warmleyseagull
Well-known member
...and are being fined for so doing. http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/bournemouth-face-hefty-fine-football-7066844.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
So Bournemouth did gamble big time
- Thread starter warmleyseagull
- Start date
studio150
Well-known member
Given the story is from December I think everyone was already aware that they had breached FFP.
The pony express must take months to reach the far outposts of this Kingdom
ManOnTheRun
Active member
There is an article in the Times today on Bournemouths financial shenanigans so I'm guessing there is some element of this that is 'new' news ...
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bournemouth-fined-7-6m-for-losses-in-championship-hgbkbt38t
nicko31
Well-known member
FFP breaches mean nothing if you are promoted, you are untouchable unless relegated
The likes of Leicester and B'muff fled to Brazil and are living the high life, but there is no extradition treaty in place
The PL and the Football League have few diplomatic ties
The likes of Leicester and B'muff fled to Brazil and are living the high life, but there is no extradition treaty in place
The PL and the Football League have few diplomatic ties
Hotchilidog
Well-known member
- Jan 24, 2009
- 9,120
So they spent over 200% of their income on wages? Only a 7.6m fine, FFP is pointless.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
Even when you're relegated like QPR, they seem untouchable. FFP is nonsense. It doesn't seem to be enforceable.
That doesn't seem to the case here though, does it? As it says in The Times piece, linked above, and other articles on this subject, it seems to be the case that Bournemouth have paid a fine. Not "may face a fine", not "may be hit with a fine" nor "could face a fine" - they all say that Bournemouth have paid over hard cold cash.
That seems different to the QPR story we are all so familiar with.
I have no idea why there would be a difference, if indeed there is.
Regardless, the gamble clearly paid off for them.
KZNSeagull
Well-known member
If they have indeed already paid this fine then they have set the precedent. Hopefully it makes it much harder for the likes of QPR and Leicester to avoid paying up.
nwgull
Well-known member
At least they're paying their fine. Amongst all the Leicester loving, it's not being widely reported that they're still trying to avoid paying their fine (from 13/14) due to a dodgy deal between Leicester City and a company that, apart from an address of a small unit at a Sheffield business park, has no evidence of existence or trading, apart from on paper at Companies House and in Leicester's annual accounts.
Hotchilidog
Well-known member
- Jan 24, 2009
- 9,120
According to the Times, the fine was £7.6m. This just sends a clear message to teams that it is ok to ignore FFP. Bournemouth didn't just fall foul of FFP, they drove a bloody tank through it losing £38million (six times the permitted loss) with a £30m wage bill that was over double their revenue. That is about a blatant example of cheating that you will ever see. Bournemouth could not have mounted their successful promotion bid without the overspending, it really is as simple as that.
I've no idea what the point of FFP is.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...long-grass-personality-clashes-fuel-feud.html >>> "But it’s emerged Bournemouth have paid a £7.6million fine for last season’s FFP breach."
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bournemouth-fined-7-6m-for-losses-in-championship-hgbkbt38t >>> "Bournemouth have had to pay a fine of £7.6 million for breaching financial fair play"
http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/sp...inancial_Fair_Play_fine_more_than___7million/ >>> "A FINE of more than £7million for breaching Financial Fair Play rules contributed to Cherries' pre-tax losses totalling nearly £40million."
http://www.insidermedia.com/insider/southwest/losses-near-40m-at-afc-bournemouth >>> "A fine of more than £7m for breaking Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules has contributed to pre-tax losses widening to almost £40m at Premier League side AFC Bournemouth."
It could be a single incorrect story that has been recirculated, of course...
Silverhatch
Well-known member
It's a gamble that's worth taking. AFCB gambled/broke the rules, won and paid a fine. Leicester City gambled/broke the rules, won, will pay a fine that pales into insignificance because they're champions. QPR gambled/broke the rules, won, got promotion, got relegated, and refuse to pay a fine (bare-faced cheating). Boro have gambled...
nicko31
Well-known member
Maybe we need to be talking about points deductions or relegations, fines really mean nothing when you have loads of funny money piling into the game from all angles
severnside gull
Well-known member
The problem is that parachute payments create such an uneven playing field that imposing meaningful sanctions is nigh on impossible. The real solution lies in spreading the SKY wealth more equitably but the premier league will never allow that,
nicko31
Well-known member
Howe will be feeling smugger than ever this morning, everyone's talking about Leicester this story won't get a look in anyway.
Notice their local rag the Echo has completely ignored the story today. Far worse cheats than ever imagined
Notice their local rag the Echo has completely ignored the story today. Far worse cheats than ever imagined
Horton's halftime iceberg
Blooming Marvellous
For the short term perhaps, the Premier league who want chairman to spend big and budge the wage bills of clubs will care nothing about Bournemouth as a club when they get relegated and are then in a financial mess (the thing FFP is trying to prevent, the list is endless to see, Portsmouth, Blackpool, Bolton....
Premier league is making a mess of football especially at out level where the playing field has been rigged towards those reach or touch their promised land
nwgull
Well-known member
Forest gambled and had to sell their best players and take COG on loan as a replacement. Fulham and Blackburn aren't having the best of seasons either.
Silverhatch
Well-known member
Actually meant to post a rhetorical question i.e. 'Is it' rather than 'it's'