Clubs in debt face Champions League ban
- Thread starter daz.wallace
- Start date
Our fans are Angels in comparison to the antics of many other nations, which is why I can't understand it.
Yet World Football are ready to throw the next two major WORLD footballing events at South Africa and Poland, two of the most violent countries in the entire world.
Sure, but there have been numerous examples of clubs that have overextended themselves in the pursuit of glory. Presumably that's what Platini is attempting to prevent. Like I said though, the solution seems rather cackhanded.
but if you over extend then you lose out in the end by heading into administration etc. there are business things in place already to 'punish' companies who cannot balance the books properly, there is no need for this muppet to put things in place on top of that.
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 1,188
Does anyone else see the irony here?
In all other markets the UK has forced companies to stand alone financially through liberalisation and privatisation. In europe there are still several state owned and state funded inefficient monopolies.
In football, the Europeans are now trying to tell the British (specifically English in this case) to encourage their football teams to be able to survive finacially on their own without wealthy donors.
In all other markets the UK has forced companies to stand alone financially through liberalisation and privatisation. In europe there are still several state owned and state funded inefficient monopolies.
In football, the Europeans are now trying to tell the British (specifically English in this case) to encourage their football teams to be able to survive finacially on their own without wealthy donors.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
He is a twit, and anti English, but he has a point.
THe premierleague is becoming silly, a club without a billionaire to pocket them simply can't compete with one that has one. We do need something to encourage not being in debt and not being able to cover wages with income. Chelsea made what, a near £80mil debt and I'm not sure if thats on just club costs like wages, upkeep, security, I'm guessing that the transfer fee's were outside that?
I think a wage cap, Europe wide, and a transfer cap are very much needed, and the sooner its done the easier it will be to get done. Of course people will find ways around wage caps to a certain degree unless quite a bit of checking is done, but its a first step. if we had a £100k a week wage cap(and honestly can any footballer stand infront of his own fans and tell them, most making £30k a year or less, that it isn't enough?) then people like ronaldo would be on the cap, so people like Wes Brown would not need to be paid 80k a week to be a reserve. IT would make it easier for smaller clubs to get in a few stars, and easier to persaude players to come to other clubs, spread out the talent a little and make the whole league more competitive.
At the moment we are just moving towards the time when the whole Premier League will be play toys for billionaires, but what happens, for instance to Chelsea when Abramovich, goes to jail, dies, gets bored and Chelsea have to rely on ticket sales for wages, they'll lose a horrific amount of money and go bust very quickly. But to compete half the clubs, if not all the clubs will be in the same situation, all very susceptible to these problems. Its just not a good situation.
Platini shouldn't be in charge of anything, he's a grade A plonker, and his current plan/idea is ridiculous. But the reason behind it, is geniune and needs addressing. What will happen when all the top stars realise they can get more money at English clubs, most of the big European clubs will turn to crap, our league will turn to crap, the Champs league will be a joke and we won't have competitive football. We'll have teams basically ranked by how rich their owner is alone.
You can't ever have a level playing field, but its a sport, and should be competitive, every last game, but we should do something to make it as level as possible, and a wage cap/transfer cap would help out the bottom half of the table a lot and make the league much better on the whole.
Lets be honest, Chelsea bought the title, and frankly, that shouldn't be possible. What if Thaksin goes and spends £500 million on players and City win the treble this year, new, yes, funny, for the short term, but fair? no.
THe premierleague is becoming silly, a club without a billionaire to pocket them simply can't compete with one that has one. We do need something to encourage not being in debt and not being able to cover wages with income. Chelsea made what, a near £80mil debt and I'm not sure if thats on just club costs like wages, upkeep, security, I'm guessing that the transfer fee's were outside that?
I think a wage cap, Europe wide, and a transfer cap are very much needed, and the sooner its done the easier it will be to get done. Of course people will find ways around wage caps to a certain degree unless quite a bit of checking is done, but its a first step. if we had a £100k a week wage cap(and honestly can any footballer stand infront of his own fans and tell them, most making £30k a year or less, that it isn't enough?) then people like ronaldo would be on the cap, so people like Wes Brown would not need to be paid 80k a week to be a reserve. IT would make it easier for smaller clubs to get in a few stars, and easier to persaude players to come to other clubs, spread out the talent a little and make the whole league more competitive.
At the moment we are just moving towards the time when the whole Premier League will be play toys for billionaires, but what happens, for instance to Chelsea when Abramovich, goes to jail, dies, gets bored and Chelsea have to rely on ticket sales for wages, they'll lose a horrific amount of money and go bust very quickly. But to compete half the clubs, if not all the clubs will be in the same situation, all very susceptible to these problems. Its just not a good situation.
Platini shouldn't be in charge of anything, he's a grade A plonker, and his current plan/idea is ridiculous. But the reason behind it, is geniune and needs addressing. What will happen when all the top stars realise they can get more money at English clubs, most of the big European clubs will turn to crap, our league will turn to crap, the Champs league will be a joke and we won't have competitive football. We'll have teams basically ranked by how rich their owner is alone.
You can't ever have a level playing field, but its a sport, and should be competitive, every last game, but we should do something to make it as level as possible, and a wage cap/transfer cap would help out the bottom half of the table a lot and make the league much better on the whole.
Lets be honest, Chelsea bought the title, and frankly, that shouldn't be possible. What if Thaksin goes and spends £500 million on players and City win the treble this year, new, yes, funny, for the short term, but fair? no.
everyone always goes on about chelsea. they have spent millions yes, but in a couple of years they will break even then start making money. long term business plan that is being executed well iirc.
chelsea arent the first team to be given lots of money, others have as well.
chelsea arent the first team to be given lots of money, others have as well.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 12,050
- Location
- Manchester
Awesome idea!
Only profit making clubs and thus sustainable clubs allowed to compete on a level playing field....
Will never happen but a good idea..??
Only profit making clubs and thus sustainable clubs allowed to compete on a level playing field....
Will never happen but a good idea..??
Chelsea haven't been given lots of money though. Every penny Abramovich has put into Chelsea has been in the form of an interest free loan. What happens when he calls in that debt and they have 18 months to come up with £500m+?
G14 doesnt exist any more I thought?
Man Utd (and many others) DO make a profit every year - its just not anywhere near in the same ballpark as the debt saddled on the club by the idiot americans
The business is sustainable therefore - but it doesnt stop it being in dept
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 May 2003
- Posts
- 9,361
- Location
- Limehouse
There are different types of debt though? Man Utd and Arsenal have big debts but they make big profits also (seem to remember reading Arsenal's profits fell this year but still a profit nonetheless). This proves that the debt is well structured and serviceable, as if it wasn't the clubs would be making losses. Debt isn't a problem, being able to service that debt is the issue. Stupid idea from Platini; seems to be a prerequisite for the heads of governing bodies to come up with stupid ideas.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 12,607
- Location
- Northants
Platini, Blatter & Jack Warner are their 3 bigger numptys at the head of a sport? They all seem to have verbal diarrhoea and can't seem to help themselves with stupid ramblings.
There might be a nugget of a sensible idea in Platinis suggestion but why does he always single out the English clubs as the reason for any wrongs in the sport? Do you think he'd be coming out with this if Spanish or Italian teams were doing all the spending? Like hell would he.
Surely if you are running a Europe wide organisation you should at least pretend to be impartial?
There might be a nugget of a sensible idea in Platinis suggestion but why does he always single out the English clubs as the reason for any wrongs in the sport? Do you think he'd be coming out with this if Spanish or Italian teams were doing all the spending? Like hell would he.
Surely if you are running a Europe wide organisation you should at least pretend to be impartial?
Abramovich isnt just going to walk away asking for the money. he is a business man and even if he lost interest in the club and football itself, he would still keep the money where it is as in years to come the club will make a fortune.
people have been saying 'what will happen when he walks off' since he bought the club, funny how it hasnt happened yet.
Another Platini dig at something English related?
I really hate this man, what he stands for and what he says.
And I thought Blatter was bad....
http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11667_3750047,00.html
I really hate this man, what he stands for and what he says.
And I thought Blatter was bad....
Having not already walked away is hardly proof that he won't ever.
But you're right, he isn't likely to just walk away and leave the club in financial ruin. I was really just pointing out that this money people think Abramovich has been pumping into Chelsea has actually been a loan, and not through the kindness of his heart.
It's not entirely untrue, don't think the president of Uefa should be saying it though. I wonder how happy some of the english clubs are with the nonsense he comes out with.