You had one job, Sheffield United: spare us as much of the "Oh look, Ryan Reynolds owns Wrexham, he's so gosh darned quirky" And you failed
Looks like Chelsea really gonna push for Fernandez in the final days. Got a €120m release clause. That’ll take Boehly’s spending close to £600m if it goes through I think, lol.
When he was at Cambridge United, he was reckoned to be the highest paid player in their history. When he moved to Wrexham, it was said they more than trebled his Cambridge wage.
Will be quickly forgotten (as usual) because of the team that didn't get the red cards and even more because they lost. What will never be discussed by the media that are paid to discuss football things however, is that the number of points that Liverpool are off the top four is actually fewer than it seems, as they are going to be handed points by the officials at some point. Indeed, they already have more points than they should have.
Actually, in terms of one statistically robust measure I use (peer GD and pts) , I have the Poool about 3 pts below where I would expect them to be. Spurs similarly I have 4 pts better off And Man Utd ?? Well just file them under "taking the p*ss" .
Seriously, Boehly, there's plenty of Football Manager tutorials on Youtube telling you what you;re doing wrong
Southampton have supposedly had a £3m bid for former Fulham striker Moussa Dembele accepted. It's now up to him whether he wants to join them. He's out of contract in the summer. Not sure I'd go for that if I were in his position. Counts as homegrown and could get a better move.
Good player, when he's fit. Not done much this season, but he was banging them in last year. Adams and Ward-Prowse could do with a hand.
1. I suggest to said people that they make such wagers in the SUMMER transfer window 2. Paging Spurlock ...
Sounds like Gwen Doozi is going to Villa , thought we had seen the last of him in the Prem but it seems like he's returning to stink the place out again
This is ... er ... haven't got words: https://www.footballtransfers.com/en/teams/uk/chelsea/transfers Really not sure how you tell that Abramovich still isn't in charge. What's the difference? Anyway, main point is that it shows 47.7m incoming, 491.5 outgoing (that's Euros, so today's rate is £41.86m incoming / £431.36 outgoing, or £546.36 if they make that deal today). So how much have they actually spent? Well normal people that do finances would suspect they have a deficit of £504.5 million this season. But nooooo. This is my understanding of how it works (I know most of you would have got this by now, but just in case). The incoming is counted against the balance sheet straight away, but the outgoing is divided over the length of the contract. This is of course fantasy finance and typical of this modern world (don't get me started on short selling stocks, where you can sell stocks you don't have and buy them back when the price falls) and means this. If all the contracts are eight years (I know they're not, but let's use that as an example) they haven't spent £546.36 million, they've spent £68.29 million, so they have a (paper) deficit of "only" £26.435 million, which presumably is fine under the joke that is FFP. There is of course a risk in that they are still liable for the wages over the length of the contract. But if you sell the players (even at a loss), and take the incoming off your balance sheet straight away, you can probably keep this system going for a while. Of course you've also spent £68.29 million of next year's transfer budget already. It's a kind of footballing ponzi scheme? One day it can all implode though, but I suspect the Chelski owners (presumably like the Barca owners) assume something will happen to rescue them from this in the future. And guess what? With Abramovich they were right, they never had to pay back that loan did they? The fact that this type of accountancy is allowed just shows what a state the game is in.
And thus the true purpose of FFP is revealed in all its festering glory: A means to prevent the smaller clubs from spending so much the bigger clubs have to bail them out. It protects money, not football.
It's perfectly normal to account for spending in that way and always has been. Assets are depreciated over their expected life. If they are sold then the profit or loss is immediately charged. And short selling makes a market more efficient by making the number of participants higher than it would be if selling was restricted to those who owned shares. It is no different to borrowing money and buying a house with it in the hope that the value of the house increases faster than the value of the money.
Firstly, your fixation on Kings Rd FC IMHO is getting close to Billy-esque on the scale. The way to make FFP catch up with them is to repeatedly keep them out of the CL (this season appears to nailed on) . The revenue drain comes very quickly indeed, and no amount of "creative accounting" on transfers will prevent escape. Whether UEFA punish them severely once that moment comes, is of course an entirely different story ...
UEFA intended it to prevent PL Sugga Daddy FCs from making England dominate the CL This was proven the moment PSG won the lottery like Citeh did (the contradiction was laid bare) . If we were still dealing with the Chelsky era, I suspect that the Ukraine crisis would have made UEFA really go after them on the FFP stuff.
Yeah, no apologies though. Citeh and Chelski shouldn't exist in their current form. Sure there's plenty wrong with football, but that's no excuse not to draw the line somewhere. My line stops with these two artificially created "clubs" (soon to be joined by that team from the North East). And I hate them more than Arsenal (really). Though Arsenal have had a good go at winning back my hate by playing the rapey one.
