Easy mate - we just go back to the spend what you like days i.e. like when Liverpool and United were able to spend the most money in their glory quests and, surprise, surprise, win a lot of stuff ... just be a few additional players around now, with all these billionaire owners ... what we currently have is smoke and mirrors... but the underlying principle is still there ... proven by the emergence and success of Chelsea and now Citeh ... FFP was supposed to protect vulnerable clubs from going out of business ... that could be more easily achieved by just filtering more money down from the Prem TV deals etc , etc ...
Personally I don't see why lestah should get any of the money the premier league teams generate. **** off innit, poncing championship scum
difference being us and Utd had money to spend by earning it not because a foreign billionaire/state pumps it in .
What others have pointed at is also a nonsense. Why is the system so arbitrary and subjective? Who sits there deciding that a breach isn't bad enough for 10 points, but 6 points is about right? Do they pick a number out of a hat? Unless there are clearly defined guidelines outlining action and consequence, there is no deterrent to stop a club taking a risk. I think this is exactly what Chelsea gambled when they breached the law by signing multiple under 18s to senior contracts. There was no clear precedent and they appealed the subjective one that was ultimately applied. They got a slap on the wrist, a transfer embargo for a couple of windows, but the net gain was an exponential growth in the standard, reach and reputation of their academy and they have since gone on to profit close to £200m from selling home grown talent. So in other words, it was probably worth the risk. City have done the same. They'll get a slap on the wrist, maybe a points deduction, and will still come home from the hearing to a trophy room overflowing with awards. It was worth it. And once you've set a precedent for varying levels of interpretation which are only magnified by the appeals process, any subsequent action against other clubs will inherently be held up objectively against a decision that was basically subjective. It boggles the mind how illogical the whole thing is, but then again these are the same people who think VAR is an improvement so what do I know?
I think more money is going to filter down next season with the new tv deal that has been done with SKY,.... https://www.sportspromedia.com/news...ts-deal-sky-sports-2024-29-saturday-blackout/ The five-year domestic deal for the organising body for the second, third and fourth tiers of English soccer, which is made up of guaranteed payments of UK£895 million (US$1.1 billion) and UK£40 million (US$50.5 million) in marketing rights, will begin in 2024/25 and run to the end of the 2028/29 season.9 May 2023 . https://www.efl.com/news/2023/may/efl-announces-landmark-broadcasting-deal-with-sky-sports/
There was also a team omitted that got caught cheating in the second tier too However I am relatively confident that was deliberate
Liverpool bought their way out of the 2nd division in the 50’s by spending huge sums of money and then they carried on spending their way to success in the top flight. Until that point Liverpool were bang average and not even the biggest club on Merseyside.
The thing is Saf, for all of Fosse’s tears, other clubs could have done the same. Liverpool and Utd didn’t have exclusive rights to spend money, whilst others watched on. TBH it’s a straw-man argument.
4 academy lads starting against Bournemouth tonight in the Cup... another 3 on the bench ... da yoof!!!!
... it's called a wind-up ya soft tart ... didn't expect you biting mind... Why would I be crying? ... Prem title and FA Cup in the last decade, despite the mega rich throwing billions and billions at it ...