[Football] Chelsea moaning about PSR

[El Presidente]

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.

 

[AZ Gull]

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.

 

[The Wookiee]

Never pass up an opportunity to post this again

 

[pigmanovich]

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

 

[dazzer6666]

Chelsea news: Stefan Borson drops sensational reveal

Football Insider has been told by Stefan Borson a sensational reveal after a Chelsea loophole update has emerged.

www.footballinsider247.com

 

[Shins]

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.

 

[Shins]

Double post.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Chelsea news: Stefan Borson drops sensational reveal

Football Insider has been told by Stefan Borson a sensational reveal after a Chelsea loophole update has emerged.

www.footballinsider247.com

Is that it? I thought from @El Presidente comment, that it would be akin to Sean Dyche eating worms. At least.

 

[Hiheidi]

What's even more annoying than those dodgy sales is having an FA that allows those transactions in the first place.

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).

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

 

[schmunk]

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.

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.

 

[Dibdab]

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.

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.

 

[Shins]

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.

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.

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.

 

[dwayne]

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.

 

[FatSuperman]

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.

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.

 

[Hiheidi]

 

[bhafc99]

Amusing lunchtime read

 

[Doonhamer7]

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.

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]

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

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]

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”.

Would it surprise you if he turned out to be genuinely clueless?

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Would it surprise you if he turned out to be genuinely clueless?

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