The Great Big FFP Debate

What is it with Newcastle supporters and conspiracy theories. Its been known all season that clubs would have to submit their accounts for last season by the end of December and decisions on clubs who failed would be given today.
 
imtoooldforthis said:
From what i've read Everton hasn't broken them again, it's a second penalty for the same year of losses that they were penalised for before... or something along those lines.
Click to expand...
This is misleading. The rules work on a rolling 3 year cycle*. Everton breached the profit and sustainability limit in the 3 year cycle to the end of the 21/22 season and they breached them in the 3 years to the end of last season. And if their finances haven't improved, they could breach then to the 3 years to the end of this season.

*For the two covid years they've taken the average of the two and they're recorded as a single season, which in the case of Everton massively helps them.
 
BaZ87 said:
People need to understand the process these things go through because these "what about City" shouts are getting tedious. The PL have done their part in regards to the City situation - they've been charged. That is all the PL can do. It's now down to the independent commission (this is not the PL) to gather all the documentation and exchange of evidence from both sides relating to 115 separate charges before a hearing can be heard. This is not a straight forward, single charge of x has spent too much where gathering all the evidence can be done in a few months. City's charges are far more complex, relating to false accounting and there will be quite literally hundreds of thousands of documents to go through - it's going to take ages to do this, not least because City are slowing down the process at every stage.

Again so it's crystal clear, the PL have done absolutely everything they can do and the rest is now out of their hands. They, like you and me, are now waiting for the independent commission to gather all the evidence ready for a hearing.
Click to expand...

Also, more importantly Citys lawyers are the best that you can possibly get and they’ll have them tied up in all sorts of loops. Nothing will come of the charges and if they do they’ll be appealed to the death and they’ll find a loop to get out of it. Just like they did with the UEFA one.

It’s the world we live in, money talks.
 
imtoooldforthis said:
From what i've read Everton hasn't broken them again, it's a second penalty for the same year of losses that they were penalised for before... or something along those lines.
Click to expand...

My understanding is it is for additional losses not the same losses.

This is like the way during a match, a team can concede a goal, but that doesn’t prevent them conceding another goal in the same match.

Everton lost X and were penalised for it. It now looks like they might have lost X+Y and they might get another penalty for the Y
 
Ok, so probably a stupid thought...but...we 'know' that teams with rich owners gain an 'unfair' advantage which is why we have FFP (excuse me if that's wrong, but that's my take). we also 'know' that without such owners you probably end up with a boring league where no-one can catch up and the gap gets even bigger...

...so, how about a situation where you are granted additional 'financial input' each season based on your league position and the fact the owner inputs it directly? Something along the lines of if you win the league you get no adjustment, 2nd your owner can put in an additional 5%, 3rd 10% etc maybe up to a maximum (say 25%)?

Of course figures totally pulled out of my backside, but it was just a thought so owners can put their money in but it's a controlled amount and it still allows those lower in the league to try and catch up with those higher.

Crazy I know, but it's a slow Tuesday, go easy on me! lol
 
Last edited:
NF7-S said:
Ok, so probably a stupid thought...but...we 'know' that teams with rich owners gain an 'unfair' advantage which is why we have FFP (excuse me if that's wrong, but that's my take). we also 'know' that without such owners you probably end up with a boring league where no-one can catch up and the gap gets even bigger...

...so, how about a situation where you are granted additional 'financial input' each season based on your league position and the fact the owner inputs it directly? Something along the lines of if you win the league you get no adjustment, 2nd your owner can put in an additional 5%, 3rd 10% etc maybe up to a maximum (say 25%)?

Of course figures totally pulled out of my backside, but it was just a thought so owners can put their money in but it's a controlled amount and it still allows those lower in the league to try and catch up with those higher.

Crazy I know, but it's a slow Tuesday, go easy on me! lol
Click to expand...
F1 does similar to an extent. The team who comes bottom of the constructors championship gets the most wind tunnel time before the next season starts. This winter, Haas will get 1,380 hours while Red Bull will get 840. Supposedly this will help the smaller teams close up but the only instance I can think of is Aston Martin making a huge leap last year and even then they fell away in the 2nd half of the season.
 
el_dazza said:
F1 does similar to an extent. The team who comes bottom of the constructors championship gets the most wind tunnel time before the next season starts. This winter, Haas will get 1,380 hours while Red Bull will get 840. Supposedly this will help the smaller teams close up but the only instance I can think of is Aston Martin making a huge leap last year and even then they fell away in the 2nd half of the season.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but that's like giving teams longer to prepare for matches right? Imagine if teams below the T4 could spend a fairly large % more on players, that's got to help vs the current FFP where the smaller clubs, even with a rich owner cannot build anything due to their smaller budgets.
 
NF7-S said:
Ok, so probably a stupid thought...but...we 'know' that teams with rich owners gain an 'unfair' advantage which is why we have FFP (excuse me if that's wrong, but that's my take). we also 'know' that without such owners you probably end up with a boring league where no-one can catch up and the gap gets even bigger...

...so, how about a situation where you are granted additional 'financial input' each season based on your league position and the fact the owner inputs it directly? Something along the lines of if you win the league you get no adjustment, 2nd your owner can put in an additional 5%, 3rd 10% etc maybe up to a maximum (say 25%)?

Of course figures totally pulled out of my backside, but it was just a thought so owners can put their money in but it's a controlled amount and it still allows those lower in the league to try and catch up with those higher.

Crazy I know, but it's a slow Tuesday, go easy on me! lol
Click to expand...
Because, FFP is as fair as things get, the same rules apply to everybody. If we throw our arms up and say yeah these clubs can spend as much as they want if they have dodgy rich owners stop crying tough luck, then why not Man united and Liverpool go it alone with TV deals and hoover up 90% of the money for example, if fair doesn't matter ?

This is the thing as much as Everton, Newcastle, City etc say we have to overspend to catch up with the big guys, there are 80 league clubs behind them too thinking this isn't fair we can't catch them.
 
Sythe79 said:
Because, FFP is as fair as things get, the same rules apply to everybody. If we throw our arms up and say yeah these clubs can spend as much as they want if they have dodgy rich owners stop crying tough luck, then why not Man united and Liverpool go it alone with TV deals and hoover up 90% of the money for example, if fair doesn't matter ?

This is the thing as much as Everton, Newcastle, City etc say we have to overspend to catch up with the big guys, there are 80 league clubs behind them too thinking this isn't fair we can't catch them.
Click to expand...
I agree about FFP, I was just saying that people are saying that we would essentially be stuck with the same teams every year getting all the best players due to their capacity vs the smaller teams. I was just trying to think of a 'fair' way to try and 'balance' things to allow those lower teams to potentially close the gap.
 
NF7-S said:
I agree about FFP, I was just saying that people are saying that we would essentially be stuck with the same teams every year getting all the best players due to their capacity vs the smaller teams. I was just trying to think of a 'fair' way to try and 'balance' things to allow those lower teams to potentially close the gap.
Click to expand...
You could draw 20 teams from the 92 at the start of each season, and then they get to play in the Premier League. Then at the end of the season draw the winners, and they get a cup, and rotate.

The rules should be fair, but the reality of competition is that things won't be equal.

League Football has been going for 150 years, the clubs with natural advantages didn't get them by magic (apart from Arsenal, the dirty cheats). It took decades for Manchester United or Liverpool to get to the position they are in, they earn't it by being good on the pitch, and even then they both have periods where they haven't dominated.

It shouldn't be a cheap free to play game where it's perfectly fine to pay to win, otherwise what's the point.
 
Last edited:
What an arrogant arse Masters is, if the “smaller“clubs break the rules, the rest of the league expect the Premier League to punish them, remind me again what the punishment was for the sly6 to try and slope off on their own. The cheek of Calling Everton and Forest small clubs as well.
 
Last edited:
woppy101 said:
What an arrogant arse Masters is, if the “smaller“clubs break the rules, the rest of the league expect the Premier League to punish them,
Click to expand...
correct, these are the rules everyone signed up to.
woppy101 said:
remind me again what the punishment was for the sly6 to try and slope off on their own.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
woppy101 said:
The cheek of Calling Everton and Forest small clubs as well.
Click to expand...
They are in the grand scheme of things, I highly doubt anyone would call Forest a 'big club' even with their European pedigree, which dwarves all but a handful of English teams.
 
Sythe79 said:
You could draw 20 teams from the 92 at the start of each season, and then they get to play in the Premier League. Then at the end of the season draw the winners, and they get a cup, and rotate.

The rules should be fair, but the reality of competition is that things won't be equal.

League Football has been going for 150 years, the clubs with natural advantages didn't get them by magic (apart from Arsenal, the dirty cheats). It took decades for Manchester United or Liverpool to get to the position they are in, they earn't it by being good on the pitch, and even then they both have periods where they haven't dominated.

It shouldn't be a cheap free to play game where it's perfectly fine to pay to win, otherwise what's the point.
Click to expand...
lol 'Arsenal cheaters' eh?

Totally disagree about Manchester United, back in the day they were always the ones over-paying for players with 'owners' helping fund (or rather borrowing money against the club to fund).
 
NF7-S said:
lol 'Arsenal cheaters' eh?

Totally disagree about Manchester United, back in the day they were always the ones over-paying for players with 'owners' helping fund (or rather borrowing money against the club to fund).
Click to expand...
Which owners ? Man Utd pulled ahead of everyone else by selling their soul on the stock market and commercialism so they could improve Old Trafford AND still buy players, combined with being good on the pitch they were well run off it and the gambles worked out. Of course, the price to pay for it was it opened themselves up to vulture capitalists like the Glazers.

In 1992 the same could have happened to Forrest, Villa, Newcastle, Liverpool, Everton or Arsenal if they had been run well.......... Spurs tried to do the Same thing and failed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom