On her wrists or the other one!
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
QPR - now relegated, will they have to pay their FFP fine?
- Thread starter Marty___Mcfly
- Start date
On her wrists or the other one!
KJP
Well-known member
From bbc
QPR 'challenge legality' of Football League FFP regulations
Queens Park Rangers revealed they have begun legal proceedings against the Football League, a day after being relegated from the Premier League.
The club say they are challenging "the legality of the Championship Financial Fair Play rules", which could leave them facing a fine of up to £58m.
Rangers said any charge for breaching the rules would not begin until the outcome of their challenge was known.
Their relegation was confirmed by Sunday's 6-0 loss at Manchester City.
In March, the club announced losses of £9.8m, but £60m worth of loans were written off by owner Tony Fernandes and other shareholders.
A failure to pay any fine imposed could see the London side being refused entry into the Championship.
QPR 'challenge legality' of Football League FFP regulations
Queens Park Rangers revealed they have begun legal proceedings against the Football League, a day after being relegated from the Premier League.
The club say they are challenging "the legality of the Championship Financial Fair Play rules", which could leave them facing a fine of up to £58m.
Rangers said any charge for breaching the rules would not begin until the outcome of their challenge was known.
Their relegation was confirmed by Sunday's 6-0 loss at Manchester City.
In March, the club announced losses of £9.8m, but £60m worth of loans were written off by owner Tony Fernandes and other shareholders.
A failure to pay any fine imposed could see the London side being refused entry into the Championship.
SIMMO SAYS
Well-known member
BensGrandad
New member
Bevendean Hillbilly
New member
You would have thought so.
I have had a response from PB tonight, as always very quick and fair appraisal of the questions I asked.
As I alluded to earlier (and pleased I was correct) The FFP rules are clear and concise, voted and agreed by the members as per the Leagues constitution.
There's no planned meeting and unlikely to be unless an EGM is called, which is unlikely before the AGM in June.
The legality is whether the financial rules are correct as per EL Pres's post. As these are ell explained and were fully agreed imo I can't see QPR have a case.
It would be unlikely that the rules would have been ratified without a legal eagle determining their status.
The other one!
yxee
Well-known member
What is the basis of their challenge? That they deserve to be in a club and that club can't kick them out even if they break the clearly stated club rules? I can't see what they can even say.
withdeanwombat
Well-known member
It's the Notus challenge. The rules apply to all, but Notus.
KZNSeagull
Well-known member
PB explained that there were two parts to the package being offered by the PL. The first part was to tie up FL solidarity payments from the PL with any increase in tv rights - so if the tv rights go up by 50%, then the solidarity payments to the FL go up by 50%. The second part was changing the rules to what they are now so that they are more aligned to the PL rules (ie allowing a loss over 3 years as opposed to 1), which ties in with trying to combat the increase in parachute payments. You could not vote for either/or, it was all or nothing.
But it's irrelevant to QPR's fine as it was pre-change.
KZNSeagull
Well-known member
Yes, I was just expanding on the explanation given for why the rules were changed. Makes no difference to QPR #cheats
BensGrandad
New member
I would think that whether or not they were technically legal in the eyes of the courts is irrelevant as the club s voted for the rules so they become the rules for the FL to enforce by the choice of the participating members.
TWOCHOICEStom
Well-known member
Exactly. Legally I'm sure much of the football league's rules aren't watertight. But if you want to BE in the Football League, you've got to play by the Football League's rules. Quite simple really isn't it!
Indeed BG PB was basically saying they have made a legal challenge to the financial wording and interpretation. One would hope that the League's own legal department would make sure all League rules fall within the law.
daveinprague
New member
Definitely get the impression that the only people who suffer under FFP are the clubs who abide by it.
- Apr 13, 2015
- 3,860
Most sensible comment on this thread.....spot on.
I would be AMAZED if The Football League showed any sort of balls in this situation
I really don't understand the negativity. The League is duty bound to follow the members wishes. They can not do as they want. The only way it can change is with a vote from its members. PB has stated there's no likelihood of an EGM and doubts that it will even be discussed officially at the AGM due to the fact I already given. The legality of the fine is whats being challenged but considering the very thing that triggered the fine is the fundamental reason FFP was introduced by the clubs I for one can't see how it can be overturned.
Are Rangers the legal system now?They choose not to challenge a decision until it's too late to get their challenge through the courts before the new season is planned. Presumably they plan to spend £100m on players etc to ensure they walk the Championship next season, so that by the time they lose the court case, they'll already be back in the PL.