What if the Conference refuse to have them? Or whoever adjudicates decisions regarding the Conference make them start from the lowest possible rung in the Conference?
Same situation with Newco Rangers, sending them to the bottom of the professional football pyramid was a massive cock-up and didn't have the desired effect. Rangers are still pulling in the biggest crowds in Scottish football but now Scotland has tumbled down the UEFA rankings meaning Celtic have to play Dynamo Bogbrush or Grasshopper Workmate in order to qualify for anything and all the clubs Rangers have to complete against on the way back up have to play an opponent well above their standard in what ought to be a balanced league (indeed, in case anyone actually forgot, the League system exists so clubs only play other teams that are equivalent in standard as they are, not as a punishment for top flight teams when they need a slap).
Can't see it happening to be honest because no one in English footballing is either as stupid or has large enough balls to do to QPR what the SFA did to Rangers. I imagine QPR's owners with grease some palms and they'll get slapped with something resembling a punishment (transfer embargo or wage cap or something that could probably got around quite easily).
Good points. However, as Katrien says in the article, if nothing is done then that just gives licence for any other club to ignore any financial rules that are in play, and cue mayhem.
Granted, but clubs that spaff millions more than they're allowed are few and far between in the Football League. The Football League has a bigger problem with clubs not making any money at all and going insolvent than clubs owned by billionaires buying promotion. I'm not saying QPR shouldn't be punished in some way, I just think that:
a) Sending them to a different part of the football pyramid is a pointless punishment because it hurts other clubs more than the offending club and it undermines the reason why we have a league system in the first place (i.e. to ensure clubs are competing against teams on a similar level). Financial punishment (e.g. fining their parachute payments, transfer embargo, wage cap etc.) are more appropriate. If I was going to make a threat to QPR, I'd threaten them with a 10-point deduction for each year they stayed in the Premiership and didn't pay their fine until their eventual return to the Championship. It'd certainly send a message home and it would certainly make an interesting situation where QPR's metaphorical balls were left dangling over an increasingly more vicious pit of crocodiles.
b) QPR will likely escape any punishment as they're rich enough to grease the right palms at the FA and Football League and the Football League likely don't have the cojones to stick to their guns on this one.
There will be plenty of clubs that have "spaffed" millions more than they're allowed.
Sending QPR to the conference will NOT hurt other clubs, more than QPR.
The Football League cannot deduct points off Premier League teams.
What if the Conference refuse to have them? Or whoever adjudicates decisions regarding the Conference make them start from the lowest possible rung in the Conference?
Same situation with Newco Rangers, sending them to the bottom of the professional football pyramid was a massive cock-up and didn't have the desired effect. Rangers are still pulling in the biggest crowds in Scottish football but now Scotland has tumbled down the UEFA rankings meaning Celtic have to play Dynamo Bogbrush or Grasshopper Workmate in order to qualify for anything and all the clubs Rangers have to complete against on the way back up have to play an opponent well above their standard in what ought to be a balanced league (indeed, in case anyone actually forgot, the League system exists so clubs only play other teams that are equivalent in standard as they are, not as a punishment for top flight teams when they need a slap).
Can't see it happening to be honest because no one in English footballing is either as stupid or has large enough balls to do to QPR what the SFA did to Rangers. I imagine QPR's owners with grease some palms and they'll get slapped with something resembling a punishment (transfer embargo or wage cap or something that could probably got around quite easily).
Good points. However, as Katrien says in the article, if nothing is done then that just gives licence for any other club to ignore any financial rules that are in play, and cue mayhem.
Granted, but clubs that spaff millions more than they're allowed are few and far between in the Football League. The Football League has a bigger problem with clubs not making any money at all and going insolvent than clubs owned by billionaires buying promotion. I'm not saying QPR shouldn't be punished in some way, I just think that:
a) Sending them to a different part of the football pyramid is a pointless punishment because it hurts other clubs more than the offending club and it undermines the reason why we have a league system in the first place (i.e. to ensure clubs are competing against teams on a similar level). Financial punishment (e.g. fining their parachute payments, transfer embargo, wage cap etc.) are more appropriate. If I was going to make a threat to QPR, I'd threaten them with a 10-point deduction for each year they stayed in the Premiership and didn't pay their fine until their eventual return to the Championship. It'd certainly send a message home and it would certainly make an interesting situation where QPR's metaphorical balls were left dangling over an increasingly more vicious pit of crocodiles.
b) QPR will likely escape any punishment as they're rich enough to grease the right palms at the FA and Football League and the Football League likely don't have the cojones to stick to their guns on this one.
There will be plenty of clubs that have "spaffed" millions more than they're allowed.
Sending QPR to the conference will NOT hurt other clubs, more than QPR.
The Football League cannot deduct points off Premier League teams.
1) Not on the scale that QPR have, QPR are very much a special case given their financial backing outside of the Premiership is very unusual, at least at the moment.
2) Yes, it will. Looks at Rangers in Scotland, they have basically robbed another club of a promotion opportunity every season they've sat outside the Premiership. It is also insulting to clubs that will never escape the Conference or the lower rungs of the Football League due to the fact the club will never be financially successful enough to aspire higher, that their league is a 'punishment'. If I supported Dover Athletic, I'd know my club in never going to have meaningful success outside of the Conference but it shouldn't be somewhere to stick a club that has cheated or broken the rules.
3) I was talking about a points deduction when they eventually get relegated (i.e. if QPR don't pay their fine and spend 3 years in the Premiership before being relegated, they'd start their first season in the Championship with minus 30 points).
What if the Conference refuse to have them? Or whoever adjudicates decisions regarding the Conference make them start from the lowest possible rung in the Conference?
Same situation with Newco Rangers, sending them to the bottom of the professional football pyramid was a massive cock-up and didn't have the desired effect. Rangers are still pulling in the biggest crowds in Scottish football but now Scotland has tumbled down the UEFA rankings meaning Celtic have to play Dynamo Bogbrush or Grasshopper Workmate in order to qualify for anything and all the clubs Rangers have to complete against on the way back up have to play an opponent well above their standard in what ought to be a balanced league (indeed, in case anyone actually forgot, the League system exists so clubs only play other teams that are equivalent in standard as they are, not as a punishment for top flight teams when they need a slap).
Can't see it happening to be honest because no one in English footballing is either as stupid or has large enough balls to do to QPR what the SFA did to Rangers. I imagine QPR's owners with grease some palms and they'll get slapped with something resembling a punishment (transfer embargo or wage cap or something that could probably got around quite easily).
Good points. However, as Katrien says in the article, if nothing is done then that just gives licence for any other club to ignore any financial rules that are in play, and cue mayhem.
Granted, but clubs that spaff millions more than they're allowed are few and far between in the Football League. The Football League has a bigger problem with clubs not making any money at all and going insolvent than clubs owned by billionaires buying promotion. I'm not saying QPR shouldn't be punished in some way, I just think that:
a) Sending them to a different part of the football pyramid is a pointless punishment because it hurts other clubs more than the offending club and it undermines the reason why we have a league system in the first place (i.e. to ensure clubs are competing against teams on a similar level). Financial punishment (e.g. fining their parachute payments, transfer embargo, wage cap etc.) are more appropriate. If I was going to make a threat to QPR, I'd threaten them with a 10-point deduction for each year they stayed in the Premiership and didn't pay their fine until their eventual return to the Championship. It'd certainly send a message home and it would certainly make an interesting situation where QPR's metaphorical balls were left dangling over an increasingly more vicious pit of crocodiles.
b) QPR will likely escape any punishment as they're rich enough to grease the right palms at the FA and Football League and the Football League likely don't have the cojones to stick to their guns on this one.
There will be plenty of clubs that have "spaffed" millions more than they're allowed.
Sending QPR to the conference will NOT hurt other clubs, more than QPR.
The Football League cannot deduct points off Premier League teams.
1) Not on the scale that QPR have, QPR are very much a special case given their financial backing outside of the Premiership is very unusual, at least at the moment.
2) Yes, it will. Looks at Rangers in Scotland, they have basically robbed another club of a promotion opportunity every season they've sat outside the Premiership. It is also insulting to clubs that will never escape the Conference or the lower rungs of the Football League due to the fact the club will never be financially successful enough to aspire higher, that their league is a 'punishment'. If I supported Dover Athletic, I'd know my club in never going to have meaningful success outside of the Conference but it shouldn't be somewhere to stick a club that has cheated or broken the rules.
3) I was talking about a points deduction when they eventually get relegated (i.e. if QPR don't pay their fine and spend 3 years in the Premiership before being relegated, they'd start their first season in the Championship with minus 30 points).
1) I agree with relation to scale, but that wasn't what you said. There will be plenty and I mean plenty, of teams that will have breached FFP.
2) We'll have to agree to disagree, on this as well. Surely, your argument that Rangers are denying a promotion opportunity, is negated by the fact that teams moved up already, because Rangers were demoted.
3) I now understand your point, but if QPR last 15 years in The Prem, they will start the season on -150 points. Personally I feel a better alternative would be required.
Anyway, I'll leave it there, before people misconstrue our conversation as a row :-)
What if the Conference refuse to have them? Or whoever adjudicates decisions regarding the Conference make them start from the lowest possible rung in the Conference?
Same situation with Newco Rangers, sending them to the bottom of the professional football pyramid was a massive cock-up and didn't have the desired effect. Rangers are still pulling in the biggest crowds in Scottish football but now Scotland has tumbled down the UEFA rankings meaning Celtic have to play Dynamo Bogbrush or Grasshopper Workmate in order to qualify for anything and all the clubs Rangers have to complete against on the way back up have to play an opponent well above their standard in what ought to be a balanced league (indeed, in case anyone actually forgot, the League system exists so clubs only play other teams that are equivalent in standard as they are, not as a punishment for top flight teams when they need a slap).
Can't see it happening to be honest because no one in English footballing is either as stupid or has large enough balls to do to QPR what the SFA did to Rangers. I imagine QPR's owners with grease some palms and they'll get slapped with something resembling a punishment (transfer embargo or wage cap or something that could probably got around quite easily).
Good points. However, as Katrien says in the article, if nothing is done then that just gives licence for any other club to ignore any financial rules that are in play, and cue mayhem.
Granted, but clubs that spaff millions more than they're allowed are few and far between in the Football League. The Football League has a bigger problem with clubs not making any money at all and going insolvent than clubs owned by billionaires buying promotion. I'm not saying QPR shouldn't be punished in some way, I just think that:
a) Sending them to a different part of the football pyramid is a pointless punishment because it hurts other clubs more than the offending club and it undermines the reason why we have a league system in the first place (i.e. to ensure clubs are competing against teams on a similar level). Financial punishment (e.g. fining their parachute payments, transfer embargo, wage cap etc.) are more appropriate. If I was going to make a threat to QPR, I'd threaten them with a 10-point deduction for each year they stayed in the Premiership and didn't pay their fine until their eventual return to the Championship. It'd certainly send a message home and it would certainly make an interesting situation where QPR's metaphorical balls were left dangling over an increasingly more vicious pit of crocodiles.
b) QPR will likely escape any punishment as they're rich enough to grease the right palms at the FA and Football League and the Football League likely don't have the cojones to stick to their guns on this one.
There will be plenty of clubs that have "spaffed" millions more than they're allowed.
Sending QPR to the conference will NOT hurt other clubs, more than QPR.
The Football League cannot deduct points off Premier League teams.
1) Not on the scale that QPR have, QPR are very much a special case given their financial backing outside of the Premiership is very unusual, at least at the moment.
2) Yes, it will. Looks at Rangers in Scotland, they have basically robbed another club of a promotion opportunity every season they've sat outside the Premiership. It is also insulting to clubs that will never escape the Conference or the lower rungs of the Football League due to the fact the club will never be financially successful enough to aspire higher, that their league is a 'punishment'. If I supported Dover Athletic, I'd know my club in never going to have meaningful success outside of the Conference but it shouldn't be somewhere to stick a club that has cheated or broken the rules.
3) I was talking about a points deduction when they eventually get relegated (i.e. if QPR don't pay their fine and spend 3 years in the Premiership before being relegated, they'd start their first season in the Championship with minus 30 points).
1) I agree with relation to scale, but that wasn't what you said. There will be plenty and I mean plenty, of teams that will have breached FFP.
2) We'll have to agree to disagree, on this as well. Surely, your argument that Rangers are denying a promotion opportunity, is negated by the fact that teams moved up already, because Rangers were demoted.
3) I now understand your point, but if QPR last 15 years in The Prem, they will start the season on -150 points. Personally I feel a better alternative would be required.
Anyway, I'll leave it there, before people misconstrue our conversation as a row :-)
Granted on all points, but on point 2 do you share my concern that lower divisions should not be used as 'punishments' for clubs that cheat as it demeans clubs who cannot realistically expect to achieve higher than Conference football? These are extremely lazy punishments that cause a lot of unintended distortion. If QPR came back down this season and Charlton stayed in the Championship, I wouldn't mind QPR staying in our division as long as they are punished appropriately (e.g. huge fine, transfer embargo, points deduction etc.).
Sorry Fiiish, I don't get your last point. Why should't a punishment be lazy (whatever that means)? And why might you consider fines, transfer embargoes or points deductions any less lazy that relegation to lower divisions?
What if the Conference refuse to have them? Or whoever adjudicates decisions regarding the Conference make them start from the lowest possible rung in the Conference?
Same situation with Newco Rangers, sending them to the bottom of the professional football pyramid was a massive cock-up and didn't have the desired effect. Rangers are still pulling in the biggest crowds in Scottish football but now Scotland has tumbled down the UEFA rankings meaning Celtic have to play Dynamo Bogbrush or Grasshopper Workmate in order to qualify for anything and all the clubs Rangers have to complete against on the way back up have to play an opponent well above their standard in what ought to be a balanced league (indeed, in case anyone actually forgot, the League system exists so clubs only play other teams that are equivalent in standard as they are, not as a punishment for top flight teams when they need a slap).
Can't see it happening to be honest because no one in English footballing is either as stupid or has large enough balls to do to QPR what the SFA did to Rangers. I imagine QPR's owners with grease some palms and they'll get slapped with something resembling a punishment (transfer embargo or wage cap or something that could probably got around quite easily).
Good points. However, as Katrien says in the article, if nothing is done then that just gives licence for any other club to ignore any financial rules that are in play, and cue mayhem.
Granted, but clubs that spaff millions more than they're allowed are few and far between in the Football League. The Football League has a bigger problem with clubs not making any money at all and going insolvent than clubs owned by billionaires buying promotion. I'm not saying QPR shouldn't be punished in some way, I just think that:
a) Sending them to a different part of the football pyramid is a pointless punishment because it hurts other clubs more than the offending club and it undermines the reason why we have a league system in the first place (i.e. to ensure clubs are competing against teams on a similar level). Financial punishment (e.g. fining their parachute payments, transfer embargo, wage cap etc.) are more appropriate. If I was going to make a threat to QPR, I'd threaten them with a 10-point deduction for each year they stayed in the Premiership and didn't pay their fine until their eventual return to the Championship. It'd certainly send a message home and it would certainly make an interesting situation where QPR's metaphorical balls were left dangling over an increasingly more vicious pit of crocodiles.
b) QPR will likely escape any punishment as they're rich enough to grease the right palms at the FA and Football League and the Football League likely don't have the cojones to stick to their guns on this one.
There will be plenty of clubs that have "spaffed" millions more than they're allowed.
Sending QPR to the conference will NOT hurt other clubs, more than QPR.
The Football League cannot deduct points off Premier League teams.
1) Not on the scale that QPR have, QPR are very much a special case given their financial backing outside of the Premiership is very unusual, at least at the moment.
2) Yes, it will. Looks at Rangers in Scotland, they have basically robbed another club of a promotion opportunity every season they've sat outside the Premiership. It is also insulting to clubs that will never escape the Conference or the lower rungs of the Football League due to the fact the club will never be financially successful enough to aspire higher, that their league is a 'punishment'. If I supported Dover Athletic, I'd know my club in never going to have meaningful success outside of the Conference but it shouldn't be somewhere to stick a club that has cheated or broken the rules.
3) I was talking about a points deduction when they eventually get relegated (i.e. if QPR don't pay their fine and spend 3 years in the Premiership before being relegated, they'd start their first season in the Championship with minus 30 points).
1) I agree with relation to scale, but that wasn't what you said. There will be plenty and I mean plenty, of teams that will have breached FFP.
2) We'll have to agree to disagree, on this as well. Surely, your argument that Rangers are denying a promotion opportunity, is negated by the fact that teams moved up already, because Rangers were demoted.
3) I now understand your point, but if QPR last 15 years in The Prem, they will start the season on -150 points. Personally I feel a better alternative would be required.
Anyway, I'll leave it there, before people misconstrue our conversation as a row :-)
Granted on all points, but on point 2 do you share my concern that lower divisions should not be used as 'punishments' for clubs that cheat as it demeans clubs who cannot realistically expect to achieve higher than Conference football? These are extremely lazy punishments that cause a lot of unintended distortion. If QPR came back down this season and Charlton stayed in the Championship, I wouldn't mind QPR staying in our division as long as they are punished appropriately (e.g. huge fine, transfer embargo, points deduction etc.).
I'm afraid I don't think that relegating QPR to the Conference demeans Conference teams.
What if the Conference refuse to have them? Or whoever adjudicates decisions regarding the Conference make them start from the lowest possible rung in the Conference?
Same situation with Newco Rangers, sending them to the bottom of the professional football pyramid was a massive cock-up and didn't have the desired effect. Rangers are still pulling in the biggest crowds in Scottish football but now Scotland has tumbled down the UEFA rankings meaning Celtic have to play Dynamo Bogbrush or Grasshopper Workmate in order to qualify for anything and all the clubs Rangers have to complete against on the way back up have to play an opponent well above their standard in what ought to be a balanced league (indeed, in case anyone actually forgot, the League system exists so clubs only play other teams that are equivalent in standard as they are, not as a punishment for top flight teams when they need a slap).
Can't see it happening to be honest because no one in English footballing is either as stupid or has large enough balls to do to QPR what the SFA did to Rangers. I imagine QPR's owners with grease some palms and they'll get slapped with something resembling a punishment (transfer embargo or wage cap or something that could probably got around quite easily).
Good points. However, as Katrien says in the article, if nothing is done then that just gives licence for any other club to ignore any financial rules that are in play, and cue mayhem.
Granted, but clubs that spaff millions more than they're allowed are few and far between in the Football League. The Football League has a bigger problem with clubs not making any money at all and going insolvent than clubs owned by billionaires buying promotion. I'm not saying QPR shouldn't be punished in some way, I just think that:
a) Sending them to a different part of the football pyramid is a pointless punishment because it hurts other clubs more than the offending club and it undermines the reason why we have a league system in the first place (i.e. to ensure clubs are competing against teams on a similar level). Financial punishment (e.g. fining their parachute payments, transfer embargo, wage cap etc.) are more appropriate. If I was going to make a threat to QPR, I'd threaten them with a 10-point deduction for each year they stayed in the Premiership and didn't pay their fine until their eventual return to the Championship. It'd certainly send a message home and it would certainly make an interesting situation where QPR's metaphorical balls were left dangling over an increasingly more vicious pit of crocodiles.
b) QPR will likely escape any punishment as they're rich enough to grease the right palms at the FA and Football League and the Football League likely don't have the cojones to stick to their guns on this one.
There will be plenty of clubs that have "spaffed" millions more than they're allowed.
Sending QPR to the conference will NOT hurt other clubs, more than QPR.
The Football League cannot deduct points off Premier League teams.
1) Not on the scale that QPR have, QPR are very much a special case given their financial backing outside of the Premiership is very unusual, at least at the moment.
2) Yes, it will. Looks at Rangers in Scotland, they have basically robbed another club of a promotion opportunity every season they've sat outside the Premiership. It is also insulting to clubs that will never escape the Conference or the lower rungs of the Football League due to the fact the club will never be financially successful enough to aspire higher, that their league is a 'punishment'. If I supported Dover Athletic, I'd know my club in never going to have meaningful success outside of the Conference but it shouldn't be somewhere to stick a club that has cheated or broken the rules.
3) I was talking about a points deduction when they eventually get relegated (i.e. if QPR don't pay their fine and spend 3 years in the Premiership before being relegated, they'd start their first season in the Championship with minus 30 points).
1) I agree with relation to scale, but that wasn't what you said. There will be plenty and I mean plenty, of teams that will have breached FFP.
2) We'll have to agree to disagree, on this as well. Surely, your argument that Rangers are denying a promotion opportunity, is negated by the fact that teams moved up already, because Rangers were demoted.
3) I now understand your point, but if QPR last 15 years in The Prem, they will start the season on -150 points. Personally I feel a better alternative would be required.
Anyway, I'll leave it there, before people misconstrue our conversation as a row :-)
Granted on all points, but on point 2 do you share my concern that lower divisions should not be used as 'punishments' for clubs that cheat as it demeans clubs who cannot realistically expect to achieve higher than Conference football? These are extremely lazy punishments that cause a lot of unintended distortion. If QPR came back down this season and Charlton stayed in the Championship, I wouldn't mind QPR staying in our division as long as they are punished appropriately (e.g. huge fine, transfer embargo, points deduction etc.).
I'm afraid I don't think that relegating QPR to the Conference demeans Conference teams.
In that situation, I would guess that each Conference team would relish 2 good paydays each season - and their players get the chance to play at Loftus Road.
"The increasing gap between the wealth of English and Italian club football has been revealed in a new survey which shows that Ashley Cole took a £6 million pay-cut to join Roma and AC Milan’s wage-bill is now below Queens Park Rangers’ most recently published figure."
The whole article is pretty shocking (for example Pogba is only on 23,000pw):
3) I now understand your point, but if QPR last 15 years in The Prem, they will start the season on -150 points. Personally I feel a better alternative would be required.
Anyway, I'll leave it there, before people misconstrue our conversation as a row :-)
Like this, if they're docked -150 points then they're a guarantee to go down to League 2 in successive seasons and this will be a huge impact on their financial viability and/or survival, so paying up is the lesser of the two evils. However like others I. Simply cannot see the Football League having the balls to do this, the first letter from a top legal firm on behalf of QPR will leave them sh!tting in their pants...
The football leagye needs to grow some now, more than ever, and carry out its threat in accordance with FFP. I am sure that most fans will support this rather than a club been pardoned because they are of a certain size.
FFP is a bit of a mystery to me, however I noticed that Manchester City have to post a reduced list of players eligible for the Champions League because of FFP.
FFP is a bit of a mystery to me, however I noticed that Manchester City have to post a reduced list of players eligible for the Champions League because of FFP.
European FFP has decreed that "sponsorship" deals to PSG and Mam City are simply hidden subsidies to reduce losses...can't remember PSG sanction but yes, Man City only allowed squad of 21. Championship FFP has been enacted but the first round of filing and possible sanctions is not until December 1. A number of high spending championship clubs threatened legal action (not yet happened) and some clubs proposed rule changes in May to increase limits but none secured two thirds majority required. That means that CAFC and eight other clubs can defend the rules which include reducing loss limits every year. We will have to see who fails, whether any club is challenged on their numbers and what sanctions are applied / challenged.
Teams should be docked 10 points for each of two seasons.
Or, if they have been promoted from the Championship, then their punishment should be, on returning to the Championship, they forfeit their parachute payments, which instead are distributed equally among the remaining 23 Championship teams.
I have no sympathy whatsoever with Queens Park Rangers and I strongly believe that the new Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules need to be enforced. However, I'm afraid that the Football League Championship have got this completely wrong. It's not easy to understand quite what they had in mind when they drafted the part of the new rule book which is now impacting Rangers.
As we know, the objective of FFP in the Championship is to limit losses at all Clubs and, as result, stop the arms race which has taken the aggregate level of debts at a Championship Clubs to above £1 billion. All being well we'll see the new rules being enforced in January with Clubs in breach being subject to a transfer embargo.
However, whatever their losses in the season just ended, i.e. 2013/14, Reading and Wigan Athletic, the two Clubs relegated from the Premier League the previous season, along with QPR, will not be subject to sanctions. This is because the rules were designed to give them one year to adjust to life in the Championship, in recognition of the considerable difficulty involved in reducing a Premier League cost base.
Had QPR not won promotion they would also have been exempt, notwithstanding their outsized FFP loss. They are being punished not simply because they made a sizeable loss, but because they made that loss and were promoted. Had they lost the Play-Off final there would have been no fine to pay and no transfer embargo to face either.
This seems somewhat perverse to me and smacks of opportunism by the Championship Clubs. While recognising the need for a grace period they nevertheless saw an opportunity to raise money at the expense of any Club managing to win promotion back to the Premier League at the first attempt. The fact that the original intention was to share the spoils between the remaining Championship Clubs lends weight to this interpretation.
It might be argued that the intention of the FFP rules as far as relegated Clubs are concerned is simply to ensure that once in the Championship they begin to adjust their cost base. If Reading and/or Wigan have not yet done so then they will likely pay the price this season, either as a result of the need to quickly and radically reduce their cost bases, through a transfer embargo in January 2016 or a fine if they are promoted. This seems entirely fair. Moreover, it might then be seen as unreasonable for Clubs promoted back to the Premier League at the first time of asking to avoid any sanction or inconvenience if they have made no effort to begin to comply with FFP.
However, if this was the reason the rules included a provision to sanction Clubs in QPR's position, then the fine should reflect not the entirety of their loss over the FFP limit, but the extent to which they have clearly failed to begin to adjust their cost base.
It's not at all clear how such a fine might be calibrated, but if Tony Fernandes wants to strike a negotiated settlement to mitigate future risk this might be a very valid line of argument. Most importantly, if would probably ensure that the penalty was much more manageable and reasonable. As it stands the likely fine is ludicrous given the context.
So these fines go to the clubs in European competition but qprs fine (if made to pay - which they obviously should) would go to charity, not clubs in the competition.
@Mundell Fleming the devil is in the detail! One proposal rejected in May was that there should be live assessments of clubs current finances, ie, not waiting until accounts filed six months after the season. I still maintain clubs not willing to play within rules (or pay penalties) should simply be excluded! The collective debts of the Championship clubs will soon drop as seriously indebted clubs either return to the Premier league or fall over. This handful of clubs, together with a handful of agents and others have seriously inflated the cost of running a Championship club since the 90s. Fortunately the majority have seen sense. As FFP evolves there is a case for abandoning the one year exemption. There may be as many as 10-12 championship clubs with parachute payments - why should they get a soft ride when their first year payment is higher than CAFC turnover?!
So these fines go to the clubs in European competition but qprs fine (if made to pay - which they obviously should) would go to charity, not clubs in the competition.
Disgrace.
I suppose the difference is that for the likes of Manure, £200k makes little difference. If Charlton got £2million or something like that redistributed from QPR, it would be more significant. £200k for some of the minnows of the Europa League, if that's what they will get, will be useful to them, but they're no threat to the Manures or Citeh.
Have just seen Harry on Sky News from his weekly press conference. Asked about FFP his response was along the lines of..."what's financial fair play...I'm playing Man United this weekend...wouldn't it be fair if I got to spend £200m, like they have, before that game...I don't get this"
That, Harry, is exactly the point. You don't get it. And that's why all your former clubs, bar Spurs where Levy knew what you were like, are or have been in the proverbials!!
A absolute twonk of the highest order, who really should be taking life easy at one of Her Maj's establishments!!
So these fines go to the clubs in European competition but qprs fine (if made to pay - which they obviously should) would go to charity, not clubs in the competition.
Disgrace.
I suppose the difference is that for the likes of Manure, £200k makes little difference. If Charlton got £2million or something like that redistributed from QPR, it would be more significant. £200k for some of the minnows of the Europa League, if that's what they will get, will be useful to them, but they're no threat to the Manures or Citeh.
Yeah I get that but still think it's not on, it's just the principle
I feel very strongly that QPR should be brought to book over what is after all cheating.
Will the FL win? Of course not. Come March time when QPR have sacked Harry and are 10 points a drift at the bottom uncle Tony will threaten the FL with the High court and they will back down quicker than an England World cup exit. Where does that leave FFP?
A rule that only applies to those who can't afford smart lawyers, although most of those clubs will comply anyway.
Actually no. The rules were agreed by the vast majority of club chairman at the time and require a 2/3 majority to change. I can't see how QPR can be re accepted back into the Championship (if relegated) while refusing to accept the rules. I did some analysis with @Mundell Fleming earlier this year and we think that Leicester and QPR will fail and a number of other clubs are borderline. Apart from Forest and Cardiff, clubs are changing their behaviour. I don't know the formal rules of the league but the CAFC CEO is a competition law specialist. I would have thought CAFC and other clubs will hold firm on the integrity of the competition. Let's see how it pans out for the January window?
Nothing will happen to QPR or anyone else. Nothing remotely meaningful anyway.
I would suggest that the supporters Trust should work with CAFC and trusts of other compliant clubs to lobby on this. Given that the shadow minister of sport represents a constituency just a few miles from the Valley one can see how an alignment of parties interested in sustainable football might gather some momentum.
Comments
Sending QPR to the conference will NOT hurt other clubs, more than QPR.
The Football League cannot deduct points off Premier League teams.
2) Yes, it will. Looks at Rangers in Scotland, they have basically robbed another club of a promotion opportunity every season they've sat outside the Premiership. It is also insulting to clubs that will never escape the Conference or the lower rungs of the Football League due to the fact the club will never be financially successful enough to aspire higher, that their league is a 'punishment'. If I supported Dover Athletic, I'd know my club in never going to have meaningful success outside of the Conference but it shouldn't be somewhere to stick a club that has cheated or broken the rules.
3) I was talking about a points deduction when they eventually get relegated (i.e. if QPR don't pay their fine and spend 3 years in the Premiership before being relegated, they'd start their first season in the Championship with minus 30 points).
2) We'll have to agree to disagree, on this as well. Surely, your argument that Rangers are denying a promotion opportunity, is negated by the fact that teams moved up already, because Rangers were demoted.
3) I now understand your point, but if QPR last 15 years in The Prem, they will start the season on -150 points.
Personally I feel a better alternative would be required.
Anyway, I'll leave it there, before people misconstrue our conversation as a row :-)
(It'll never happen! :-( )
The whole article is pretty shocking (for example Pogba is only on 23,000pw):
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/serie-a/11085952/Queens-Park-Rangers-wage-bill-bigger-than-AC-Milan-as-survey-shows-financial-gap-between-Serie-A-and-Premier-League.html
Championship FFP has been enacted but the first round of filing and possible sanctions is not until December 1. A number of high spending championship clubs threatened legal action (not yet happened) and some clubs proposed rule changes in May to increase limits but none secured two thirds majority required. That means that CAFC and eight other clubs can defend the rules which include reducing loss limits every year.
We will have to see who fails, whether any club is challenged on their numbers and what sanctions are applied / challenged.
Or, if they have been promoted from the Championship, then their punishment should be, on returning to the Championship, they forfeit their parachute payments, which instead are distributed equally among the remaining 23 Championship teams.
As we know, the objective of FFP in the Championship is to limit losses at all Clubs and, as result, stop the arms race which has taken the aggregate level of debts at a Championship Clubs to above £1 billion. All being well we'll see the new rules being enforced in January with Clubs in breach being subject to a transfer embargo.
However, whatever their losses in the season just ended, i.e. 2013/14, Reading and Wigan Athletic, the two Clubs relegated from the Premier League the previous season, along with QPR, will not be subject to sanctions. This is because the rules were designed to give them one year to adjust to life in the Championship, in recognition of the considerable difficulty involved in reducing a Premier League cost base.
Had QPR not won promotion they would also have been exempt, notwithstanding their outsized FFP loss. They are being punished not simply because they made a sizeable loss, but because they made that loss and were promoted. Had they lost the Play-Off final there would have been no fine to pay and no transfer embargo to face either.
This seems somewhat perverse to me and smacks of opportunism by the Championship Clubs. While recognising the need for a grace period they nevertheless saw an opportunity to raise money at the expense of any Club managing to win promotion back to the Premier League at the first attempt. The fact that the original intention was to share the spoils between the remaining Championship Clubs lends weight to this interpretation.
It might be argued that the intention of the FFP rules as far as relegated Clubs are concerned is simply to ensure that once in the Championship they begin to adjust their cost base. If Reading and/or Wigan have not yet done so then they will likely pay the price this season, either as a result of the need to quickly and radically reduce their cost bases, through a transfer embargo in January 2016 or a fine if they are promoted. This seems entirely fair. Moreover, it might then be seen as unreasonable for Clubs promoted back to the Premier League at the first time of asking to avoid any sanction or inconvenience if they have made no effort to begin to comply with FFP.
However, if this was the reason the rules included a provision to sanction Clubs in QPR's position, then the fine should reflect not the entirety of their loss over the FFP limit, but the extent to which they have clearly failed to begin to adjust their cost base.
It's not at all clear how such a fine might be calibrated, but if Tony Fernandes wants to strike a negotiated settlement to mitigate future risk this might be a very valid line of argument. Most importantly, if would probably ensure that the penalty was much more manageable and reasonable. As it stands the likely fine is ludicrous given the context.
So these fines go to the clubs in European competition but qprs fine (if made to pay - which they obviously should) would go to charity, not clubs in the competition.
Disgrace.
One proposal rejected in May was that there should be live assessments of clubs current finances, ie, not waiting until accounts filed six months after the season.
I still maintain clubs not willing to play within rules (or pay penalties) should simply be excluded!
The collective debts of the Championship clubs will soon drop as seriously indebted clubs either return to the Premier league or fall over.
This handful of clubs, together with a handful of agents and others have seriously inflated the cost of running a Championship club since the 90s. Fortunately the majority have seen sense.
As FFP evolves there is a case for abandoning the one year exemption. There may be as many as 10-12 championship clubs with parachute payments - why should they get a soft ride when their first year payment is higher than CAFC turnover?!
That, Harry, is exactly the point. You don't get it. And that's why all your former clubs, bar Spurs where Levy knew what you were like, are or have been in the proverbials!!
A absolute twonk of the highest order, who really should be taking life easy at one of Her Maj's establishments!!
Will the FL win? Of course not. Come March time when QPR have sacked Harry and are 10 points a drift at the bottom uncle Tony will threaten the FL with the High court and they will back down quicker than an England World cup exit. Where does that leave FFP?
A rule that only applies to those who can't afford smart lawyers, although most of those clubs will comply anyway.
Apart from Forest and Cardiff, clubs are changing their behaviour.
I don't know the formal rules of the league but the CAFC CEO is a competition law specialist. I would have thought CAFC and other clubs will hold firm on the integrity of the competition.
Let's see how it pans out for the January window?
Given that the shadow minister of sport represents a constituency just a few miles from the Valley one can see how an alignment of parties interested in sustainable football might gather some momentum.