QPR in the Conference - Great Idea

[Creaky]

But if the club owner funds the losses via an equity issue it is not putting the business into greater debt.

Manchester City have the lowest prices in the Premier League, mainly due to the club owners subsidising the operational activities of the club, I don't see what they have done wrong.

Leicester City are a prime example of the irrelevancy of FFP and club stability. They spectacularly failed the FFP requirements in the 2012/2013 season by announcing losses of £34 million - in December last year however the owners wiped out the clubs £103 million pound debt by converting it into equity making the club debt free for the first time in twenty years.

Had all this happened one season later they would have been facing a huge 'fine' under FFP legislation on their promotion to the PL.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Backing him is an irrelevance, the issue is whether FFP is legal.

The only reason why City and PSG didn't take UEFA to court this year was that their penalties were watered down to an acceptable level.

The elephant in the room in relation to FFP isn't the clubs, it could be a player. The lawyer who brought about the Bosman ruling is considering acting on behalf of a client who claims that his wages potential is being compromised by FFP, and therefore could be illegal from that perspective.

There's nothing fair or egalitarian about FFP anyway, it's simply the rich ensuring they have less competition from the nouveau riche.

What the f**k has elephants got to do with it. Stupid bloody sayings.

His wages aren't being compromised by FFP but by financial reality. Clubs can't keep running with huge debts. Ask if the small businesses F**ked over by the likes of Portsmouth have had their wages compromised?

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Leicester City are a prime example of the irrelevancy of FFP and club stability. They spectacularly failed the FFP requirements in the 2012/2013 season by announcing losses of £34 million - in December last year however the owners wiped out the clubs £103 million pound debt by converting it into equity making the club debt free for the first time in twenty years.

Had all this happened one season later they would have been facing a huge 'fine' under FFP legislation on their promotion to the PL.

So like us they took advantage of the fact the member proposed and agreed rules hadn't fully come in to force. Really is quite simple.

 

[Creaky]

So like us they took advantage of the fact the member proposed and agreed rules hadn't fully come in to force. Really is quite simple.

The rules were in place - what they, and us, took advantage of was the fact that there were no penalties for breaking those rules - not quite the same thing!

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

The rules were in place - what they, and us, took advantage of was the fact that there were no penalties for breaking those rules - not quite the same thing!

Er, I said hadn't FULLY come in to force. Therefore the penalties not applied. Now they are so those members have to abide to them or face the agreed penalties.

The fact remains these were voted on and agreed, maybe by previous members but nonetheless agreed. To change them the members can vote to change, they haven't plain and simple.

The clubs that have complied have a much better and legal position than any who have fallen foul and now crying about, tough titty.

 

[halbpro]

Backing him is an irrelevance, the issue is whether FFP is legal.

The only reason why City and PSG didn't take UEFA to court this year was that their penalties were watered down to an acceptable level.

The elephant in the room in relation to FFP isn't the clubs, it could be a player. The lawyer who brought about the Bosman ruling is considering acting on behalf of a client who claims that his wages potential is being compromised by FFP, and therefore could be illegal from that perspective.

There's nothing fair or egalitarian about FFP anyway, it's simply the rich ensuring they have less competition from the nouveau riche.

I don't really like arguing the legality of FFP. Maybe we'll get an effective challenge, maybe we won't. Maybe the agent involved in the case (Daniel Striani) will find that it doesn't have much of an effect on his wages and decide that continuing to fund Dupont is overly expensive. We might even just end up with a different version of FFP in the end. No one will really know for a few years yet.

 

[Creaky]

Er, I said hadn't FULLY come in to force. Therefore the penalties not applied. Now they are so those members have to abide to them or face the agreed penalties.

The fact remains these were voted on and agreed, maybe by previous members but nonetheless agreed. To change them the members can vote to change, they haven't plain and simple.

The clubs that have complied have a much better and legal position than any who have fallen foul and now crying about, tough titty.

So by your argument, where there are agreed rules but no penalties then it is perfectly OK to ignore those rules!

The rules with regard to fines for promoted teams and where those fines were to be distributed were changed unilaterally, without any reference to those voting for them, by the Football League and the Premier League.

Who is to say how the clubs would have voted if it were known at the time that fines wouldn't be distributed between compliant teams - it can't even be argued that the teams agreed to that change by starting the season in the League as they were made mid-season.

That alone I would imagine would be grounds for a legal challenge.

 

[halbpro]

So by your argument, where there are agreed rules but no penalties then it is perfectly OK to ignore those rules!

The rules with regard to fines for promoted teams and where those fines were to be distributed were changed unilaterally, without any reference to those voting for them, by the Football League and the Premier League.

Who is to say how the clubs would have voted if it were known at the time that fines wouldn't be distributed between compliant teams - it can't even be argued that the teams agreed to that change by starting the season in the League as they were made mid-season.

That alone I would imagine would be grounds for a legal challenge.

Surely there have now been multiple meetings where members of the Football League etc... could have voted to, at the very least, show their disapproval of the change in fine distribution should they want to?

 

[El Presidente]

Clubs can't keep running with huge debts.

Manchester United have managed quite easily running with huge debts, and the Albion are surviving despite owing TB over £100 million.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Manchester United have managed quite easily running with huge debts, and the Albion are surviving despite owing TB over £100 million.

"Managed quite easily" - I wouldn't say that. They're no longer in the Champions League, their spending in recent seasons has been dwarfed by that of Chelsea and Man City - who are now set to dominate English football for some time to come - and they're now having to pay well over the odds for players. The Falcao deal shows they are gambling on a quick return to the Champions League places, and there are real question marks over the ability of their Chief Executive to bring the top names to Old Trafford.

 

[Creaky]

Surely there have now been multiple meetings where members of the Football League etc... could have voted to, at the very least, show their disapproval of the change in fine distribution should they want to?

Wrong way round - the League changed the rules, (under pressure from the PL) - it was up to them to gain the clubs approval.

 

[El Presidente]

"Managed quite easily" - I wouldn't say that. They're no longer in the Champions League, their spending in recent seasons has been dwarfed by that of Chelsea and Man City - who are now set to dominate English football for some time to come - and they're now having to pay well over the odds for players. The Falcao deal shows they are gambling on a quick return to the Champions League places, and there are real question marks over the ability of their Chief Executive to bring the top names to Old Trafford.

It's a myth that they haven't spent well in recent years, in the last four seasons (before this summers splurge) they spent a NET £170 million on players, and they won the league only 15 months ago. What they haven't done is bought good players. Included in the £170 million are the likes of Bebe, Fellaini, Zaha, Henrique, Buttner, Kagawa and Young.

United also have the second highest wage bill in the PL, outstripping that of Chelsea.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

"Could" result in a fine of up to £40m. In other words, nowhere near that figure once a few envelopes of cash are slipped into a few hands

Annoyingly if the original concept hadn't been hijacked by the Premier League we could have looked forward to £2.5M from the QPR fine.

 

[Pavilionaire]

It's a myth that they haven't spent well in recent years, in the last four seasons (before this summers splurge) they spent a NET £170 million on players, and they won the league only 15 months ago. What they haven't done is bought good players. Included in the £170 million are the likes of Bebe, Fellaini, Zaha, Henrique, Buttner, Kagawa and Young.

United also have the second highest wage bill in the PL, outstripping that of Chelsea.

It's really gone tits up since David Gill left and Ed Woodward took over. Fergie bought some duffers but managed to squeeze enough gold dust out of Giggs, Scholes, Ferdinand and Vidic to paper over the cracks. United still haven't brought in that dominant centre-half they require and the big name signings they've made they've simply had to pay insane money for.

 

[El Presidente]

It's really gone tits up since David Gill left and Ed Woodward took over. Fergie bought some duffers but managed to squeeze enough gold dust out of Giggs, Scholes, Ferdinand and Vidic to paper over the cracks. United still haven't brought in that dominant centre-half they require and the big name signings they've made they've simply had to pay insane money for.

I agree with you entirely. If you take a look at the United press release today in respect of their results Steady Eddie witters on about commercial deals and EBITDA, but there's very little about a decent defence......................and long may in continue.

 

[Iggle Piggle]

United also have the second highest wage bill in the PL, outstripping that of Chelsea.

115K a week Ashley Young anyone? As TSF puts it in the article below, there is only one thing that gets Europe elite players to a rain soaked corner of the NW of England - Wages.

http://www.thesecretfootballer.com/...nchester-uniteds-sky-high-salaries-laid-bare/

 

[Pavilionaire]

Back on FFP, I believe that it WILL actually bite because football - and those clubs outside the Prem in particular - simply have to regain some control over football finances.

 

[narly101]

It will be very interesting to see what happens when UEFA nail the big boys and tell them they can't play in the Champions League

 

[halbpro]

Wrong way round - the League changed the rules, (under pressure from the PL) - it was up to them to gain the clubs approval.

I understand that the League changed the rules but, if the clubs were unhappy with the rules, they could have easily voted to reverse the change. As I understand it the clubs essentially run the show, so if they were not happy with the change the League made, surely they could simply change it back? As they haven't they are, at the very least, giving their implicit approval to the change.

 

[Ernest]

Why is it ok for UEFA to share the fines round the clubs but not for the Championship clubs ?