Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Sheffield United in trouble
Comments
-
Probably a week before the season ends.Zulu said:So, wots it mean?
Are they gonna have points deduction or not ??
Like West Brom last time.1 -
That’s true and it used to be that when a player hung up his boots he went on to pursue a “normal” career. I once met Peter Reeves who had a very good career as a second tier footballer and when he retired if I remember correctly from our conversation was working for British Gas. Footballers these days playing at that level hang up their boots and live off their investments and savings. It’s gone from being a very well paid and privileged career to being like winning the lottery.letthegoodtimesroll said:
This bollox about a footballers career being relatively short so they should be paid more needs to stop. Relatively nobody has a job for life these days and even those that do manage to stay in the same ‘industry’ for a long time have to actually constantly switch and evolve into something that is probably light years away from what they did when they were younger.Notts_Addick said:
I don't have solutions either however the wages paid to players are the biggest issue and without solving that, we will continue to see clubs come close to the wire.SDAddick said:
That can be arranged...Exiled_Addick said:
I agree but can’t see it coming in now. Probably needed to happen 30 or 40 years ago - just too much money in the game now.SDAddick said:What a mess. 50+1 fan ownership is the only way forward. Otherwise it's just billionaires owing billionaires millions of dollars. Or supposed billionaires. Or supposed millionaires. etc. and so on.There was an interesting snippet on the “The Rest is Entertainment” podcast this week. Richard Osman talking about why there’s been a surge in Billionaires investing in sport teams/franchises. Concept was it’s being seen as something of a future proof investment - the number of teams is basically capped, it’s AI proof because you will always need humans playing as the end product, a lot of them also have interests in media companies that can also make money from broadcast rights so there’s an opportunity to double dip and the business model can be somewhat cyclical.
Make of it what you will, but it didn’t make it sound like the billionaire owners are going away - quite the opposite.
We might be stuck waiting for the revolution, and a few billionaires to be burned/eaten, before we get our game back.
I don't have a good solution on how to go about implementing a 50+1, and I'm not even from the UK, let alone a legal expert. I figure it would require something along the lines of treating football clubs like a public good, maybe similar to how a utility is done here, whereby you make the public (e.g. supporters) an investor and make it so that that group of investors must own 50+1 of a company. That would, I imagine, require a level of regulation if not downright nationalization that I don't think any party in the UK has an appetite for.
The problem would then be, do you end up hindering wages to workers (e.g. the footballers themselves)? Which I think would be harsh, given how short their careers are and how elite they are at their sport. I don't have a particularly good answer to this either.
I have a problem. I have a solution. I do not know enough on how to get from said problem to said solution, though if anyone has any thoughts or any examples of how this could be/has been done, would love to hear it.
You hear about many clubs from the premier league down to football league who are paying out more in wages than they turnover. That is an absolute recipe for disaster and in any other business would simply never happen. Football clubs are big operations and of course some of those wages are paid out to staff but the vast majority of those wages will be on players. Cooks, kitmen, receptionists, cleaners, stewards etc will all be on very basic wages
I don't blame players as naturally nobody is going to turn down good money, and I also agree that the career of a footballer is relatively short which means they should have opportunity to earn enough to ensure they are comfortable. However, I think most would agree that footballers earn far too much money and the figures for some are absolutely eye watering. Of course they should be remunerated well for their talents but the fact there are academy kids earning 50k a week is ludicrous. As is the 100k, 200k, 300k a week you hear a lot of players earning now.4 -
We’ll email you and let you know. ..Zulu said:So, wots it mean?
Are they gonna have points deduction or not ??1 -
I thought it all went through the Danish mafiaLoOkOuT said:Everyone knows classy global criminals work through Bermuda. Cayman is for your common sleaze.2 -
But when our owners won’t spent well beyond our means, they are skint, 2 bob, embarrassing and should fuck off and sell to ‘real’ owners.Notts_Addick said:
I don't have solutions either however the wages paid to players are the biggest issue and without solving that, we will continue to see clubs come close to the wire.SDAddick said:
That can be arranged...Exiled_Addick said:
I agree but can’t see it coming in now. Probably needed to happen 30 or 40 years ago - just too much money in the game now.SDAddick said:What a mess. 50+1 fan ownership is the only way forward. Otherwise it's just billionaires owing billionaires millions of dollars. Or supposed billionaires. Or supposed millionaires. etc. and so on.There was an interesting snippet on the “The Rest is Entertainment” podcast this week. Richard Osman talking about why there’s been a surge in Billionaires investing in sport teams/franchises. Concept was it’s being seen as something of a future proof investment - the number of teams is basically capped, it’s AI proof because you will always need humans playing as the end product, a lot of them also have interests in media companies that can also make money from broadcast rights so there’s an opportunity to double dip and the business model can be somewhat cyclical.
Make of it what you will, but it didn’t make it sound like the billionaire owners are going away - quite the opposite.
We might be stuck waiting for the revolution, and a few billionaires to be burned/eaten, before we get our game back.
I don't have a good solution on how to go about implementing a 50+1, and I'm not even from the UK, let alone a legal expert. I figure it would require something along the lines of treating football clubs like a public good, maybe similar to how a utility is done here, whereby you make the public (e.g. supporters) an investor and make it so that that group of investors must own 50+1 of a company. That would, I imagine, require a level of regulation if not downright nationalization that I don't think any party in the UK has an appetite for.
The problem would then be, do you end up hindering wages to workers (e.g. the footballers themselves)? Which I think would be harsh, given how short their careers are and how elite they are at their sport. I don't have a particularly good answer to this either.
I have a problem. I have a solution. I do not know enough on how to get from said problem to said solution, though if anyone has any thoughts or any examples of how this could be/has been done, would love to hear it.
Perhaps us, the fans, should take some responsibility for the ridiculous spending, due to our unrealistic expectations.11 -
It is a justification for the money paid but not a reason. The reason is players have a value to the club paying their wages. If the club doesn't pay a certain wage and another club is willing to, that is the driver. That is why the top players get paid stupid money. I think another incentive for the richer cubs to pay big money as the less rich clubs are then priced out of the best players which affects their chances of success and therefore reduces competition. The problem for the Championship is it doesn't have the riches of the Premier League but those riches are only a promotion away. Look at Hull last season. They were decent but nothing more but got promoted. That will inspire clubs like ours.letthegoodtimesroll said:
This bollox about a footballers career being relatively short so they should be paid more needs to stop. Relatively nobody has a job for life these days and even those that do manage to stay in the same ‘industry’ for a long time have to actually constantly switch and evolve into something that is probably light years away from what they did when they were younger.Notts_Addick said:
I don't have solutions either however the wages paid to players are the biggest issue and without solving that, we will continue to see clubs come close to the wire.SDAddick said:
That can be arranged...Exiled_Addick said:
I agree but can’t see it coming in now. Probably needed to happen 30 or 40 years ago - just too much money in the game now.SDAddick said:What a mess. 50+1 fan ownership is the only way forward. Otherwise it's just billionaires owing billionaires millions of dollars. Or supposed billionaires. Or supposed millionaires. etc. and so on.There was an interesting snippet on the “The Rest is Entertainment” podcast this week. Richard Osman talking about why there’s been a surge in Billionaires investing in sport teams/franchises. Concept was it’s being seen as something of a future proof investment - the number of teams is basically capped, it’s AI proof because you will always need humans playing as the end product, a lot of them also have interests in media companies that can also make money from broadcast rights so there’s an opportunity to double dip and the business model can be somewhat cyclical.
Make of it what you will, but it didn’t make it sound like the billionaire owners are going away - quite the opposite.
We might be stuck waiting for the revolution, and a few billionaires to be burned/eaten, before we get our game back.
I don't have a good solution on how to go about implementing a 50+1, and I'm not even from the UK, let alone a legal expert. I figure it would require something along the lines of treating football clubs like a public good, maybe similar to how a utility is done here, whereby you make the public (e.g. supporters) an investor and make it so that that group of investors must own 50+1 of a company. That would, I imagine, require a level of regulation if not downright nationalization that I don't think any party in the UK has an appetite for.
The problem would then be, do you end up hindering wages to workers (e.g. the footballers themselves)? Which I think would be harsh, given how short their careers are and how elite they are at their sport. I don't have a particularly good answer to this either.
I have a problem. I have a solution. I do not know enough on how to get from said problem to said solution, though if anyone has any thoughts or any examples of how this could be/has been done, would love to hear it.
You hear about many clubs from the premier league down to football league who are paying out more in wages than they turnover. That is an absolute recipe for disaster and in any other business would simply never happen. Football clubs are big operations and of course some of those wages are paid out to staff but the vast majority of those wages will be on players. Cooks, kitmen, receptionists, cleaners, stewards etc will all be on very basic wages
I don't blame players as naturally nobody is going to turn down good money, and I also agree that the career of a footballer is relatively short which means they should have opportunity to earn enough to ensure they are comfortable. However, I think most would agree that footballers earn far too much money and the figures for some are absolutely eye watering. Of course they should be remunerated well for their talents but the fact there are academy kids earning 50k a week is ludicrous. As is the 100k, 200k, 300k a week you hear a lot of players earning now.0 -
I totally agree with 'If the club doesn't pay a certain wage and another club is willing to, that is the driver. That is why the top players get paid stupid money. I think another incentive for the richer cubs to pay big money as the less rich clubs are then priced out of the best players which affects their chances of success and therefore reduces competition'.MuttleyCAFC said:
It is a justification for the money paid but not a reason. The reason is players have a value to the club paying their wages. If the club doesn't pay a certain wage and another club is willing to, that is the driver. That is why the top players get paid stupid money. I think another incentive for the richer cubs to pay big money as the less rich clubs are then priced out of the best players which affects their chances of success and therefore reduces competition. The problem for the Championship is it doesn't have the riches of the Premier League but those riches are only a promotion away. Look at Hull last season. They were decent but nothing more but got promoted. That will inspire clubs like ours.letthegoodtimesroll said:
This bollox about a footballers career being relatively short so they should be paid more needs to stop. Relatively nobody has a job for life these days and even those that do manage to stay in the same ‘industry’ for a long time have to actually constantly switch and evolve into something that is probably light years away from what they did when they were younger.Notts_Addick said:
I don't have solutions either however the wages paid to players are the biggest issue and without solving that, we will continue to see clubs come close to the wire.SDAddick said:
That can be arranged...Exiled_Addick said:
I agree but can’t see it coming in now. Probably needed to happen 30 or 40 years ago - just too much money in the game now.SDAddick said:What a mess. 50+1 fan ownership is the only way forward. Otherwise it's just billionaires owing billionaires millions of dollars. Or supposed billionaires. Or supposed millionaires. etc. and so on.There was an interesting snippet on the “The Rest is Entertainment” podcast this week. Richard Osman talking about why there’s been a surge in Billionaires investing in sport teams/franchises. Concept was it’s being seen as something of a future proof investment - the number of teams is basically capped, it’s AI proof because you will always need humans playing as the end product, a lot of them also have interests in media companies that can also make money from broadcast rights so there’s an opportunity to double dip and the business model can be somewhat cyclical.
Make of it what you will, but it didn’t make it sound like the billionaire owners are going away - quite the opposite.
We might be stuck waiting for the revolution, and a few billionaires to be burned/eaten, before we get our game back.
I don't have a good solution on how to go about implementing a 50+1, and I'm not even from the UK, let alone a legal expert. I figure it would require something along the lines of treating football clubs like a public good, maybe similar to how a utility is done here, whereby you make the public (e.g. supporters) an investor and make it so that that group of investors must own 50+1 of a company. That would, I imagine, require a level of regulation if not downright nationalization that I don't think any party in the UK has an appetite for.
The problem would then be, do you end up hindering wages to workers (e.g. the footballers themselves)? Which I think would be harsh, given how short their careers are and how elite they are at their sport. I don't have a particularly good answer to this either.
I have a problem. I have a solution. I do not know enough on how to get from said problem to said solution, though if anyone has any thoughts or any examples of how this could be/has been done, would love to hear it.
You hear about many clubs from the premier league down to football league who are paying out more in wages than they turnover. That is an absolute recipe for disaster and in any other business would simply never happen. Football clubs are big operations and of course some of those wages are paid out to staff but the vast majority of those wages will be on players. Cooks, kitmen, receptionists, cleaners, stewards etc will all be on very basic wages
I don't blame players as naturally nobody is going to turn down good money, and I also agree that the career of a footballer is relatively short which means they should have opportunity to earn enough to ensure they are comfortable. However, I think most would agree that footballers earn far too much money and the figures for some are absolutely eye watering. Of course they should be remunerated well for their talents but the fact there are academy kids earning 50k a week is ludicrous. As is the 100k, 200k, 300k a week you hear a lot of players earning now.
So clubs run at a loss which is ridiculous as it leads to all these issues. There needs to be stricter regulations and penalties so clubs don't just pay more that they can't afford. And the penalties need to be watertight and timely0 -
Will Sheffield Utd be deducted 12 points?Complicated. The company that bought SU still owe £35m to the previous owner.They moved all the assets and money to a new company and wound up the original one, thus walking away from the debt.Football cant allow them get away with this. Southampton tried a similar thing and it was ruled that both companies were intrinsically linked.If they follow this, then one company going under should activate an automatic 12 points deduction.They must also have a view on the £35m. This will need to be repaid as a football debt. Any less and clubs up and down the country will be flipping companies to avoid paying their debts.
If they don’t repay it, potentially they have an extra £35m to spend on players.
Fit and proper owners come into it as well. They appointed a new director and didn’t go through the process.1st big job for the regulator. Need to get their fingers out and resolve this asap.
Personally I think they will get 12 points deduction as a warning to others.
If they repay or reach an understanding with the previous owner that maybe the end of it.If not?6 -
Agree with all of that except Sheff Utd’s owners have broken the rules regardless of whether they come to an agreement over the £35 million. Winding up the original Company and transferring all of its assets to a new one is an obvious attempt to avoid paying the £35 million. They would need to prove a valid reason for the transfer which I certainly can’t see. It’s fairly obvious that the old and new companies are intrinsically linked because the assets are the same. I suspect it’ll take quite some time to untangle and will involve an appeal if SU are found in breach. Given how slowly the authorities work and potentially complicated this one is I doubt it can be resolved before this season is concluded and would expect any points deduction to come into play for 27/28. Further complicated if Sheff Utd should reach the playoffs and win them. Not likely but it’s a scenario.Redrobo said:Will Sheffield Utd be deducted 12 points?Complicated. The company that bought SU still owe £35m to the previous owner.They moved all the assets and money to a new company and wound up the original one, thus walking away from the debt.Football cant allow them get away with this. Southampton tried a similar thing and it was ruled that both companies were intrinsically linked.If they follow this, then one company going under should activate an automatic 12 points deduction.They must also have a view on the £35m. This will need to be repaid as a football debt. Any less and clubs up and down the country will be flipping companies to avoid paying their debts.
If they don’t repay it, potentially they have an extra £35m to spend on players.
Fit and proper owners come into it as well. They appointed a new director and didn’t go through the process.1st big job for the regulator. Need to get their fingers out and resolve this asap.
Personally I think they will get 12 points deduction as a warning to others.
If they repay or reach an understanding with the previous owner that maybe the end of it.If not?0 -
£100 Million was a ridiculous sum to pay for Sheffield U in the first place. Yes an old established club with a decent fan base, but paying salaries, travel, transfer fees etc etc and hoping to make a profit even in the long term ? .. I don't think so0
-
Sponsored links:
-
How much for and was it all paid up front?usetobunkin said:Football has sold its soul to the Devil.2 -
Redrobo said:Will Sheffield Utd be deducted 12 points?Complicated. The company that bought SU still owe £35m to the previous owner.They moved all the assets and money to a new company and wound up the original one, thus walking away from the debt.Football cant allow them get away with this. Southampton tried a similar thing and it was ruled that both companies were intrinsically linked.If they follow this, then one company going under should activate an automatic 12 points deduction.They must also have a view on the £35m. This will need to be repaid as a football debt. Any less and clubs up and down the country will be flipping companies to avoid paying their debts.
If they don’t repay it, potentially they have an extra £35m to spend on players.
Fit and proper owners come into it as well. They appointed a new director and didn’t go through the process.1st big job for the regulator. Need to get their fingers out and resolve this asap.
Personally I think they will get 12 points deduction as a warning to others.
If they repay or reach an understanding with the previous owner that maybe the end of it.If not?
It's awful behaviour by the Americans and seems quite a personal risk when it's a Saudi Prince they are ripping off !
It seems open and shut and whilst they are hiding behind the fact that the vendors would have had professional advise that is just a slimy way of absolving themselves of really poor behaviour.
Personally think they should be told that Sheffield Utd will be relegated unless they pay what they owe and stop hiding behind smoke and mirrors and poor ethical practices.3 -
I don't know the ins and outs but I suppose it will boil down to whether the changes the club made meant people who were owed money lost money. I don't know whether they did or didn't but usually there is no smoke without fire.Redrobo said:Will Sheffield Utd be deducted 12 points?Complicated. The company that bought SU still owe £35m to the previous owner.They moved all the assets and money to a new company and wound up the original one, thus walking away from the debt.Football cant allow them get away with this. Southampton tried a similar thing and it was ruled that both companies were intrinsically linked.If they follow this, then one company going under should activate an automatic 12 points deduction.They must also have a view on the £35m. This will need to be repaid as a football debt. Any less and clubs up and down the country will be flipping companies to avoid paying their debts.
If they don’t repay it, potentially they have an extra £35m to spend on players.
Fit and proper owners come into it as well. They appointed a new director and didn’t go through the process.1st big job for the regulator. Need to get their fingers out and resolve this asap.
Personally I think they will get 12 points deduction as a warning to others.
If they repay or reach an understanding with the previous owner that maybe the end of it.If not?0 -
So Wednesday and United from Sheffield have and will be hit with points deductions in the EFL but Chelsea and Man City can just pay fines for their hundreds of misdemeanors over the last decade or two.
Two tier policing of football ? You bet there is.7 -
As per my post above that’s not nearly enough. Being caught out and breaking the rules with sharp practice cannot be exonerated by being told to pay up. Even if they pay up there are serious questions to be asked.Athletico Charlton said:Redrobo said:Will Sheffield Utd be deducted 12 points?Complicated. The company that bought SU still owe £35m to the previous owner.They moved all the assets and money to a new company and wound up the original one, thus walking away from the debt.Football cant allow them get away with this. Southampton tried a similar thing and it was ruled that both companies were intrinsically linked.If they follow this, then one company going under should activate an automatic 12 points deduction.They must also have a view on the £35m. This will need to be repaid as a football debt. Any less and clubs up and down the country will be flipping companies to avoid paying their debts.
If they don’t repay it, potentially they have an extra £35m to spend on players.
Fit and proper owners come into it as well. They appointed a new director and didn’t go through the process.1st big job for the regulator. Need to get their fingers out and resolve this asap.
Personally I think they will get 12 points deduction as a warning to others.
If they repay or reach an understanding with the previous owner that maybe the end of it.If not?
It's awful behaviour by the Americans and seems quite a personal risk when it's a Saudi Prince they are ripping off !
It seems open and shut and whilst they are hiding behind the fact that the vendors would have had professional advise that is just a slimy way of absolving themselves of really poor behaviour.
Personally think they should be told that Sheffield Utd will be relegated unless they pay what they owe and stop hiding behind smoke and mirrors and poor ethical practices.1 -
Is rather galling! Watching traditional English clubs being put through the wringer, whilst Manchester City are still signing players for squadrillions...
4 -
And Chelsea only get fined 10mil for their indiscretions . The equivalent of what you find down the back of the sofa for them .soapy_jones said:Is rather galling! Watching traditional English clubs being put through the wringer, whilst Manchester City are still signing players for squadrillions...5 -
I might be wrong, but thought it was now written in the rules that a punishment had to be given during the season the club was caught.ShootersHillGuru said:
Agree with all of that except Sheff Utd’s owners have broken the rules regardless of whether they come to an agreement over the £35 million. Winding up the original Company and transferring all of its assets to a new one is an obvious attempt to avoid paying the £35 million. They would need to prove a valid reason for the transfer which I certainly can’t see. It’s fairly obvious that the old and new companies are intrinsically linked because the assets are the same. I suspect it’ll take quite some time to untangle and will involve an appeal if SU are found in breach. Given how slowly the authorities work and potentially complicated this one is I doubt it can be resolved before this season is concluded and would expect any points deduction to come into play for 27/28. Further complicated if Sheff Utd should reach the playoffs and win them. Not likely but it’s a scenario.Redrobo said:Will Sheffield Utd be deducted 12 points?Complicated. The company that bought SU still owe £35m to the previous owner.They moved all the assets and money to a new company and wound up the original one, thus walking away from the debt.Football cant allow them get away with this. Southampton tried a similar thing and it was ruled that both companies were intrinsically linked.If they follow this, then one company going under should activate an automatic 12 points deduction.They must also have a view on the £35m. This will need to be repaid as a football debt. Any less and clubs up and down the country will be flipping companies to avoid paying their debts.
If they don’t repay it, potentially they have an extra £35m to spend on players.
Fit and proper owners come into it as well. They appointed a new director and didn’t go through the process.1st big job for the regulator. Need to get their fingers out and resolve this asap.
Personally I think they will get 12 points deduction as a warning to others.
If they repay or reach an understanding with the previous owner that maybe the end of it.If not?1
