Foreign loan loophole to be closed by Football League (Finally)

[Bayfox]

If the same family owns a number of clubs, let's say Udinese, Granada and Watford, selling players to Watford for £1 per player that would have been loaned under last seasons rules is really not an issue for the owner. They can be bought back for 1 euro at the end of the 2013 - 2014 season if that is what the owners want to do AND completely circumvent the FFP rules re cost of transfers counting against revenue.

That is what what I would do as the owner or am I missing something ?

Yes this stupid panel who will look into all sponsorship deals and decide a market value and also be able to veto any transfers they see as not fit and proper so to speak.

[Harry - LCFC]

Watford didn't break any rules but their actions were clearly unethical, hence why the whole of football called for the loophole to be closed and why the football league have responded.

They will go on with their unethical attempts to circumnavigate the usual challenges clubs face to get promotion, of that we can be sure. The rest of football will continue to look at them with fully deserved contempt and hope that they fail again.

As for replaying the play offs, it is clearly out of the question, but would be justice for clubs like Leicester and more so the likes of Bolton who were denied a play off spot due to a club doing what will from now on be officially considered cheating. Some kind of compensation would be agreeable. Maybe even a moderate points deduction for Watford next season.

 

This is exactly what I want. People have called me bitter for speaking out against Watford and that does frustrate, I'm unfortunate in that my club has lost out to Watford so people are easily able to undermine what I say by saying I'm just frustrated by this.

 

I didn't actually want Leicester to go straight to the final (although that would be nice) what I want is Watford in mid-table and POs that look like this:

 

     Brighton

     Palace

     Leicester

     Bolton

 

...and we go from there.

[Solihullfox]

Yes this stupid panel who will look into all sponsorship deals and decide a market value and also be able to veto any transfers they see as not fit and proper so to speak.

Yep and thanks.

Can see this is going to be a complete minefield - someone IS going to challenge this as a restriction of trade and will win even though this has been "voted" in by the clubs themselves.

[theessexfox]

Watford didn't break any rules but their actions were clearly unethical, hence why the whole of football called for the loophole to be closed and why the football league have responded.

They will go on with their unethical attempts to circumnavigate the usual challenges clubs face to get promotion, of that we can be sure. The rest of football will continue to look at them with fully deserved contempt and hope that they fail again.

As for replaying the play offs, it is clearly out of the question, but would be justice for clubs like Leicester and more so the likes of Bolton who were denied a play off spot due to a club doing what will from now on be officially considered cheating. Some kind of compensation would be agreeable. Maybe even a moderate points deduction for Watford next season.

Oh come on... 'unethical' but lawful behaviour cannot lead to a points deduction.

[Guy1960]

So you're not really a club anymore? You're just part of the ugly conglomerate that is Pozzo FC, no identity, nothing unique, just a puppet.

 

You said it yourself, they're the Pozzo's players, not yours or Udinese's. They've merged three clubs into one competing across three divisions, easily able to ship their troops to where they're most needed.

 

That's what your existence consists of now, loans between clubs "are not really loans at all" because you aren't just Watford FC anymore you're part of a larger super-club that's sucking up footballing outlets across Europe.

 

All of this comes from your words by the way, I've just expanded on them and added my own opinion.

 

 

Watford didn't break any rules but their actions were clearly unethical, hence why the whole of football called for the loophole to be closed and why the football league have responded.

They will go on with their unethical attempts to circumnavigate the usual challenges clubs face to get promotion, of that we can be sure. The rest of football will continue to look at them with fully deserved contempt and hope that they fail again.

As for replaying the play offs, it is clearly out of the question, but would be justice for clubs like Leicester and more so the likes of Bolton who were denied a play off spot due to a club doing what will from now on be officially considered cheating. Some kind of compensation would be agreeable. Maybe even a moderate points deduction for Watford next season.

 

So in the spirits of the game if a rich foreign owner say maybe Mr Tan came in a and spent heavily even though the club were 90m in debt do you think that's fair or even Hull making use of the international loan system and bringing in two Egyptian internationals is that fair and yourselves spending millions unsustainably to gain an advantage and go into administration is that fair? or maybe Bolton who you think had a better case for the playoffs  who benefited from parachute payments is that fair

 

Football isn't a level playing field that's just how it is.

[aefevans]

Watford didn't break any rules but their actions were clearly unethical, hence why the whole of football called for the loophole to be closed and why the football league have responded.

They will go on with their unethical attempts to circumnavigate the usual challenges clubs face to get promotion, of that we can be sure. The rest of football will continue to look at them with fully deserved contempt and hope that they fail again.

As for replaying the play offs, it is clearly out of the question, but would be justice for clubs like Leicester and more so the likes of Bolton who were denied a play off spot due to a club doing what will from now on be officially considered cheating. Some kind of compensation would be agreeable. Maybe even a moderate points deduction for Watford next season.

                       

 

But seriously, this forum's purpose is probably for you to voice your frustration. But that's as far as it's going to go with this one.

 

Also, I've been on Bolton's forum; they don't seem too bothered with it all, and they didn't even make the play-offs! 

 

I have the numbers of a couple of decent therapists if you're interested.

[Guy1960]

So you're not really a club anymore? You're just part of the ugly conglomerate that is Pozzo FC, no identity, nothing unique, just a puppet.

 

You said it yourself, they're the Pozzo's players, not yours or Udinese's. They've merged three clubs into one competing across three divisions, easily able to ship their troops to where they're most needed.

 

That's what your existence consists of now, loans between clubs "are not really loans at all" because you aren't just Watford FC anymore you're part of a larger super-club that's sucking up footballing outlets across Europe.

 

All of this comes from your words by the way, I've just expanded on them and added my own opinion.

 

Many at Watford had reservations when the Pozzo family took over but nothing so far over last season has caused any disquiet.  Yes we are part of something bigger but that gives us access to better players, financial security and a much more optimistic future that we could only have dreamed about this time last year.

 

The club is connecting with the community, the players seem to care far more than any of the journeymen we have seen come through our club in recent years, we have a great manager and we are playing the best football I have witnessed since the early 1980's.

 

I would much rather have owners who know and care about their football and not by a foreign owner who is just out to make a quick buck or have the club as a toy or status symbol.

 

Yes all in all I'm very content with where we are  

[Guy1960]

If the same family owns a number of clubs, let's say Udinese, Granada and Watford, selling players to Watford for £1 per player that would have been loaned under last seasons rules is really not an issue for the owner. They can be bought back for 1 euro at the end of the 2013 - 2014 season if that is what the owners want to do AND completely circumvent the FFP rules re cost of transfers counting against revenue.

That is what what I would do as the owner or am I missing something ?

 

No you're not and that's why the whole loan 'loophole' business is a load of nonsense.  

[Harry - LCFC]

So in the spirits of the game if a rich foreign owner say maybe Mr Tan came in a and spent heavily even though the club were 90m in debt do you think that's fair or even Hull making use of the international loan system and bringing in two Egyptian internationals is that fair and yourselves spending millions unsustainably to gain an advantage and go into administration is that fair? or maybe Bolton who you think had a better case for the playoffs  who benefited from parachute payments is that fair

 

Football isn't a level playing field that's just how it is.

 

You're right, it's just that you've moved it so far from a level playing field that it generates some frustration. You're right that others don't behave all the time but you do have to question why so much has been made of your actions and not of others - yours have had a big impact pushing you from 11th to 3rd.

 

This has been done by not having to compete in the transfer market, now your lot like the word 'sustainable' to describe this but it's only low cost because you're being given the players by a sub-section of Pozzo FC rather than being an attractive destination for players.

 

At least other clubs actually pay these costs, you just avoid them altogether.

 

 

Many at Watford had reservations when the Pozzo family took over but nothing so far over last season has caused any disquiet.  Yes we are part of something bigger but that gives us access to better players, financial security and a much more optimistic future that we could only have dreamed about this time last year.

 

The club is connecting with the community, the players seem to care far more than any of the journeymen we have seen come through our club in recent years, we have a great manager and we are playing the best football I have witnessed since the early 1980's.

 

I would much rather have owners who know and care about their football and not by a foreign owner who is just out to make a quick buck or have the club as a toy or status symbol.

 

Yes all in all I'm very content with where we are  

 

Well I knew you'd be happy with it. I just wanted to show that you're competing as three clubs and not one like everyone else, you have access to three squads and not one. I, like many, am prone to exaggeration at times but having access to three squads (and some very, very good youth players) in comparison to the rest of the Championship is about as unfair as you can get IMO.

[Guy1960]

 

 

You're right, it's just that you've moved it so far from a level playing field that it generates some frustration. You're right that others don't behave all the time but you do have to question why so much has been made of your actions and not of others - yours have had a big impact pushing you from 11th to 3rd.

 

This has been done by not having to compete in the transfer market, now your lot like the word 'sustainable' to describe this but it's only low cost because you're being given the players by a sub-section of Pozzo FC rather than being an attractive destination for players.

 

At least other clubs actually pay these costs, you just avoid them altogether.

 

 

 

Well I knew you'd be happy with it. I just wanted to show that you're competing as three clubs and not one like everyone else, you have access to three squads and not one. I, like many, am prone to exaggeration at times but having access to three squads (and some very, very good youth players) in comparison to the rest of the Championship is about as unfair as you can get IMO.

 

 

 

What Watford are doing now is showing some ambition and trying something new.  Had we stayed as we were we would be destined to at best be challenging for a play off spot but be in fear of going out of business and having to rely on loans which are not our own like Cleverley, Lansbury and sell to pay the bills. Our future is the brightest it's been for many years and for that I for one am happy.  

[Jordan]

So you're not really a club anymore? You're just part of the ugly conglomerate that is Pozzo FC, no identity, nothing unique, just a puppet.

You said it yourself, they're the Pozzo's players, not yours or Udinese's. They've merged three clubs into one competing across three divisions, easily able to ship their troops to where they're most needed.

That's what your existence consists of now, loans between clubs "are not really loans at all" because you aren't just Watford FC anymore you're part of a larger super-club that's sucking up footballing outlets across Europe.

All of this comes from your words by the way, I've just expanded on them and added my own opinion.

So, what does that make Leicester City, then? City are owned by a shell company that signs sponsorship deals with its directors' own companies, and takes loans from those companies at about 8% APR. On the Leicester City subforum on this site, the club's transfer policy, it's shirt/stadium sponsorship deals, the partnership with Army United FC, and various other moves made by the club's owners have all been cynically dismissed by us as ways to circumvent Financial Fair Play and/or as tax write-offs.

While I would agree with lots of you that the Watford/Pozzo system is not very sporting, I do think a lot of the hate directed at Watford stems from resentment over what happened in the semifinals. Replay the playoffs? Relax, guys. Watford beat us on the pitch and their system beat our club's system (or at least were beating us, until now) at the underhanded game clubs play against each other in the boardrooms.

Also, it's very easy to lose money in football. Leicester and Watford fans both know this. As unfair as the Pozzo system seems, at least it appears they have a handle on the finances at all three clubs (although the built-in advantage is also amplified here).

The real problem stems from The Football League (and you could say the FA, too) continuing to fail at anticipating changes in the footballing world. The FL is an old boys club that always seems fine to let things stay the way they are, until massive holes get torn, and then they just try to patch things up after the fact. Every big move--from ITV to the administration-points-deduction rules to FFP to this--is a stand-alone move designed to postpone further suffering, and a move which can itself be circumvented in kind.

[Samilktray]

It'd be fvcking superb 12 months from now if Watford won the league. 

[Bert]

Exactly what I thought, just sign them on a one year deal.

The rules will do nothing to deter it if they really want them to play.

I said exactly the same thing just the other day.

All Watfords transfers are under embargo though which could be a potential stopper.

Only Leicester fans could ask for a punishment against a team that hasn't broken any laws.

[Harry - LCFC]

So, what does that make Leicester City, then? City are owned by a shell company that signs sponsorship deals with its directors' own companies, and takes loans from those companies at about 8% APR. On the Leicester City subforum on this site, the club's transfer policy, it's shirt/stadium sponsorship deals, the partnership with Army United FC, and various other moves made by the club's owners have all been cynically dismissed by us as ways to circumvent Financial Fair Play and/or as tax write-offs.

 

My comment about Watford not having an identity anymore was exaggerated but nonetheless Guy1960 did almost imply that they were a sort of super-club with him saying the loans "are not really loans at all" because they're owned by the Pozzos. We do at least have a designated Leicester City squad whereas their squad includes the Udinese and Granada players too.

[Benditlikevydra]

What makes me laugh, is the sense of moral righteousness some of you have. Watford are owned by foreigners like over half the Championship, including Leicester. The big difference is that our owners are real football people, whose main business is football. They have a proven track record of sustained success with their other two clubs, and have done it without amassing huge debt like Cardiff, Forest, Bolton and, yes, Leicester have done. All the other foreign owners in this division are using the Club as a play thing or hobby. When they get bored, or if the Club costs too much, they will leave.

Some of you believe it is morally correct to build a squad using debt, others will disagree and think that the Pozzo way is morally correct. Certainly, Clubs that are being run sensibly and judiciously, within their budgets, will feel aggrieved if other Clubs are doing the opposite, living beyond their means and are only bailed out via funds coming in from Asia.

How is using someone else's money (through debt) to buy players and to support the Clubs operational costs, more morally correct than using players owned by the owner.

It is debt that is the scourge of the game. Particularly as, in the event of administration and bankruptcy the losers are often not the owners, but local businesses, with their 10p in the £, and the fans who are left with the wreck of a Club. It is the sort of debt that Leicester had, that has forced the implementation of the FFP rules - not what Watford did this last season.

So before you preach from your high horse, just consider whether you actually have the right to present yourself as so morally perfect, whilst sneering another Club that has found a way to compete, without debt.

[Manwell Pablo]

If the same family owns a number of clubs, let's say Udinese, Granada and Watford, selling players to Watford for £1 per player that would have been loaned under last seasons rules is really not an issue for the owner. They can be bought back for 1 euro at the end of the 2013 - 2014 season if that is what the owners want to do AND completely circumvent the FFP rules re cost of transfers counting against revenue.

That is what what I would do as the owner or am I missing something ?

 

 

Anyone who thinks moving players between three clubs without a regard to the boards, staff, coaches, managers, fans and most importantly, the players themselves, is as easy as you and a lot of people seem to think it is, are missing an awful lot to be honest! 

[LCFC FOX]

Now all we need is a singing section 

 

 

 

http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/sport/watfordfc/watfordfcnews/10469558.Watford_to_introduce__singing_section__at_Vicarage_Road/

[Jordan]

It is debt that is the scourge of the game. Particularly as, in the event of administration and bankruptcy the losers are often not the owners, but local businesses, with their 10p in the £, and the fans who are left with the wreck of a Club. It is the sort of debt that Leicester had, that has forced the implementation of the FFP rules - not what Watford did this last season.

So before you preach from your high horse, just consider whether you actually have the right to present yourself as so morally perfect, whilst sneering another Club that has found a way to compete, without debt.

Debt, per se, is not the problem.

It would be unfair to not allow a business that has earned excellent credit to take on debt on reasonable terms.

Risk, and the price of success, are bigger threats.

But just because Leicester may not do things the ol' fashioned way doesn't mean that Leicester fans do not have the right to question if the way Watford "compete," as you put it, is anti-competitive. Essentially, Watford had, to a certain extent last season, exclusive access to a pool of players outside of its club that its divisional rivals most likely will not be able to sign.

[Benditlikevydra]

Debt, per se, is not the problem.

It would be unfair to not allow a business that has earned excellent credit to take on debt on reasonable terms.

Risk, and the price of success, are bigger threats.

But just because Leicester may not do things the ol' fashioned way doesn't mean that Leicester fans do not have the right to question if the way Watford "compete," as you put it, is anti-competitive. Essentially, Watford had, to a certain extent last season, exclusive access to a pool of players outside of its club that its divisional rivals most likely will not be able to sign.

Well FFP is designed to prevent debt to a degree, so the FL obviously thinks debt is wrong. But where the debt is to the owner, or the owners business, this gives a huge advantage over all other teams that can't get the same debt on the same terms.

A Club that buys players, pays higher wages, or operationally, and is only able to survive using money that is not their own (debt) gets an unfair advantage. There is no doubt.

This unfair advantage is only relatively ignored by fans like Leiceters, because their Club and around 50% of clubs use the same methods to get the same advantage. It could be said that it is cheating the other 50% who stay within their means.

Whereas Watford, being alone in coming up with their innovative solution, is slagged off. Pure jealousy.

[Corky]

Jealousy? Not really, you missed out in the play-offs, same as us, we're in the same division next year, nothing to be jealous of.

[Benditlikevydra]

Jealousy? Not really, you missed out in the play-offs, same as us, we're in the same division next year, nothing to be jealous of.

Are you stupid? I'm obviously talking about the loans we used, that massive long threads on your forums have been complaining about.

[reynard]

Are you stupid? I'm obviously talking about the loans we used, that massive long threads on your forums have been complaining about.

 

http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/sport/10080351.Updated__Watford_claim_Bassini_owes_club___1_5m/

 

Of course Watford is a club which has always balanced the books/never been in financial trouble or had some curious financial dealings.

 

Is there an ethical difference between finding loopholes in the laws of the game or trying to buy your way out of the league? Probably not but both loaning almost an entire side from overseas and excessive spending thus leading to excessive debt look like being stopped.

 

People should have a hard look in the mirror before condemning other sides and their practices.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21829894

[Super_horns]

Yes - we all know what a crock Bassini was thanks and I don't think any fan would dispute that.

 

Hence why people find the Pozzos much more appealing!

 

He must have passed the fit and proper persons test which doesn't say much for the FA!

[Guest ttfn]

Watford didn't cheat but had a team that was constructed in a way that to any casual observer was absolutely ridiculous.

I'd not want a Leicester side like that. I've never felt more distant from the club than that Sven side in 10/11 which routinely had 5 or 6 loan players.

Hopefully now this loophole has been closed we can all get back to normal. Quite how Watford will manage with a skeleton squad and transfer embargo is going to be interesting.

[Super_horns]

Hopefully now this loophole has been closed we can all get back to normal. Quite how Watford will manage with a skeleton squad and transfer embargo is going to be interesting.

 

BIB - Its not really though as we can still get 5 loan players from overseas...the word "closed" is a bit mis-leading.

 

Altered/changed might be a better adjective.

 

Also the transfer embargo just means have to ask the FA for permission to buy anyone - not an outright ban on buying anyone.

 

Maybe next they could concentrate on the mounting debts and rising player wages/agent fees that ruin the game.