Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We haven’t even failed FFP, and the club seems confident of passing the regulations. What exactly are the EFL suppose to investigate? Nothing to see here.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said:

It's a strange one - Gibson saying "These rules aren't working because I'm the only one following them honestly" is to my mind more likely to have the effect of the FA agreeing that the rules aren't working and changing them than it is to have them reward him for his compliance.

The rules clearly don't work - and they don't work in lots of ways - if Derby can sell their ground to themselves to make a profit, then it's obvious that manipulation and financial chicanery will become not just the method, but the necessity for any club looking to get out of this league, and there are now so many teams that aren't "genuinely" compliant that the rules themselves become something of a sham.

Faced with the idea of having the EFL in 2020-21 start with twelve teams on minus six points whilst half of the other chairmen moan about it and someone at Preston sells themselves a clock for £30m I'm pretty sure that the league will choose an adjustment to the rule before it'll choose universal ridicule.

At a time where the most successful championship club of the last two years lost £52m in it's final season in the division, £39m in losses over three seasons is no longer a suitable measure - there need to be other protections in place to stop clubs hitting the skids, a different safety net - and this ceiling needs to be either massively extended or removed.

 

Wage cap perhaps🤔

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Made In Aston said:

Wage cap perhaps🤔

It's about finding a balance between protecting teams that might be in difficulty and allowing those with money to use it. I think they'll raise the losses limit significantly.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was reading yesterday about the fracas in the AC Milan v Lazio game and a tidbit of info piqued my interest. The new owners of Milan are contesting their own FFP investigation as they don't feel they should be impacted upon by the poor decisions made from the previous ownership group. With my very basic understanding of this topic, I fail to see how this cannot be taken into account. If the new owners have a sustainable plan, who can punish these clubs based on errors of owners gone by?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we’ve broken any rules we should get the appropriate punishment.

I doubt we have.

Gibson seems to be bothered about how teams have complied.

Good luck with that reasoning. Get a better accountant.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Made In Aston said:

Wage cap perhaps🤔

Wage caps only works in closed leagues.

Bit funny that the US who sees communists behind every corner are using it in their sports but still deem socialism, tax and free healthcare as the devil.

In the world of football it would be pointless as the chasm between rich and poor even withing various leagues is too great. Even if every league in every country has their own wage cap it wouldn't work.

and when you start enforcing it in different leagues and countries it gets even more pointless. 

In say Hockey, Basketball or Handballfootballwithhelmets there is only one direction where players move, no competition from other places when it comes to wages.

The only way a wage cap would work would be is the super rich elite clubs get their own closed European Super League.

Sadly that's not that far off.

Edited by sne
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

It's about finding a balance between protecting teams that might be in difficulty and allowing those with money to use it. I think they'll raise the losses limit significantly.

 

Really hope you are right there and it does make sense with the massive rise in money in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ciggiesnbeer said:

FFP needs to be abolished. Its done enough damage to football already. Even the EFL acknowledges its irrelevant given the slap on the wrist Blues got (which i am fine with btw)

The Boro bloke is half right though, he may well the the only owner who thinks FFP is good for football. He might want to ask himself why.

Really? I’ve seen Alan Nixon argue this. But surely FFP helps protect fine old clubs from the possibility of rogue owners crushing them. Look at Bolton. I’m not saying FFP could prevent that, but it might help. While you have a wealthy owner able and willing to pump money in, you’re fine. But how would you feel if an ambitious owner overspent, failed to get you promoted and walked away, leaving the club in liquidation? 

You can always assume that a new rich owner will pick up the tab, but the Bolton mess shows that a tipping point can be reached where the club is no longer worth the price needed to keep it going.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 9 point deduction for the noses speaks volumes. It was a points deduction designed to have only nominal impact. Had they they made it 12-15 it would have put the noses borderline relegation and they would most likely have contested it - as it had little impact they took it on the chin.

If we get promoted it would be ballsy in the extreme to dock us points so we don't.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Leveller said:

Really? I’ve seen Alan Nixon argue this. But surely FFP helps protect fine old clubs from the possibility of rogue owners crushing them. Look at Bolton. I’m not saying FFP could prevent that, but it might help. While you have a wealthy owner able and willing to pump money in, you’re fine. But how would you feel if an ambitious owner overspent, failed to get you promoted and walked away, leaving the club in liquidation? 

You can always assume that a new rich owner will pick up the tab, but the Bolton mess shows that a tipping point can be reached where the club is no longer worth the price needed to keep it going.

There is an example much closer to home for us villains - an owner did precisely what you suggest - the FFP rules totally and utterly  failed to stop it happening.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Leveller said:

Really? I’ve seen Alan Nixon argue this. But surely FFP helps protect fine old clubs from the possibility of rogue owners crushing them. Look at Bolton. I’m not saying FFP could prevent that, but it might help. While you have a wealthy owner able and willing to pump money in, you’re fine. But how would you feel if an ambitious owner overspent, failed to get you promoted and walked away, leaving the club in liquidation? 

You can always assume that a new rich owner will pick up the tab, but the Bolton mess shows that a tipping point can be reached where the club is no longer worth the price needed to keep it going.

We have wealthy owners after they bought us on the cheap because our owner who had passed the EFL Fit and Proper Owners Test nearly put the football club out of business the previous season.

We have essentially got very lucky with our owners, in the summer we didn't have a pot to p*ss in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Leveller said:

Really? I’ve seen Alan Nixon argue this. But surely FFP helps protect fine old clubs from the possibility of rogue owners crushing them. Look at Bolton. I’m not saying FFP could prevent that, but it might help. While you have a wealthy owner able and willing to pump money in, you’re fine. But how would you feel if an ambitious owner overspent, failed to get you promoted and walked away, leaving the club in liquidation? 

You can always assume that a new rich owner will pick up the tab, but the Bolton mess shows that a tipping point can be reached where the club is no longer worth the price needed to keep it going.

We could argue that Bolton would have a better chance at survival if any random Billionaire could come in and transform them too though.

Which FFP prevents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve "I can't keep flushing my dough down the toilet" Gibson suddenly concerned about adhering to ffp.

He was Alan Boksic £100,000 a week in the late 90s ffs.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, wilko154 said:

We have wealthy owners after they bought us on the cheap because our owner who had passed the EFL Fit and Proper Owners Test nearly put the football club out of business the previous season.

We have essentially got very lucky with our owners, in the summer we didn't have a pot to p*ss in.

Yep, just been reading those threads again. Reminding myself how lucky we were and are. Also, how the **** Xia passed all the checks, ridiculous.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve Gibson can kiss my dangleberries. 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, thejoker said:

We haven’t even failed FFP, and the club seems confident of passing the regulations. What exactly are the EFL suppose to investigate? Nothing to see here.

If its anything like Xia's due diligence...they owe us one.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mazrim said:

Steve Gibson can kiss my dangleberries. 

If our opponents can't get us on offsides,or penalties, they will find a different strategy.....If they can't beat us on the field, they will try, off it.

Edited by TRO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, TRO said:

If our opponents can't get us on offsides,or penalties, they will find a different strategy.....If they can't beat us on the field, they will try, off it.

After Saturday I don’t think you should be too high and mighty about penalties and offsides!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...
Â