David Conn @david_conn 2h QPR accounts state that the club's continued "operational existence" depends on the financial support of Tony Fernandes and the other owners.
Really? : - )
Is it necessary to put a smiley face in every post you make, 99% of the time its neither witty or funny...
Hello, I'd like to say it was good to have you back trolling again but it's not.
Bye bye
I fail to see how I am trolling, it was a legitimate question.
So you have the power to ban me, even though you are not a moderator? .
Three posts in total and two about me. No, not a troll. : - )
David Conn @david_conn 2h QPR accounts state that the club's continued "operational existence" depends on the financial support of Tony Fernandes and the other owners.
Really? : - )
Is it necessary to put a smiley face in every post you make, 99% of the time its neither witty or funny...
Hello, I'd like to say it was good to have you back trolling again but it's not.
Bye bye
I fail to see how I am trolling, it was a legitimate question.
So you have the power to ban me, even though you are not a moderator? .
Three posts in total and two about me. No, not a troll. : - )
Bye, bye
Oh right I did not realise there was a quota of posts you have to make. I asked you a question then replied to you, I did not make this account to 'troll' you as you would like to believe, I guess being elected by 400 odd people has gone to your head.
David Conn @david_conn 2h QPR accounts state that the club's continued "operational existence" depends on the financial support of Tony Fernandes and the other owners.
Really? : - )
Is it necessary to put a smiley face in every post you make, 99% of the time its neither witty or funny...
Hello, I'd like to say it was good to have you back trolling again but it's not.
Bye bye
I fail to see how I am trolling, it was a legitimate question.
So you have the power to ban me, even though you are not a moderator? .
Three posts in total and two about me. No, not a troll. : - )
Bye, bye
Oh right I did not realise there was a quota of posts you have to make. I asked you a question then replied to you, I did not make this account to 'troll' you as you would like to believe, I guess being elected by 400 odd people has gone to your head.
In the good old days it didn't matter. Chelsea and Man City have run up huge debts but the owners are willing to pay.
If QPR had stayed up or go up this year then it won't matter. The Mittels and Fernandes will pay the fine anyway.
But with Financial Fair Play not all the over spending clubs can go up so someone is going to be left with a massive fine.
Just a shame that the fines don't get distributed amongst the other clubs who complied.
It is more than a shame - it is ridiculous - that was the initial intention if I understood it right and it made a lot of sense as a deterrent. SO not only are you hurting yourself, you are making your rivals stronger. If th epoint of FFP is to stop clubs behaving in this way - surely you have to give the regs real bite.
One question though - does the £65m include players who have gon eout on loan?
If the money can't be distributed amongst clubs who have complied with the rules, what about going into a fund that compensates non footballing creditors who have been left out of pocket by football administrations?
Bit off topic but back to QPR... If they fail to get promoted (and I reckon their chances are c.25% now) then they have a big decision to make over the summer. They are exempt from the player registration embargo this time (to come into effect Jan 2015) but they have just one more season to ignore the agreed framework. These overspending clubs are cheating under the new rules AND inflating the wage budgets for second tier players... CAFC has plenty of room to add to costs now but the limits come down next season... To me it is essential that the rules are enforced AND that the relationship with the Premier League is re-examined. Why should clubs be exempt for a year after relegation?
Can failing to comply with FFP lead to a points deduction?
Points deduction should be the punishment. Deduct one point for each million overspent. Not only would we not get relegated but promotion could be a possibility!
Can failing to comply with FFP lead to a points deduction?
Points deduction should be the punishment. Deduct one point for each million overspent. Not only would we not get relegated but promotion could be a possibility!
Points deduction would definitely make the difference.
Can failing to comply with FFP lead to a points deduction?
Points deduction should be the punishment. Deduct one point for each million overspent. Not only would we not get relegated but promotion could be a possibility!
Points deduction would definitely make the difference.
Actually, that would probably be the best way to make FFP work - maybe 1 point for every £500k over would be more effective though as whilst it would make no more difference to QPR, they are a special example of financial obsenity!
Can failing to comply with FFP lead to a points deduction?
Points deduction should be the punishment. Deduct one point for each million overspent. Not only would we not get relegated but promotion could be a possibility!
Points deduction would definitely make the difference.
Been saying that for ages. Financial punishment doesn't work against those who have cash to burn on chasing a dream. Taking away the thing (points) they are effectively buying is the only way to punish them. Spend stupid amounts (such as Rangers have done this season) and you can find yourself actually being relegated if the deduction is done on a point -per-£xxx system.
Something tells me that all this fair play is no more than talk from the league and any penalties occurred will be token gestures at best, leaving many other clubs who abided by the rules saying "What's the fu**ing point"?...............
Can failing to comply with FFP lead to a points deduction?
Points deduction should be the punishment. Deduct one point for each million overspent. Not only would we not get relegated but promotion could be a possibility!
Points deduction would definitely make the difference.
Been saying that for ages. Financial punishment doesn't work against those who have cash to burn on chasing a dream. Taking away the thing (points) they are effectively buying is the only way to punish them. Spend stupid amounts (such as Rangers have done this season) and you can find yourself actually being relegated if the deduction is done on a point -per-£xxx system.
Nice idea in theory, but it would be impossible to deduct points at the time the debt was being racked up, and I doubt the EPL would agree to deduct points from any offending team promoted from the Chumpionship.
I think they have to make the first year work which is only nine months away - ensure no one fiddles the books and review the impact on clubs. Brighton have sold players to stay under the limit and may miss out on the play-offs as a result. Supporters of clubs who follow this way back to financial sanity should stick together and lobby hard to get any team putting in legal challenges kicked out. As I posted earlier the limits reduce each year and it may be difficult to change the penalties while holding the whole thing together but this new framework might well let clubs cheat just once before they find they are not allowed to sign another player - including those from their own academy!
Can failing to comply with FFP lead to a points deduction?
Points deduction should be the punishment. Deduct one point for each million overspent. Not only would we not get relegated but promotion could be a possibility!
Points deduction would definitely make the difference.
Been saying that for ages. Financial punishment doesn't work against those who have cash to burn on chasing a dream. Taking away the thing (points) they are effectively buying is the only way to punish them. Spend stupid amounts (such as Rangers have done this season) and you can find yourself actually being relegated if the deduction is done on a point -per-£xxx system.
Nice idea in theory, but it would be impossible to deduct points at the time the debt was being racked up, and I doubt the EPL would agree to deduct points from any offending team promoted from the Chumpionship.
True, but again shows up the utter nonsense of the EPL being 'separate'.
Why should all clubs have same amount spend as percentage of turnover? How a rich person spends their money is up to them. If they want to fund huge losses on a football team then why not.
Perhaps we should have Player Fair Play where each team gets one pick at a time to get equal squads.
Why should all clubs have same amount spend as percentage of turnover? How a rich person spends their money is up to them. If they want to fund huge losses on a football team then why not.
Because it doesn't just affect that club. If one club is funded by a lunatic billionaire willing to pay players exorbitant wages then the agents will use that to extort similar wages from other clubs that don't have the finances to support them and you end up with the ludicrous situation we have at present where only a tiny fraction of football clubs towards the upper end of the English leagues are actually financially viable despite receiving unbelievable amounts of money from TV rights etc. QPR is a prime example. Even if they get promoted this season, with the £70m they get for finishing last in the EPL next season, plus the £60m they get in parachute payments over the following 4 seasons they don't even cover their losses from this season!
Comments
Three posts in total and two about me. No, not a troll. : - )
Bye, bye
If QPR had stayed up or go up this year then it won't matter. The Mittels and Fernandes will pay the fine anyway.
But with Financial Fair Play not all the over spending clubs can go up so someone is going to be left with a massive fine.
Just a shame that the fines don't get distributed amongst the other clubs who complied.
One question though - does the £65m include players who have gon eout on loan?
If they fail to get promoted (and I reckon their chances are c.25% now) then they have a big decision to make over the summer. They are exempt from the player registration embargo this time (to come into effect Jan 2015) but they have just one more season to ignore the agreed framework.
These overspending clubs are cheating under the new rules AND inflating the wage budgets for second tier players...
CAFC has plenty of room to add to costs now but the limits come down next season... To me it is essential that the rules are enforced AND that the relationship with the Premier League is re-examined. Why should clubs be exempt for a year after relegation?
Surely just a wage cap would be much simpler
All totally obscene.
Something tells me that all this fair play is no more than talk from the league and any penalties occurred will be token gestures at best, leaving many other clubs who abided by the rules saying "What's the fu**ing point"?...............
Supporters of clubs who follow this way back to financial sanity should stick together and lobby hard to get any team putting in legal challenges kicked out. As I posted earlier the limits reduce each year and it may be difficult to change the penalties while holding the whole thing together but this new framework might well let clubs cheat just once before they find they are not allowed to sign another player - including those from their own academy!
Perhaps we should have Player Fair Play where each team gets one pick at a time to get equal squads.