working on it." Aw, diddums.

In all seriousness he has a point though. Especially if you were a relatively established premier league club and have a shock relegation.

Being a team around 15-17th in the prem must be a bit of a nighmare from a club accountant/those in charge of finances. You WANT to try and boost your team but not leave yourself up the creek if relegated.

Teams like Norwich and Villa (whilst rebuilding) seem to have gone the logical route of talented players for low fees on reasonable contracts. You have sellable assets and non-draining assets if relegated. The downside of course is that you are using time to bring the players up to prem quality and time is the one thing chairmen don't like to provide. Villa stuck with the policy and Lambert when, at this point last year, they looked screwed.

QPR however.....

 

[nwgull]

Except there's still the parachute teams to compete with which could be nearly half the league.

Not sure how much I buy the argument that teams coming down struggle with higher wage bills. To some extent obviously, but if they manage it properly they will be able to sell or loan a decent number and replace with high earners by Championship standard and still be uber competitive

It's not easy to let go or loan out a failed premier league player with 2-3 years left on his lucrative contract; clubs that might want them aren't always going to match their current wages.

 

[Greavsey]

"I think there will be a lot of clubs creating a lot of noise over the next few months because nobody's really been hit with it yet.
"Clubs like ourselves and the Leicesters, and probably clubs like Middlesbrough, who have got big wage bills, won't be wanting transfer embargoes."

This is the elephant in the room - we have, or are trying our very hardest, to comply with FFP. But, we appear to me to be in the minority in the Championship. How watertight is FFP legally once the lawyers get their mits on it if say ten or so clubs get together to contest their fines/embargoes? At the very least I would suggest they can probably cause enough delays to mean it won't be enforced next season.

 

[Gary Gurr]

Would that be the same type of transfer embargo Watford were subject too - Meaningless!

 

[supaseagull]

I'm pretty certain the embargo lasts until they can show they are FFP compliant.

This is why they're calling teams like QPR and the like potentially "zombie clubs" as they will perpetually have debts which force them into embargo and they won't be able to attract and investment into their clubs.

Hard to feel sorry for clubs that spend way too much beyond their means.

 

[KZNSeagull]

In all seriousness he has a point though. Especially if you were a relatively established premier league club and have a shock relegation.

Being a team around 15-17th in the prem must be a bit of a nighmare from a club accountant/those in charge of finances. You WANT to try and boost your team but not leave yourself up the creek if relegated.

True, but that is what parachute payments are for. If you know how much they are, you can factor them into your budget etc.

A long term implication is that, hopefully, wages will come down and relegation clauses in contracts will become the norm (ie get relegated, your wages go down accordingly).

 

[Rugrat]

It's not easy to let go or loan out a failed premier league player with 2-3 years left on his lucrative contract; clubs that might want them aren't always going to match their current wages.

I agree but they have got an extra £16M a year to play with!

I also think that more and more "they" will be savvy to the fact that relegation could prove financial ruin and set themselves up with as much as contingency as possible. After all we've had trumpeted to us I'd be shocked if we went up and came back down a year or 2 later and be in the cack