Col Steve Austin
Viv Anderson
Yes, definitely. I did say the majority, but should probably have further clarified that I was mainly talking about big business, where internal politics often dictate succession more than merit.
-
All - as you will understand, the forum is exceptionally busy at this time. The admins and moderators simply don't have time to read every post in every thread. Could you PLEASE use the "Report" option below a post to flag any content that you feel we need to be aware of. We'll review everything reported as a priority and deal with it accordingly. Thank you.
Financial Fair Play (FFP)
- Thread starter Hawkeye1947
- Start date
chaospunx
Geoff Thomas
I agree the decision to put the keeper up baffled me he'd of got hammered if they had lost a point from it
Villa sold their stadium to themselves and exploited a loophole which has since been closed. Yep, it helped us a lot but that is the benefit of having clever management and clever accountants. Villa is now looking for an increase in PSR limit which is probably due to the fact that most other teams can spend 85% of revenue on players/agents/wages while Villa can only spend 70%, that doesn't seem fair. I think you are confusing entitlement with a good management team trying to do their best for the club they work for.Morning all btw hope we are well.
Aston Villa complaining about the tiles, looking for ways around..it takes me back. They never change do they, Stadium fiddle in 2018-19!The chutzpah and entitlement there seems incredible no?
Yourselves and Everton were punished. Wolves sold half their squad, even Newcastle the richest club in the world striffled in January.
Aston Villa, I dunno what to say tbh I recall seeing articles that they've overcome FFP just 6-12 months ago. Their mindset is unique so far.
What’s your opinion on Villa trying to raise the 105m to 135m, seems like you are going to breach.
I haven't looked into what all the 115 charges are against City but I would expect them to get off. The bottom line is City is denying the charges and the PL is unable to prove them. The reason Everton & Forest cases have already been closed is that both clubs admitted the offense and argued mitigating factors. I think the PL have bittten off way too much in going after City with so many difficult to prove charges. One of the charges is that they were paying managers under the table bonuses to keep them off FFP/PSR calculations. Really difficult to prove this and also could end up with people going to jail for tax evasion. They should have anticipated they would have been up against some of the brightest lawyers in the world when trying to make their case.
Rubics
Bin VAR!
Don’t know the history - why can villa only spend 70%?
Are you expecting Watkins to leave to meet PSR?
Are you expecting Watkins to leave to meet PSR?
The CEO has said we are not in breach so I expect we are fine, also the PL has not charged us with anything which suggests we are okay. However, I expect we are close and have little room for further investment. Clubs in Europe can only spend 70% of revenue on wages whereas clubs in PL can spend 85% with new rules. I expect Villa is trying to get the PSR level increased by 25m next year so that they can invest during this coming window and then reduce the transfer spending in the following year to align with the 70% wage restriction
UEFA rules are different to PL rules although the PL is aligning with the rules over the course of the next 3 or 4 years. In UEFA competitions the club is restricted to 85% of revenue to wage and in the PL it is 70%. In a few years it will be 70% for everyone
Rubics
Bin VAR!
got you the new rules. 70% of a bigger number though with the European income.
Rubics
Bin VAR!
We were repeatably told by the chairman, a KC no less that we wouldn’t breach FFP! Hence the frustration from the fans.
I can't see anyone paying for Watkins. He is 28, although he is a great player and having a stellar season he is not a clinical finisher. We would want about 100m for him and he would probably want 200k+ a week. He is good but not that good, nowhere near Harry Kane good. If he was 26 maybe but he is too old for a big transfer imo. I can see Doug Luiz going though.
Rubics
Bin VAR!
Just for clarity I think it’s utter rubbish that from the outside it looks like you’re being held back from challenging the tourist clubs by FFP. You should be building rather than being held back by FFP.
Yeah but how much would Villa get from the Champions League, we are not going to be progressing far in it. It would probably add about 20 to 30 million and reducing from 85% to 70% on annual revenue e.g. on 200m is a reduction of 30m
The full FFP thing is daft the way it has been implemented. At a high level, why should Forest be penalised for trying to buy players to stay in the PL and then to dock points for such a small breach is just silly. Villa owners are very wealthy, I am guessing if there were no restrictions we would have a very exciting transfer window.
I get the principle of trying to stop owners running up debt, putting the club at risk and then running for the hills leaving the club in shit. I agree with putting something in place to stop this. Maybe if the owners had to deposit all money to cover their spending for the following 2 years or something like that would work but the current system stinks.
Last edited:
Quntib Hollox
Jack Armstrong
I 100% agree with this which is why the current rules are nothing to do with maintaining club’s sustainability but a way to protect the cartel of teams at the top and stifle competition from clubs like Villa and Newcastle from breaking into the elite group.
Nothing will convince me of anything other than a protection of the current cartel until they allow clubs to invest as you suggest.
Redemption
One less gobshite...
It's a great idea, there would be no owners very quickly.
Or, its a bad idea, and rich people need their money to be working for them and they'd be extracting money from the fan's as quick as you can say wallet.
Putting the money aside to cover future debt doesn't have to mean the money doesn't work for the owner. The only requirement is to put the owner on the hook for future risk due to over spending. If an owner wants to throw another 200m into the club for new players they could be simply asked to provide collateral. These owners could sign over an asset to be used to pay debt in the event the club cannot service the debt incurred. If the owner is confident enough to spend the money on the club they should be confident enough to back up the spend with collateral. If they don't want to do this it just highlights the risk they are putting the club's viability under.
valspoodle
Steve Chettle
The Man City 115 charges is a bit of a red herring. You only need to prove 1 charge to obtain a conviction and possibly if you get one charge proven you will get others simp[ly because they seem to be linked.
Robertson
Geoff Thomas
Whoever is to blame, we’d now be safe without the points deduction of course.
apondaway
Viv Anderson
Meaning there is very little chance Forest receive any reprieve from the appeal.
Motty_the_Younger
Youth Team
Unless it's zero points back, I doubt we're going to hear anything this week. The PL won't want to relegate a team by committee.
You are safe now, Luton are not going to get past you
Unfortunately uncooperative companies that have experienced Accountants can easily conceal a majority of shady and quasi legal practices through manipulative, creative accountancy. Added to a bottomless financial pit to obtain the best Lawyers, proving even one charge would surmount to a victory especially with current attitudes of the authorities. Just think if the current, reigning champions were found guilty?!?! The corruption could literally open the wormhole of litigation, and cause the downfall of the Premiership, leaving open certain Clubs to re-ignite the Super League. Simply put the FA, (and lesser extent) UEFA and FIFA will attempt to sweep the corruption under the carpet to avoid the consequences.