Let's be fair UEFA bought the rule in to protect clubs like Ajax,the milans they want them in their competitions not a Wigan athletic or anji.

On one hand I dislike the ruling because if Chelsea for example who historically have a small fan base had no success they would not be sustainable. Say they finished 16th the stadium would not be filled each week the turnover would not be there.

On the other hand I like the fact that if a club has rich owners as long as it is not leveraged against the club let them crack on and spend. Imagine Manchester city spending 10 million on a player from Rotherham United life changing for Rotherham no problem to city.

I guess aslong as the risk is to the owner and not the club then i think it is ok however I am not too sure how that would work as obviously if an owner went bust the club is a business asset.

Oh I dunno haha.

No. Goalie technology is.

And autocorrect taking 'n's out

"aslong as the risk is to the owner and not the club"

that would have been a better rule with the same outcome in terms of protecting clubs

If a club is bought for, say 50m, the owner should be made to put another 50m into a holding account. The owner can still take interest off this 50m, but if things go wrong the money could be used to cover debt. You could make it very draconian in that if the owner buys a player over a certain amount, say 10m, he also has match this into the fund, until that player is either sold on or retires.

This way you only get owners who can actually afford to run the club, and would stop the leveraged buying that almost ruined our own club.

comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 5 hours, 16 minutes ago
This rule was supposed to provide a more level playing field, but all its actually doing is keeping the big clubs at the top, and made it virtually impossible for the smaller clubs to really challenge.....
------
It was always designed to preserve the status quo for the top clubs and prevent smaller clubs gatecrashing their party.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly

I don't think you can say United spent their way back into the top 4, OP. Di Maria and Falcao have been a disaster and Herrera, Shaw and Rojo have been dropped or injured most of the year. Daley Blind must be a good player then.

United for example were able to buy their way straight back into the top four.

You're acting like the Glazers dipped their hands into their pockets and bankrolled the club. Our spending last season was purely self generated revenue streams. And it was a huge spend because of our failure to properly strengthen the squad from 2009-2013.

comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 2 hours, 7 minutes ago

And autocorrect taking 'n's out
___________________________________

Behave! You just can't spell, you daft cut.

comment by Cousin Omar 'It was the Stuart Pearce 4 points that done em' (U11726)
posted 6 hours, 6 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 2 hours, 7 minutes ago

And autocorrect taking 'n's out
___________________________________

Behave! You just can't spell, you daft cut.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a kob

comment by LQ (U6305)
posted 16 minutes ago
Whatever you can say is irrelevant.

The deal passed that's all that matters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm sure you'd be equally indifferent if you were on the other side of it.

Dodgy club dodgy fans.

A Chelsea fan saying dodgy fans, oh the irony.

How did abramovich make his money again?

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

It was always going to kick off as soon as Chelsea showed up.

Did they arrive by tube?

comment by Mata's Left Foot - It's been a long day.. Without you my friend (U11781)
posted 7 hours, 19 minutes ago
United for example were able to buy their way straight back into the top four.

You're acting like the Glazers dipped their hands into their pockets and bankrolled the club. Our spending last season was purely self generated revenue streams. And it was a huge spend because of our failure to properly strengthen the squad from 2009-2013.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It wasn't a criticism. I was merely highlighting the fact that you were able to do so quite easily, and that under FFP, it's not an option that many other clubs have. You had a bad season and were able to spend your way out of trouble. It's what Liverpool need to do this summer, but FFP will stop us doing it to Uniteds level.

comment by The Post Nearly Man. Proper spoilt bsatard. (U1270)
posted 8 hours, 21 minutes ago
I don't think you can say United spent their way back into the top 4, OP. Di Maria and Falcao have been a disaster and Herrera, Shaw and Rojo have been dropped or injured most of the year. Daley Blind must be a good player then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're missing the point a little bit though. You were able to buy all these players without having to really sell anyone of note, so you were adding to an existing squad. When you still have Rooney and RVP to call upon, it's no disaster that Falcao didn't perform. Could you imagine the reaction if we had bought Falcao with the same outcome?

On a side note, hasn't Herrera scored you a few vital goals?

I like FFP and with Liverpool being the 8th richest club on the planet we really have no excuse.

comment by Robbing_Hoody - putting the bureaucracy into footballism since 1979 (U6374)
posted 17 minutes ago
I like FFP and with Liverpool being the 8th richest club on the planet we really have no excuse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Being the 5th richest in the PL kind of skews that argument though.....

Not really. We've spent plenty and we're a couple of wins away. It's our own fault.

The rule is a disgrace. Football should be about spending loads of money that you haven't generated through the club until you win tropheees.

I hate the idea that through great management and team continuity a club can slowly progress and make their way up the league organically without the hyperinflation of player prices and wages from sugar daddy spending - fack that.

I have no.problem with FFP myself. Let's give it time. It was always going to take time and IMO it's effects are already being felt. The financial doping clubs look like they need to sell to buy unless they win major silverware which won't happen every season. Let's see where we are in 5 years otherwise what's the point?

The prem and sky and the CL rigged the league 20 years ago and created the 'sky 4'. It was grossly unfair.

Billionaires were the only way to right that wrong. There was no competition and no real way to be competitive in that model.

Then the sky 4 and their sponsors chucked their toys out of the pram that their unfair advantage had been erased and we got FFP.

There's no difference between oil money and sky/CL money. Neither are 'earned'.

I thought the money in the EPL is split among all the clubs unlike in Spain for example?

comment by Mamba - Break it down... Ohohohohohohohoh... Now Stop! Mamba time (U1282) (U13041)
posted 4 minutes ago
I thought the money in the EPL is split among all the clubs unlike in Spain for example?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
are you on crack?

Mamba isn't that far off TKT.

EPL has a collective bargaining agreement for tv rights, Spain does not.

I think KT is reading that as 'evenly split', which it isn't. And why should it be.