Financial Fair Play (FFP)

[Senior Flange Technician]

Decent people are hard to find because despite the amount of money paid to the footballers the other staff are on shit money. I was offered a position at Barnsley FC last week as a head of operations and it was 35k short of the average salary and 55k short of my expectations considering my experience.

Football clubs seem to have a strange delusion that you should just be grateful and honoured that you work for a professional football club. It's the number one reason that the vast majority of them are an absolute shitshow behind the scenes.

Absolutely this. There are odd exeptions, where the club pays well to attract better people (pats self on back) but it invariably doesn't span the whole club and there's always a perception of "you should be grateful to work for X"

 

[Harry1982]

Just had this argument/conversation with luton fans, all jumping on the you should have got a bigger points deduction, aggrieved that we should be going down over them. When I explained to them that the infraction is for last season and not this, the ones that should be aggrieved are the teams that went down last season, as a lesser squad then may have kept them up. All luton have got are the benefits of it unless its proven this season squad in massively inflated

 

[enlightened]

I don't think legal action is sensible. We'll just throw away a lot of money.

However, I do NOT want us to just let things go. I want us to be an extremely vocal critic of the PSR regulations and refereeing standards and VAR. I want us to be a guerilla movement and a thorn in the side of the EPL. There is so much wrong with modern top-tier football and I want us to be a catalyst for change ... not a club that votes for self-preservation over the integrity of the game. It is ludicrous to have a competition with such anti-competitive rules.

We should take inspiration from the man whose colour we wear.

#bemoregaribaldi

 

[Est.1865]

Secure PL status on Saturday, then send out a scathing statement…

 

[eyupmeduck]

I don't think legal action is sensible. We'll just throw away a lot of money.

However, I do NOT want us to just let things go. I want us to be an extremely vocal critic of the PSR regulations and refereeing standards and VAR. I want us to be a guerilla movement and a thorn in the side of the EPL. There is so much wrong with modern top-tier football and I want us to be a catalyst for change ... not a club that votes for self-preservation over the integrity of the game. It is ludicrous to have a competition with such anti-competitive rules.

We should take inspiration from the man whose colour we wear.

#bemoregaribaldi

I kind of agree.

I am surprised at how aggrieved I feel because my stance before was genuinely, we have overspent so need to take our medicine.

When you see how other clubs are treated and not punished its odd but when you add in the nonsense talk of the decision makers on the panel its clear that they are making the rules up as they go along.

Honestly the realisation I've had where the panel actually said we should have sold Johnson in January rather than signing any more players has highlighted that for me.

They don't recognise is the absurdity of that point in that at the precise point in January when we were working with the EPL supposedly they were in the belief that if we did breach it would be about £3m which would be more findable in the timeframe between the end of the season and June or indeed by the season end by placing 1 place higher in the league.

It was not until 5 and a half months after the January deadline closed that they said that the claimable allowances which had been indicated as OK all along, namely the promotion bonuses of £20m and the £12.5m of covid losses actually weren't. Their view is that we therefore should have been aiming to make a £30m profit and end the season without Johnson, Danilo, Navas, Felipe, Wood, Shelvey etc.

Then they give us stick for pointing this out or challenging the language. Its not the language alone though, its the content which makes absolutely no sense. The whole thing has been conducted entirely in bad faith and its that I find most alarming and disappointing.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Steve B]

Probably been posted by someone already, but someone sent me this earlier. Is it right that we’re £20m over this season?

 

[congo_red_49]

Probably been posted by someone already, but someone sent me this earlier. Is it right that we’re £20m over this season?

View attachment 39048

Not sure I'd trust the analysis of someone that spells penalty as 'penenlty'.

 

[Berkshire Red]

Probably been posted by someone already, but someone sent me this earlier. Is it right that we’re £20m over this season?

View attachment 39048

Take the two point penalty and tell them to do one.

 

[Browser79]

I’ve barely commented on this thread - whole thing is just bad juju, but I’ve read most of it and talked to plenty of fellow fans about it. Opinion seems really split and I can’t be arsed to express my own, but am sick to death of watching the bbc cobble together a completely one-sided view of a very mixed reaction and present it to the world as ‘silly little Forest’. I’d expect it of Sky, but bbc sport really has collapsed into the same world of strategic editorial narratives. Didn’t think I’d find myself actively avoiding Forest content after 23 years of being starved of it, but it’s coming to that.

 

[Quntib Hollox]

Just had this argument/conversation with luton fans, all jumping on the you should have got a bigger points deduction, aggrieved that we should be going down over them. When I explained to them that the infraction is for last season and not this, the ones that should be aggrieved are the teams that went down last season, as a lesser squad then may have kept them up. All luton have got are the benefits of it unless its proven this season squad in massively inflated

Correct. And the clubs that went down were bigger offenders than us ( maybe not Southampton)

 

[MaxiRobriguez]

Not sure I'd trust the analysis of someone that spells penalty as 'penenlty'.

Forest attempting to finish right in between breach and no breach.

 

[Robertson]

Probably been posted by someone already, but someone sent me this earlier. Is it right that we’re £20m over this season?

View attachment 39048

We need to make about £9m profit overall this season to be in the clear. Projections are of a £12-15m loss but no-one is really sure whether completion of the Mangala deal would see that loss wiped out on this season’s books.

 

[Dr Sheldon Cooper]

We need to make about £9m profit overall this season to be in the clear. Projections are of a £12-15m loss but no-one is really sure whether completion of the Mangala deal would see that loss wiped out on this season’s books.

There could be a few million for Worral and Freuler too

 

[Frank Clark’s Tash]

I’ve barely commented on this thread - whole thing is just bad juju, but I’ve read most of it and talked to plenty of fellow fans about it. Opinion seems really split and I can’t be arsed to express my own, but am sick to death of watching the bbc cobble together a completely one-sided view of a very mixed reaction and present it to the world as ‘silly little Forest’. I’d expect it of Sky, but bbc sport really has collapsed into the same world of strategic editorial narratives. Didn’t think I’d find myself actively avoiding Forest content after 23 years of being starved of it, but it’s coming to that.

View attachment 39046

I read the Blunts match report on the BBC site, and it came across as incredibly bitter in tone. I commented as much under the article (in a more diplomat manner) but the comment was deleted. The BBC, as with a Sky and the like, don't even bother trying to hide their bias these days.

The absolute glee from presenters etc. with which our failed appeal was met was also evident across the board.

 

[Dr Sheldon Cooper]

I’ve barely commented on this thread - whole thing is just bad juju, but I’ve read most of it and talked to plenty of fellow fans about it. Opinion seems really split and I can’t be arsed to express my own, but am sick to death of watching the bbc cobble together a completely one-sided view of a very mixed reaction and present it to the world as ‘silly little Forest’. I’d expect it of Sky, but bbc sport really has collapsed into the same world of strategic editorial narratives. Didn’t think I’d find myself actively avoiding Forest content after 23 years of being starved of it, but it’s coming to that.

View attachment 39046

BBC have never really liked Forest ever since we got above our station in 1978.

 

[congo_red_49]

Ultimately, we have reached a point, now where, with appeals and whatnot all out of the way, I think it's appropriate to reflect on the rules themselves.
Does the looming threat of a points deduction actually make any clubs better run? Or less likely to go out of business? Or are they more likely to fall on financial hardship if a points deduction sees them relegated?
Does any of this achieve what the rules were supposed to?
I'm going with 'no'.

 

[Redofheaven2]

We need to make about £9m profit overall this season to be in the clear. Projections are of a £12-15m loss but no-one is really sure whether completion of the Mangala deal would see that loss wiped out on this season’s books.

Even if competed won’t Mangala be 1st July - the club are going to need to be creative. There are not usually any transfers before 1st July as contracts run to 30th June.

 

[Villa_Fan]

f*** this bollocks, I remember when football was played on the pitch

They were the good old days when binmen were real men, now football in played in a court room with lawyers and accountants. I think it is referred to as progress

I kind of agree.

I am surprised at how aggrieved I feel because my stance before was genuinely, we have overspent so need to take our medicine.

When you see how other clubs are treated and not punished its odd but when you add in the nonsense talk of the decision makers on the panel its clear that they are making the rules up as they go along.

Honestly the realisation I've had where the panel actually said we should have sold Johnson in January rather than signing any more players has highlighted that for me.

They don't recognise is the absurdity of that point in that at the precise point in January when we were working with the EPL supposedly they were in the belief that if we did breach it would be about £3m which would be more findable in the timeframe between the end of the season and June or indeed by the season end by placing 1 place higher in the league.

It was not until 5 and a half months after the January deadline closed that they said that the claimable allowances which had been indicated as OK all along, namely the promotion bonuses of £20m and the £12.5m of covid losses actually weren't. Their view is that we therefore should have been aiming to make a £30m profit and end the season without Johnson, Danilo, Navas, Felipe, Wood, Shelvey etc.

Then they give us stick for pointing this out or challenging the language. Its not the language alone though, its the content which makes absolutely no sense. The whole thing has been conducted entirely in bad faith and its that I find most alarming and disappointing.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

I don't believe that is accurate. Promotion bonuses have always been part of FFP/PSS and are specifically listed as so in the rules.

 

[eyupmeduck]

I read the Blunts match report on the BBC site, and it came across as incredibly bitter in tone. I commented as much under the article (in a more diplomat manner) but the comment was deleted. The BBC, as with a Sky and the like, don't even bother trying to hide their bias these days.

The absolute glee from presenters etc. with which our failed appeal was met was also evident across the board.

The thing is that clubs get all uppity about the fact that we signed players but not that we also were not permitted to start the Premier league season with a squad of 6 first team players.

The fact that we "overspent" helped:

Wolves (Two players)
Liverpool
Newcastle (Two players)
Man United

Of the EPL meet their PSR obligations.

It also helped:

Huddersfield (Two players)
Watford
Blackpool

Of the EFL meet theirs.

Luton getting involved but forgetting that the keeper that helped them get promoted (That they then backed out of signing) was ours and they paid naff all of his £30k a week wages as well as not signing him when they indicated that they would so directly benefited from our financial excesses.

Burnley signed 15 players last season, won the championship at a canter and then have added 18 players this season at a cost of another approximately £130m. Bearing in mind that they started with a full squad that had been successful in the championship, not 6 players like us one imagines that them signing 33 players could be described as excessive more than us trying to build a squad from scratch but because its Vincent Kompany somehow this gets unsaid and is fully allowed.

Sheffield United are bonkers and tried to sell the club to what appears to be a fraudster and as a result have "no money" this season apart from the £70m they spent on replacing 2 players that yielded £30m for them. They also spent £45m on Brewster and McBurnie before. What they didn't do is pay agents though so they will start next season with a point deduction because of this.

All in all football finances look bonkers but other teams chipping in perhaps need to pipe down because if they look inwards they will probably feel differently. I fully expect Burnley to struggle to meet psr next year despite having been a premier league club for 10 out of the last 11 years (And receiving over £1 Billion more than we have in TV money) as will the blunts.

Luton might be OK but like I said, the truth is that psr is designed to help what might happen this season to keep happening with newly promoted sides falling back quickly. They should concentrate on their own issues because they will have them soon enough.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Robertson]

The thing is that clubs get all uppity about the fact that we signed players but not that we also were not permitted to start the Premier league season with a squad of 6 first team players.

The fact that we "overspent" helped:

Wolves (Two players)
Liverpool
Newcastle (Two players)
Man United

Of the EPL meet their PSR obligations.

It also helped:

Huddersfield (Two players)
Watford
Blackpool

Of the EFL meet theirs.

Luton getting involved but forgetting that the keeper that helped them get promoted (That they then backed out of signing) was ours and they paid naff all of his £30k a week wages as well as not signing him when they indicated that they would so directly benefited from our financial excesses.

Burnley signed 15 players last season, won the championship at a canter and then have added 18 players this season at a cost of another approximately £130m. Bearing in mind that they started with a full squad that had been successful in the championship, not 6 players like us one imagines that them signing 33 players could be described as excessive more than us trying to build a squad from scratch but because its Vincent Kompany somehow this gets unsaid and is fully allowed.

Sheffield United are bonkers and tried to sell the club to what appears to be a fraudster and as a result have "no money" this season apart from the £70m they spent on replacing 2 players that yielded £30m for them. They also spent £45m on Brewster and McBurnie before. What they didn't do is pay agents though so they will start next season with a point deduction because of this.

All in all football finances look bonkers but other teams chipping in perhaps need to pipe down because if they look inwards they will probably feel differently. I fully expect Burnley to struggle to meet psr next year despite having been a premier league club for 10 out of the last 11 years (And receiving over £1 Billion more than we have in TV money) as will the blunts.

Luton might be OK but like I said, the truth is that psr is designed to help what might happen this season to keep happening with newly promoted sides falling back quickly. They should concentrate on their own issues because they will have them soon enough.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Even Luton signed 15 players this season.

 

[eyupmeduck]

They were the good old days when binmen were real men, now football in played in a court room with lawyers and accountants. I think it is referred to as progress

I don't believe that is accurate. Promotion bonuses have always been part of FFP/PSS and are specifically listed as so in the rules.

My understanding of this largely comes from Maguire who in fairness to him has been pretty knowledgeable on the subject matter and as he is a better qualified person than me!

I won't trawl through all of the commentary that he has made about psr in general but he has been pretty consistent in saying (I'm sure he has pointed to specific details as well) it used to be the case and isn't now.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Raymondo Ponte']

Crazy self-serving industry that gives fuk all about supporters. Not a Rat's ass.

 

[andover red]

And Chelsea ended the year absolutely bang on the allowable limit? So it just happened that the hotel they sold to their owner was worth EXACTLY the figure they needed to avoid any sanctions? Big coincidence.....

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

 

[congo_red_49]

the club are going to need to be creative.

They should just take a look at how Born Muff are 'generating' revenue despite a tiny stadium, non-existent hospitality and no historic brand name.

 

[RedRobbo]

Even if competed won’t Mangala be 1st July - the club are going to need to be creative. There are not usually any transfers before 1st July as contracts run to 30th June.

We’ll need to be offering some discounts if we are to get deals over the line in June.
I’m sure Olympiakos would like to turn the Richards loan into a permanent - at a sensible price