QPR challenge legality of FFP

Good one pulling the mileage card, as it happens ive already racked up well over 6000 miles following Hull City this season. Doesn't mean anything.

I'd wager you're probably right, I've probably streamed 50/60 games over four premier league seasons in total. You really got me there.

Like I said means nothing. You're a premier league spectator. A Man City fan came on here with a nice set of criteria for what constitutes a real fan, using the evidence your posts on this board offer, you fall outside of it.

I'd also have another read of this thread if I were you. Your posts have accrued a total of one like, mine have two, therefore more are in agreement with me. You also didn't offer a reasoned challenge to what I'd posted, before just launching into your usual childish abusive nonsense. It's also an ironic and hypocritical accusation of yours, considering the post I made to you was basically quoting you, posting to me, I just changed the topic within.

Here's what you posted to me

Have you been stalking me?

 

Your first post in this thread;

More wind and piss from the forum tit, as if QPR are just going to drop out the league because they don't agree with one of the rules, you complete bell end.

As if that warranted a reasoned response ffs

 

I've been attending Goodison since the late 70's, so yet another incorrect assumption

Keep trying

 

Ring any bells? It pays to read properly sometimes.

You're like a cross between tickler and omega twat.

 

The difference being that I was responding to your usual tirade of abuse.

You can dish it out, but you can't take it can you love? Small man syndrome probably.

 

This was your first post on the thread, to me, completely unprovoked.

Again, being presumptuous and self righteous. Get off your high horse, you're a hypocrit and a buffoon.

I won't reply to you again, so feel free to spout as much as your usual dribble botty as you like. Someone who is around 50 years of age really should be a little more mature, wouldn't you say?

Goodnight sweetheart x

 

Niall Quinn and Gary Neville have said numerous times on Sky that somebody like Man City or QPR need to fight this because it's a winnable battle. Quinn is really clued up on the ins and outs of it from his time as Sunderland chairman and said they were promised this initiative was being proposed to stop something happening to clubs like Portsmouth - not to cap all clubs from spending to achieve their ambition.

 

I really don't see how the legal challenge is going to work.

Nobody is preventing a club from going and spending the money so there's no restriction of trade or anything taking place. They are saying that if you want to play in the FL and you spend the money there's consequences as rules of the competition. It's no more restrictive than saying you're only allowed to make 3 substitutions in a game, or that you can only name 7 subs even though you've got a squad of 25, or even limiting over 21s to a 25 man squad. These clubs aren't complaining about those restrictions.

Incidentally, did we not record an £18M loss in our promotion season? We're presumably in line for a (much smaller) fine as well.

 

I think our loss was £9.3m, totally off the top of my head.

 

Worryingly, if we add our first guesses together we'll be right.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/nov/12/hull-city-losses-premier-league-promotion

The fact we had the £18M and £9M in our heads though, maybe this has come up before and it's about £18M for the purposes of FFP with the rest being bonuses and additional transfer fees (like the first time when Marney's £500k transfer had a £500k promotion clause as well) when we got promoted. Those promotion dependent costs are excludable under FFP.

 

That's inaccurate, Ol' Senile added July to the 12/13 accounts so a load of summer signings are included in that, it's how he twisted the books to make the idiots believe we're profitable in our first prem season. Something they all gobbled up and voted yes to Hull Tigers.

 

Drama Queens Park Rangers.

Living up to the name.

 

Our accounts always ran til the end of July, it was the change to exclude it the following year that falsely showed a profit as it was for 11 months. (Ignoring the £20M(cashflow)/£5M(expense for fees and £xM wages we had go out in July 2014)

Either way though, July 2013 after promotion we only spent £6M plus whatever we paid for Sagbo, and as for the accounts that spending is split over the financial periods their contracts cover (3 or 4 in most cases*) you're only looking at maybe £2M variation.

*With July year end for a 2 year contract signed in July it would be split evenly over 12/13, 13/14, and 14/15. That's one of the reasons the change of year end to the end of June makes sense, it brings the accounting in line with when contracts are likely to run. And as you say, it's daft that previously we had summer signings counting in the accounts for the season before, but then our year end was set up before the transfer window and then FFP became a factor.

 

If that sticks and they lose the appeal then it is going to be costly.

 

the fa is the ruling body, not the football league.

 

2 and a half years for this to be sorted out, and there's still an appeal process? Christ.

 

Have they paid owt yet? How much was the fine?

 

Bloody ****ing nora. Wasn't this under previous ownership as well? If so, whoever agreed to buy them is a nut case.