snowychap Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 (edited) 8 hours ago, sidcow said: What's to stop someone at a Xia connected company saying something like "I really love that boardroom table, I would love to buy it, how does £100m sound?" The argument would be, I assume, that it's a vastly over-inflated price paid by someone associated with the owner and that the excessive amount ought to be ignored for the purposes of the FFP loss cap (isn't that the argument that was made about Leicester's shirt deal?). 31 minutes ago, Gary Thomas said: To me business ethics and morality come to the fore when people are suffering in some way. That would be an issue for me. Wouldn't that apply to the other teams who haven't got the opportunity/opportunities that we appear to be able to buy ourselves (takeover and all assumptions about it permitting)? Btw, I'm not saying that any of this (sponsorship, FFP nonsense and so on) is clear cut or that it's an important moral issue of our time, I'm just trying to be a counter voice to comments such as: Quote Who gives a shit about the 'spirit' of the law? and Quote i'm prepared to look the other way at a lot of dodgy shit Edited June 4, 2016 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Grasshopper Posted June 4, 2016 Popular Post Share Posted June 4, 2016 Sorry But! Football is now a Global business. Rules are setup so the rich get richer and the poor have no chance competing. So the morals of fair play on a level playing field are gone. This set of morals has nothing to do with personal unjust (Murder.....etc) It is simply finding away around the parameters set. The only way we can justify our history and standing in the game of football is to do what has to be done to take us within earshot of ManUre/Shitty & Chelski. If it mean using the same methods Shitty/Ski used, so be it. Morals dont come into it anymore. Interpreting the rules to ones advantage is not illegal. Staying morally correct in a distorted field of play will only result in a Lerner-Style nosedive. Sorry, but thats not what Aston Villa FC, our Colours, History, Future and Fans deserve. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 21 minutes ago, Grasshopper said: Sorry But! I obviously disagree with you. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post AntrimBlack Posted June 4, 2016 Popular Post Share Posted June 4, 2016 I very much agree with Grasshopper here. Football, after all, is only a game. No one will die if we can legally gain an advantage from the FFP rules, which are written to preserve the top teams positions. These are unjust rules, not a moral code, and I see no reason why we should continue to be disadvantaged by them if we can find a way around them. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted June 4, 2016 VT Supporter Share Posted June 4, 2016 No one died as a result of MPs' expenses cheats, doesn't mean it's OK. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 Antrim and Mooney both speak words of wisdom. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dn1982 Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 16 minutes ago, mjmooney said: No one died as a result of MPs' expenses cheats, doesn't mean it's OK. Bit of a difference when ones a criminal act the other is just breaking the glass ceiling rules! MCFC and PSG have broke FFP to get where they are now. Bournemouth got a roughly £10m fine for breaking it I'm sure they're gutted they did seeing as it's been worth £100m+!! Fortunately if we go straight back up it won't affect us so spend away Dr Xia then sponsor everything in sight to get us up amongst the big boys. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted June 4, 2016 VT Supporter Share Posted June 4, 2016 56 minutes ago, snowychap said: I obviously disagree with you. Thing is I don't think this is a moral issue. If anything is immorral it's the ffp rules themselves which are set up to keep the rich clubs rich and keep the smaller clubs down and in their place whilst disguising themselves as a way of protecting clubs. We are actually fighting unfair rules trying to beat the system which is loaded against us succeeding. That sounds to me a far better fight to fight rather than lying down and saying oh well never mind. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morley_crosses_to_Withe Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 I doubt we'll be doing any Man City/PSG style breaking of the rules anyway. There might be a slight bending of the Championship FFP rules in the same way Bournemouth and Leicester did, but I think there will be some disappointed fans if they think we'll go down the Man City/PSG route. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarpie Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 IMO only way ffp-style regulation works if it's set up like salarycaps in NHL which does really level the playingfield in my opinion, this current shitfest is even worse than what we had before so I wouldn't mind at all if we get creative circumvating it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dn1982 Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 53 minutes ago, Morley_crosses_to_Withe said: I doubt we'll be doing any Man City/PSG style breaking of the rules anyway. There might be a slight bending of the Championship FFP rules in the same way Bournemouth and Leicester did, but I think there will be some disappointed fans if they think we'll go down the Man City/PSG route. Nothing wrong with dreaming pal! We won't break championship FFP aslong as we go up then if the Dr Xia is serious we will have to break the PL FFP to get where he wants in a few years. Dream now whilst you can as the reality when it arrives may be a lot different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntrimBlack Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 1 hour ago, mjmooney said: No one died as a result of MPs' expenses cheats, doesn't mean it's OK. Of course that is not ok, that is illegal, totally different. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 1 hour ago, AntrimBlack said: Of course that is not ok, that is illegal, totally different. Actually, a lot of it wasn't illegal, which is why almost no-one went to jail. It was 'bending the rules', 'looking the other way at dodgy shit' and whatever else has been eulogised above. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwj Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 I guess an incorporation and appointment of directors is a good sign that we're nearly there https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/10176070/filing-history 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSV Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 Who's that hitchens fella. Quick google says he was involved with Pompey and a vet surgeon? Maybe he could put Gabby down. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supervillan78 Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 1 minute ago, KSV said: Who's that hitchens fella. Quick google says he was involved with Pompey and a vet surgeon? Maybe he could put Gabby down. Put him down? I doubt he could lift him up in the first place! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwj Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 Who's that hitchens fella. Quick google says he was involved with Pompey and a vet surgeon? Maybe he could put Gabby down. Probably just an administrator at an accountancy somewhere, happens quite a lot... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrytini Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 3 hours ago, mjmooney said: No one died as a result of MPs' expenses cheats, doesn't mean it's OK. What a bonkers comparison. MP's are the cornerstone of society, are our representatives, and ARE expected (rightly or wrongly) to be virtueous. Crucially, once elected we as individuals have no choice but to have them occupy that position. They can send people to die, their policies can ruin or make lives. Football is a game. A game. A game every one of us can either watch, or not watch, by choice. That's it. It has rules. It doesn't have morals. No more than a game of monopoly has morals. I know the rules to Monopoly and use them to my advantage (well, I did as a youngster).........I know the rules of golf and use them to my advantage, and also suffer by them. Morals and righteousness have absolutely nothing to do with it. Now, if somebody personally doesn't want to be involved in a perfectly rule abiding, but, to them, 'morally' dubious activity regarding football, fair enough for their personal choice, but to suggest because they feel that way the Club would somehow be culpable is just nonsense IMO. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a m ole Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 So Samuelson is a Commercial Director? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 Just now, terrytini said: What a bonkers comparison. MP's are the cornerstone of society, are our representatives, and ARE expected (rightly or wrongly) to be virtueous. Crucially, once elected we as individuals have no choice but to have them occupy that position. They can send people to die, their policies can ruin or make lives. Football is a game. A game. A game every one of us can either watch, or not watch, by choice. That's it. It has rules. It doesn't have morals. No more than a game of monopoly has morals. I know the rules to Monopoly and use them to my advantage (well, I did as a youngster).........I know the rules of golf and use them to my advantage, and also suffer by them. Morals and righteousness have absolutely nothing to do with it. Now, if somebody personally doesn't want to be involved in a perfectly rule abiding, but, to them, 'morally' dubious activity regarding football, fair enough for their personal choice, but to suggest because they feel that way the Club would somehow be culpable is just nonsense IMO. I don't understand this post. You seem to be saying you cheat at golf but play by the rules at Monopoly, and this proves something because . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts