Foxhateram Posted 17 December 2015 Posted 17 December 2015 Haha I love the way we have been accused of cheating our way to the top when we have spent about 50 mill tops spread across 3 or 4 seasons to aquire this squad. All the other teams around us spend that or more on one player haha. Radiculous. I know this is about the champ season but even then we didn't spend very much and we sold a lot of players (from sven era) to fund the incoming traffic. I don't see how they can touch us. If any teams deserve some FFP treatment here its QPR, Reading and Borough who have all spent like they own the joint and spent far more than we did in our promotion season.
Merging Cultures Posted 17 December 2015 Posted 17 December 2015 Sometimes you have to speculate to accumulate, and we are the proof in the pudding.Hardly like we have spent £250m though!!
MooseBreath Posted 17 December 2015 Posted 17 December 2015 Haha I love the way we have been accused of cheating our way to the top when we have spent about 50 mill tops spread across 3 or 4 seasons to aquire this squad. All the other teams around us spend that or more on one player haha. Radiculous. I know this is about the champ season but even then we didn't spend very much and we sold a lot of players (from sven era) to fund the incoming traffic. I don't see how they can touch us. If any teams deserve some FFP treatment here its QPR, Reading and Borough who have all spent like they own the joint and spent far more than we did in our promotion season. No need to speculate on what we spent or didn't spend that season, the accounts show that we made a loss of over £20m. The FFP folk are entitled to have a look because we signed up the the regulations.
Babylon Posted 17 December 2015 Posted 17 December 2015 It would certainly cast a (minor) shadow over our season, but - as others have said - a fine is not certain, and in any case won't be big enough to harm us (which is actually one of the problems with the whole FFP enforcement procedure). The comment about "cheating" is quite strong - but if you take your blue-tinted specs off for a second, he's got a point. I mean if it turns out we knowingly flouted agreed spending rules so as to gain an advantage over our competitors who were respecting them...it's not that wide of the mark it it? Did Manchester City cheat to win the league, or PSG? I don't see his column about that... or all the other teams that spent above the guidelines like QPR, Forest, Blackburn etc. And I state guidelines because they aren't really rules as you are free to break them if you want to take a fine or risk an embargo. We did NOT cheat to gain promotion that's cast iron, if we did anything it was we tried to hide losses to avoid a fine. QPR I think are yet to settle theirs... you know, the £60m+ losses they tried to get away with. Although it was rumoured they agreed an £8m settlement in the summer. Lets not forget as well that as soon as we were promoted the league changed the rules as they were an utter farce.
Babylon Posted 17 December 2015 Posted 17 December 2015 No need to speculate on what we spent or didn't spend that season, the accounts show that we made a loss of over £20m. The FFP folk are entitled to have a look because we signed up the the regulations. £10m of which were entirely within the rules as they were promotion bonuses.
LcFc_Smiv Posted 17 December 2015 Posted 17 December 2015 Title should read " London journo pi$$ed that teams from capital are being topped by small Midlands side".
filbertway Posted 17 December 2015 Posted 17 December 2015 As much as I agree with the intentions of FFP - which at their base, are to prevent clubs from spending over their means and going into admin/spiralling down the leagues. Surely having the main punishment as being a fine completely ruins the point of it? It really should be points deductions or reductions to the amount of squad players you are allowed to register. Whether we're found guilty of it or not, who cares. Worst case scenario, Top has to look down the back of the sofa for some loose change. I can almost guarantee it will be the same story for any team that comes up. The amount of money being spent in the championship is higher than any of them will make through gate receipts/sponsorship. Clubs coming down and receiving parachute payments are probably spending above their means as well.
Countryfox Posted 17 December 2015 Posted 17 December 2015 Me and the Daily Telegraph are finished !!
Fox 4 Life Posted 24 December 2015 Posted 24 December 2015 Just been announced that Bournemouth, Forest and Fulham have failed FFP for last season and Bournemouth subject to a hefty fine. No mention of our "open case". The whole thing is a shambles, the football league have no jurisdiction over Bournemouth. They are also changing the rules so it's a 3 season average rather than a 1 season basis, QPR will be relieved!
Fox92 Posted 24 December 2015 Posted 24 December 2015 FFP is stupid. It doesn't achieve anything - the richer clubs can pay the fine and carry on. And how is it fair that Bournemouth get a fine yet Fulham and Nottingham Forest have an embargo. Whole thing is a shambles.
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 24 December 2015 Posted 24 December 2015 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/leicester-city/12054079/Leicester-City-flying-high-and-are-sitting-top-of-the-Premier-League-table-but-will-they-be-derailed-by-FFP-regulations.html Should we be concerned as fans? http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/35174477 Far from the only ones mind.
Dan Posted 24 December 2015 Posted 24 December 2015 Something needed doing about the way clubs were losing silly money every year but FFP clearly isn't the answer. What exactly is this achieving?
Steven Posted 24 December 2015 Posted 24 December 2015 Something needed doing about the way clubs were losing silly money every year but FFP clearly isn't the answer. What exactly is this achieving? Bond the owners for the amount of outstanding debt.
ealingfox Posted 24 December 2015 Posted 24 December 2015 FFP is stupid. It doesn't achieve anything - the richer clubs can pay the fine and carry on. And how is it fair that Bournemouth get a fine yet Fulham and Nottingham Forest have an embargo. Whole thing is a shambles. Thats what the rules are. Fine if you go up, embargo if you don't.
Guest Posted 25 December 2015 Posted 25 December 2015 Something needed doing about the way clubs were losing silly money every year but FFP clearly isn't the answer. What exactly is this achieving? Agreed. The only alternative that I've really liked is an American style luxury tax. i.e. Somebody wants to buy instant success by spending 100m over the summer? ok, but you'll have to pay 1m to every club in the league for going over the limit. Something like that would still allow freedom of investment, while ensuring all clubs benefit to some extent. Would also help to cool transfer prices.
Carl the Llama Posted 25 December 2015 Posted 25 December 2015 The problem is it's not going to help Ch'ship clubs at all if they're only allowed to spend a pittance to get into a league where the other teams have been lining their pockets with big money. All this is doing is making it harder for teams to step up and stay up. At least that's what I was going to write but then I remembered us, Watford, Palace, and Bournemouth all taking the league by the scruff of the neck and now I'm not so sure. Did these clubs benefit from having to plan their finances more carefully or is it just a timely coincidence?
sylofox Posted 25 December 2015 Posted 25 December 2015 The simple way is clubs can only borrow a certain %of income. If the owners want to spend 300m they have to give it to the club.
MooseBreath Posted 25 December 2015 Posted 25 December 2015 The problem is it's not going to help Ch'ship clubs at all if they're only allowed to spend a pittance to get into a league where the other teams have been lining their pockets with big money. All this is doing is making it harder for teams to step up and stay up. At least that's what I was going to write but then I remembered us, Watford, Palace, and Bournemouth all taking the league by the scruff of the neck and now I'm not so sure. Did these clubs benefit from having to plan their finances more carefully or is it just a timely coincidence? Watford had the ponzo scheme cheat code thing activated. Bournemouth did fail championship FFP last season and are facing a fine. We passed championship FFP by setting up a perfectly legal but to all intents and purposes fake business who gave us a load of money. We now fall under premier league FFP which is different, plus we get the TV money. I think the gap will be widening as a consequence of FFP but it's not so wide yet that a good manager being backed financially in the championship isn't able to get a team up and keep them up. That's mainly because you'll always have clubs in turmoil in the premier league. Villa for example, they've got lots of money, have spent lots of money, but are rooted to the bottom because they're a shambles. That said, I don't think putting championship clubs at such a financial disadvantage is good for the game nor is it fair, contrary to the now ironic name of the regulations.
Guest Col city fan Posted 25 December 2015 Posted 25 December 2015 My Mrs is pissed with me cos I am pissed. I am more worried about that I thought you were always pissed? You mean you make your posts sober?
sylofox Posted 25 December 2015 Posted 25 December 2015 I thought you were always pissed? You mean you make your posts sober? Am so fvcking tempted but it is Xmas day. Love and peace to all mankind (suppose that means u to Col) shite. So I shall reply to this tomorrow.
hackneyfox Posted 11 April 2016 Posted 11 April 2016 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/apr/11/leicester-city-finances-football-league-financial-fair-play-investigation
mozartfox Posted 11 April 2016 Posted 11 April 2016 Have a Word with Barca and Real M, they have form
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.