rodders0223 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 hour ago, wishywashy said: Why exactly have Villa/Heck voted against this lol? Because Chris Heck is an odious little short arse desperate to be seen as one of the big boys. He's your average obnoxious prick from a working household who gets his first job above minimum wage and suddenly starts voting Tory. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nepal_villan Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 hour ago, andycv said: I wonder if we voted against it due to there being a different (more restrictive) approach for clubs in European competition? I envision UEFA aligning with the Premier League rule as the PL is their most important UCL stakeholder. PSR ultimately is the responsibility of the individual European FAs and government regulators Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wishywashy Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 (edited) 6 minutes ago, ender4 said: Though The Times also suggests a conflicting viewpoint in the same sentence - the sentence starts with "The Premier League has already agreed to replace..." using the word replace. But then continues by talking about 85% limit. I now have no idea lol. https://theathletic.com/5457496/2024/04/29/premier-league-spending-salary-cap/ The Athletic are much more clear in their claim that it'll be an addition rather than a replacement. Still would prefer definitive clarity from the Premier League itself at this rate. Quote The introduction of the squad cost rule from 2025-26 was unanimously approved at a Premier League shareholder’s meeting earlier this month and is expected to be finalised during June’s AGM. The spending cap is intended to function as a backstop to the squad cost rule, which will see clubs’ spending tied to a percentage of their revenue. Edited April 29 by wishywashy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 I would really love to know the thinking behind voting against the hard cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 minute ago, CVByrne said: I would really love to know the thinking behind voting against the hard cap. Because we’re one of the few clubs it **** over entirely. No enough revenue to not be affected by it, but in Europe so we have to adhere to Uefas stricter rules. We’re stuck in the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubberman Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 I guess we need to win the CL next season to get the boost we need pre-new rules. And build a new mega stadium. And bring in a few far eastern players. And put up the balti pie price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fun Factory Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 Its classic divide and rule. The big 6 don't want anyone long term to take their places. so are happy to give a bit to everyone else but in reality the gap is still going to be massive and harder to bridge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alakagom Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 9 minutes ago, duke313 said: Because we’re one of the few clubs it **** over entirely. No enough revenue to not be affected by it, but in Europe so we have to adhere to Uefas stricter rules. We’re stuck in the middle. The salary cap will literally not affect anyone at the proposed 4x lowest earning team, this year only City might have come close to going over it depending on bonuses paid on their CL win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czarnikjak Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 16 minutes ago, ender4 said: Though The Times also suggests a conflicting viewpoint in the same sentence - the sentence starts with "The Premier League has already agreed to replace..." using the word replace. But then continues by talking about 85% limit. I now have no idea lol. 85% limit for non European clubs will still stay with this hard multiplayer cap. This is not bad news for us at all...the whole 85%~70% cap is terrible for our competitiveness though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 hour ago, ender4 said: It makes sense. The 'big 6' have massive revenues, the cap is so high that they hit the European cap first but can still spend £300-400m or so a season. The small revenue clubs not in Europe can now massively outspend Villa up to £300-400m per season. Villa hit the European cap first rather than the PL cap, so we can only spend £150-200m per season. Basically it kills Villa and any other non big 6 club that qualifies for Europe. This is literally the worst option of all spending proposals for Villa. Almost like it was specifically designed to kill Villa and Newcastle. Explains why the club would vote against such a measure 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 minute ago, Alakagom said: The salary cap will literally not affect anyone at the proposed 4x lowest earning team, this year only City might have come close to going over it depending on bonuses paid on their CL win. It will allow clubs with rich owners not in Europe to spend vast amounts as they are so far off the cap they have massive head room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WallisFrizz Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 So why would Newcastle vote for it? They are in a similar position to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czarnikjak Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 minute ago, duke313 said: It will allow clubs with rich owners not in Europe to spend vast amounts as they are so far off the cap they have massive head room. No! They will still be subject to 85% rule 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 Voting on stuff like this for teams like us, west ham, Newcastle etc is going to be weird because do you vote on it based on the 6 teams above you or do you vote on it based on the 80+ teams below you Id obviously like to negatively impact the 6 teams above us but I'm not sure the club see it that way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alakagom Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 (edited) 4 minutes ago, duke313 said: It will allow clubs with rich owners not in Europe to spend vast amounts as they are so far off the cap they have massive head room. What stopped them now? FFP? Which is also affecting us badly, given we have to likely sell Ramsey or Luiz to squeeze through our 3 year period... And how is that bad really? If we don't get Europe one season, we can then outspend others following season? Getting to Europe every year is extremely unlikely anyway given we have big 6 and likes of Newcastle, West Ham always around. Edited April 29 by Alakagom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 (edited) The vote was to agree to the development of one, not to initiate one. There’s a huge important difference. Edited April 29 by The_Steve 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villa_Vids Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 (edited) This allows the non-euro/ newly promoted teams the financial ability to spend more on some of our fringe players, i.e Dendonker. Edited April 29 by Villa_Vids 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 Just now, Villa_Vids said: Does this allow the non-euro teams the ability to spend more on some of our fringe players, i.e Dendonker. We simply don’t know. The PL will make its proposal during the June AGM. Anything now is pure speculation. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulberto21 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 I think there should be a F1 style budget cap but a figure that is fair to all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alakagom Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 One thing these new salary caps and revenue/wages restrictions mean is that new stadium is almost a necessity to keep up with the big 6. Can't see any other way Villa can keep up. Which I'm sure they know it too given the recent appointments to the board seem to indicate as thus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts