That comment was to Proud, regarding Man City being threatened with exclusion from the Champions League if they continued to avoid the fair play rules.
We lost £7million last year, so presumably this won't have a massive impact on the way we're being run at the moment anyway will it?
What's going to stop some Sheik going in to Man City club shop and buying a shirt for £40m? The consumer is allowed to pay what he thinks a shirt is worth to him.
Just a thought, but has anyone else wondered whether this is all open to a legal challenge by the players in the same way as the Bosman ruling? When you think about it this will have a direct effect on player's wages, signing on fees, bonuses etc because the FA are implementing rules that will prevent some clubs that can afford to pay high wages etc from paying them. I can't imagine this happening in any other industry because it goes directly against the free market where each individual has the right to offer their services at the best price they can get. Imagine if a cook was on £X wages and he wanted to better himself, but he found that the most any other restaurant could offer was the same £X because the gastronomic board of control had imposed financial regulations on them. I think there's a fair chance this could be blown out of the water.
The likely way to close the loophole is for "related sources" of income to be excluded from the calculations. £22M last year. This year should be less, but if we offloaded the 3 big earners before the end of July quirks in the accounting might make it more (it would move a lot of expense from next season into this season). Next season we're supposed to be looking to break even so we'll be complying with the rules from the outset, it's everyone else around us that will have to adjust, I think Bristol City have been reporting over £10M a year in losses so they'll need to trim £4M off their costs if they haven't already done so.
Under what law? It doesn't impose any limit on an individual's earnings, and the cumulative wage bill restrictions are voluntary, if a club doesn't want to follow the rules they are welcome to withdraw from the competitions in question and form their own.
not if it has a recommended retail price ticket attached. if every shirt was ticketed at £40 million then maybe
It will indirectly impose a limit on player's wages because the clubs will inevitably have less money that they are allowed to spend, so they won't be willing to pay the high wages we have seen. Your last sentence is not realistic, club's won't want to form there own league so they will feel obliged to follow these rules.
In every other field, if a business was being run at an annual loss of £6m then that business would be wound up. Your hypothetical chef would therefore would not be able to move to the new restaurant as it would be in liquidation
Financial Fair Play is a pathetic compromise. Either go the whole hog and set wage/transfer caps etc... or leave football to the free market. Personally, I think that it should be left to the free market. All we are getting with FFP is a poor attempt to please people who are moaning about football being "out of control", whilst at the same time, maintaining the status quo - making sure that the top clubs won't be challenged by another Man City, booking themselves a permanent seat amongst the elite clubs.
"....withdraw from the competitions in question and form their own....." could this be the beginning of the end for the Murdoch League? I sincerely hope so!
Surely they already have done ? £51m by the end of this season i would suggest. Just substitute the word sponsorship for the words Paid Off Debts.!!! Splitting hairs i know. The Allams investment so far has been far more than generous.!!!
The rules don't break any player's rights as an individual as there is no individual limit in place. Doesn't Superleague have a rule about them only being allowed to have 20 players earning more than £20k? My last sentence is perfectly realistic, it's how the PL, and SPL formed, and there's been regular discussion about an Atlantic league involving Scottish, Dutch, and Portuguese teams (which keeps getting forgotten about because someone points out the travelling involved). If UEFA, the PL, and the FL want to say that to take part in their competitions you have to meet their rules then they're perfectly entitled to do that. They own those competitions and it's no different to a nighclub owner saying that you must wear shoes and not trainers to be allowed in, if you don't like the rules you don't have to enter, you wouldn't get to ignore that rule on the grounds they were the only nightclub in town.
I know what you're saying and I'm not saying the rules break the player's rights, I'm saying they reduce their opportunities to get the level of wages they might have got before the rules were introduced. If NB wants 6 players in the summer and Mr Allam says he only has 50% of the kitty he expected due to these rules, then NB will be tempted to go for cheaper options or ask the selling clubs and players to reduce their demands. This will happen across the board and players wages will inevitably come down proportionally. Yes the clubs have the option to start their own league but no, the fact is they won't.
Agreed. The deals of stupidity by football clubs is fast coming to an end. I dont like the penalties for failure though. Far too lax imo. They should be simple and harsh. Any club who fails to adhere is relegated down one league for a minimum of 2 years. Only tougher penalties will make sure this actually works. imo.
