comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 5 minutes ago
The thing with a press is that it is a team thing. It demands a high line to compress the space. When performed effectively as a unit it doesnt demand as much effort and energy as one thinks, especially as it leads to possession which itself is less demanding.
The fact that Spurs were amongst the teams running the most (in November, the latest full stats i can find, they were top) whereas City Man Utd Arsenal are in the bottom third shows that actually the way we played lacked efficiency. Arsenal seemed to run, press and play at 100mph yet covered about 10% less distance. The lowest possession stats teams - Saints, Bournemouth, West Ham are all in the top third for distance covered.
Son is a committed player, not lazy. Within an organised press there is nothing to suggest that he is not capable of pressing effectively, typically in the opposition half where turnover will benefit him more than him picking the thing up deep in our half with his back to goal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is bang on the money!
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 29 minutes ago
Does Levy and the Tax Dodger need the money?
Do me a fekin favour
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow....you have really mastered missing the point.
Absolutely clueless!
What point!!!!!
There was no talk of fairness when Spurs became a listed company and began to branch out into gyms and sports clothes
Most professional sport is unrecognisable from what it was 50 years ago, learn to swim or prepare to drown
If I was a defender with the ball and I saw Son running at me I wouldn't be bothered in the slightest, I would just flick him away.
Gary Neville weighing in and I completely agree with him...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/65956434
There was no talk of fairness when Spurs became a listed company and began to branch out into gyms and sports clothes
===========
Why would there be?
comment by Robbing Hoody - At the end of a storm (U6374)
posted 4 hours, 42 minutes ago
I would think the government would look very foolish if the team they appointed to ensure the sale of our club hadn't taken care to cover who the owners were and who was behind them else how would they ensure that a Russian wasn't benefitting somewhere along the line.
=========
If there is one thing the Tories HATE, it's corrupti.... oh
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They have proven you can't hide it at least.
With Neves looking like he’s gonna be loaned to Newcastle there needs to be something done, they’re taking the absolute P
Let me get this right OP, you are accusing Chelsea of using the Saudi group to amass fees to counter FFP.
Do you actually realise we are selling the players at a loss. Ziyech is going for 8 mil, we paid 33 mil, Mendy we may just about get our money back.
That is some clever manipulation, selling players at a loss. Do you not think if we were doing that we would get profits on them. Give your head a wobble.
Do you think Boehly and the Clearlake consortium became millionaires by being stupid. Do you not think if they were doing that it would be so obvious, its just ridiculous and could cause issues .
The problem you have is Chelsea yet again and Sandy keeps predicting the end for us, are actually getting back inline and order.
Its jealousy on your part and also Nevilles part, he aint happy if its not Man U dominating everything.
Nevilles a joke, moaned about all the clubs getting big backers and especially Newcastle and then when its announced Man U may get the billionaire backers in saudi onboard he says and I quote " that ship has sailed " meaning hes happy with it now if it happens, pure hypocrite.
And not long ago a lot of Spurs fans, not saying all were salivating especially Sandy, total hypocrite when they heard about the super league and how much money they would have got to spend on players etc .
The post you have produced is a joke
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 59 minutes ago
What point!!!!!
There was no talk of fairness when Spurs became a listed company and began to branch out into gyms and sports clothes
Most professional sport is unrecognisable from what it was 50 years ago, learn to swim or prepare to drown
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Most clubs have learned to swim.
Not all of them view cheating as part of that.
We know where your morals sit on this one!
comment by Bridge of dreams (U8917)
posted 8 minutes ago
Let me get this right OP, you are accusing Chelsea of using the Saudi group to amass fees to counter FFP.
Do you actually realise we are selling the players at a loss. Ziyech is going for 8 mil, we paid 33 mil, Mendy we may just about get our money back.
That is some clever manipulation, selling players at a loss. Do you not think if we were doing that we would get profits on them. Give your head a wobble.
Do you think Boehly and the Clearlake consortium became millionaires by being stupid. Do you not think if they were doing that it would be so obvious, its just ridiculous and could cause issues .
The problem you have is Chelsea yet again and Sandy keeps predicting the end for us, are actually getting back inline and order.
Its jealousy on your part and also Nevilles part, he aint happy if its not Man U dominating everything.
Nevilles a joke, moaned about all the clubs getting big backers and especially Newcastle and then when its announced Man U may get the billionaire backers in saudi onboard he says and I quote " that ship has sailed " meaning hes happy with it now if it happens, pure hypocrite.
And not long ago a lot of Spurs fans, not saying all were salivating especially Sandy, total hypocrite when they heard about the super league and how much money they would have got to spend on players etc .
The post you have produced is a joke
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes I get the sentiment with regards to small fees. But you are looking to be getting anything for these players given their contracts are running out and Mendy, Kante and Ziyech between them earn close to half a million a week.
Belfast Kante at end of contract, we get NO fee.
Ziyech, we could have sold for 10 mil to PSG but paperwork screw up stopped that so now we sell at 8 mil , 2 mill less.
Mendy still 2 years on hes contract and still quite highly regarded despite issues. we may if lucky end up getting our money back.
So yet again how the hell are we pulling a fast one.
The OP article is pure BS and yet again is just trying to find something to put on Chelsea.
If I did not know better I would of thought it was another Sandy sock account,
comment by Bridge of dreams (U8917)
posted 12 minutes ago
Let me get this right OP, you are accusing Chelsea of using the Saudi group to amass fees to counter FFP.
Do you actually realise we are selling the players at a loss. Ziyech is going for 8 mil, we paid 33 mil, Mendy we may just about get our money back.
That is some clever manipulation, selling players at a loss. Do you not think if we were doing that we would get profits on them. Give your head a wobble.
Do you think Boehly and the Clearlake consortium became millionaires by being stupid. Do you not think if they were doing that it would be so obvious, its just ridiculous and could cause issues .
The problem you have is Chelsea yet again and Sandy keeps predicting the end for us, are actually getting back inline and order.
Its jealousy on your part and also Nevilles part, he aint happy if its not Man U dominating everything.
Nevilles a joke, moaned about all the clubs getting big backers and especially Newcastle and then when its announced Man U may get the billionaire backers in saudi onboard he says and I quote " that ship has sailed " meaning hes happy with it now if it happens, pure hypocrite.
And not long ago a lot of Spurs fans, not saying all were salivating especially Sandy, total hypocrite when they heard about the super league and how much money they would have got to spend on players etc .
The post you have produced is a joke
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its everything you could ever want as a selling club with players on big expensive contracts on your books adding big wage and amortisation costs to your accounts:
Given the finances of European football, they aint buyer PL players, they can barely afford a transfer fee let alone the stupid wages these guys are on. PSG wanted Ziyech in Jan, on loan. SO even money bags PSG werent interested in taking the player on permanently.
This route see CFC divested of all the financial burden of these players on massive contracts, costing the club a fortune.
comment by Bridge of dreams (U8917)
posted 1 minute ago
Belfast Kante at end of contract, we get NO fee.
Ziyech, we could have sold for 10 mil to PSG but paperwork screw up stopped that so now we sell at 8 mil , 2 mill less.
Mendy still 2 years on hes contract and still quite highly regarded despite issues. we may if lucky end up getting our money back.
So yet again how the hell are we pulling a fast one.
The OP article is pure BS and yet again is just trying to find something to put on Chelsea.
If I did not know better I would of thought it was another Sandy sock account,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You havent seen what you are getting for these players yet spo one cannot judge how much of a con it is.
As for Ziyech, PSG wanted him on loan, not to buy!
https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12800609/hakim-ziyech-paris-saint-germain-claim-chelseas-document-gaffe-scuppered-loan-move-for-winger
Do away with FFP rules and set a maximum spend limit at £300m, which includes wages and transfer fees. That would mean every club in the prem would have a fighting chance of winning something. Somehow, I don't see any of the top 7 wanting this rule.
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 10 minutes ago
comment by Bridge of dreams (U8917)
posted 12 minutes ago
Let me get this right OP, you are accusing Chelsea of using the Saudi group to amass fees to counter FFP.
Do you actually realise we are selling the players at a loss. Ziyech is going for 8 mil, we paid 33 mil, Mendy we may just about get our money back.
That is some clever manipulation, selling players at a loss. Do you not think if we were doing that we would get profits on them. Give your head a wobble.
Do you think Boehly and the Clearlake consortium became millionaires by being stupid. Do you not think if they were doing that it would be so obvious, its just ridiculous and could cause issues .
The problem you have is Chelsea yet again and Sandy keeps predicting the end for us, are actually getting back inline and order.
Its jealousy on your part and also Nevilles part, he aint happy if its not Man U dominating everything.
Nevilles a joke, moaned about all the clubs getting big backers and especially Newcastle and then when its announced Man U may get the billionaire backers in saudi onboard he says and I quote " that ship has sailed " meaning hes happy with it now if it happens, pure hypocrite.
And not long ago a lot of Spurs fans, not saying all were salivating especially Sandy, total hypocrite when they heard about the super league and how much money they would have got to spend on players etc .
The post you have produced is a joke
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its everything you could ever want as a selling club with players on big expensive contracts on your books adding big wage and amortisation costs to your accounts:
Given the finances of European football, they aint buyer PL players, they can barely afford a transfer fee let alone the stupid wages these guys are on. PSG wanted Ziyech in Jan, on loan. SO even money bags PSG werent interested in taking the player on permanently.
This route see CFC divested of all the financial burden of these players on massive contracts, costing the club a fortune.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s the point I was making Devon. Spot on. It’s like City a while back when they had loads of players they wanted to ship out but had to pay percentages of the players wages for seasons after they left just to get them off the books. Now it seems clubs don’t have this problem with their sister clubs hoovering up these types of players. And in doing so tidying up their squads, amortisation sheets and wage bills. It may not be breaking the rules by the letter of the laws. But it is I’m bad spirit and is certainly a grey area that needs looked at.
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 4 hours, 26 minutes ago
Do away with FFP rules and set a maximum spend limit at £300m, which includes wages and transfer fees. That would mean every club in the prem would have a fighting chance of winning something. Somehow, I don't see any of the top 7 wanting this rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It will also be the quickest way to run down the premeirship as a major European player.
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 4 hours, 45 minutes ago
Do away with FFP rules and set a maximum spend limit at £300m, which includes wages and transfer fees. That would mean every club in the prem would have a fighting chance of winning something. Somehow, I don't see any of the top 7 wanting this rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would business want restrictions like that?
comment by AmAngeda Postecogginkiss (U11574)
posted 13 hours, 51 minutes ago
comment by PhilspursFGR (U3278)
posted 11 hours, 10 minutes ago
I honestly think a super league is the answer. Let all the state owned clubs join the league, it can even be a completely global league. The only requirement to join is based on the owners net worth or something. Have no salary caps, spending limits, FFP etc. They'll have the pick of more or less any player in the world, they'll have some truly epic games and the football will be entertaining.
The rest of the clubs stay in their domestic leagues with appropriate financial restrictions etc and it's far more competitive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't like it, but it's clearly the direction of travel and I think it's inevitable at this point.
Others can nitpick about the geographical errors in the OP but the principle is accurate - there will soon be a subset of clubs to whom the financial rules effectively don't apply, which makes a mockery of those clubs who have attempted to be self-sustaining within FFP parameters
----------------------------------------------------------------------
FFP was written for 1 reason only, to enable those that had their nose in the trough to exclude everybody else. Anybody believing otherwise is kidding themselves.
comment by bomdia (U13941)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
comment by AmAngeda Postecogginkiss (U11574)
posted 13 hours, 51 minutes ago
comment by PhilspursFGR (U3278)
posted 11 hours, 10 minutes ago
I honestly think a super league is the answer. Let all the state owned clubs join the league, it can even be a completely global league. The only requirement to join is based on the owners net worth or something. Have no salary caps, spending limits, FFP etc. They'll have the pick of more or less any player in the world, they'll have some truly epic games and the football will be entertaining.
The rest of the clubs stay in their domestic leagues with appropriate financial restrictions etc and it's far more competitive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't like it, but it's clearly the direction of travel and I think it's inevitable at this point.
Others can nitpick about the geographical errors in the OP but the principle is accurate - there will soon be a subset of clubs to whom the financial rules effectively don't apply, which makes a mockery of those clubs who have attempted to be self-sustaining within FFP parameters
----------------------------------------------------------------------
FFP was written for 1 reason only, to enable those that had their nose in the trough to exclude everybody else. Anybody believing otherwise is kidding themselves.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Na. That's definitely a benefit for them clubs but 1. FFP has other benefits to others. And 2. It hasn't worked anyway. Spurs have increased their revenues organically so we're nearly competing with the most spendingest clubs. Newcastle.
It's okay for the PL to be the biggest spenders taking from smaller leagues but when the predator becomes prey suddenly its unfair. Total joke that.
Anyway, Saudi League will probably never fully take off like the CSL didnt. If it does then fair play, ill tune in.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 11 hours, 44 minutes ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 4 hours, 45 minutes ago
Do away with FFP rules and set a maximum spend limit at £300m, which includes wages and transfer fees. That would mean every club in the prem would have a fighting chance of winning something. Somehow, I don't see any of the top 7 wanting this rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would business want restrictions like that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because football is supposed to be a sport, where everyone/team is supposed to have a chance of competing. It clearly is not a level playing field with financially doped clubs distorting and cheating their way through the rules as they stand.
comment by Bãleš left bootecoglou (U22081)
posted 12 hours, 39 minutes ago
spendingest
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I hate you
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 5 hours, 35 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 11 hours, 44 minutes ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 4 hours, 45 minutes ago
Do away with FFP rules and set a maximum spend limit at £300m, which includes wages and transfer fees. That would mean every club in the prem would have a fighting chance of winning something. Somehow, I don't see any of the top 7 wanting this rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would business want restrictions like that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because football is supposed to be a sport, where everyone/team is supposed to have a chance of competing. It clearly is not a level playing field with financially doped clubs distorting and cheating their way through the rules as they stand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There’s never been a time where there hasn’t been “financially doped” teams. What’s changed a lot now since the change in ownership rules in the eighties is there’s a lot of owners that believe they can reap the rewards of the humungous asset growth themselves with no risk.
I’m all for a change to pre eighties ownership and distribution model and a fit for purpose FFP that looks at the balance sheet as well as the P&L.
Sign in if you want to comment
Circumventing the rules
Page 3 of 4
posted on 21/6/23
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 5 minutes ago
The thing with a press is that it is a team thing. It demands a high line to compress the space. When performed effectively as a unit it doesnt demand as much effort and energy as one thinks, especially as it leads to possession which itself is less demanding.
The fact that Spurs were amongst the teams running the most (in November, the latest full stats i can find, they were top) whereas City Man Utd Arsenal are in the bottom third shows that actually the way we played lacked efficiency. Arsenal seemed to run, press and play at 100mph yet covered about 10% less distance. The lowest possession stats teams - Saints, Bournemouth, West Ham are all in the top third for distance covered.
Son is a committed player, not lazy. Within an organised press there is nothing to suggest that he is not capable of pressing effectively, typically in the opposition half where turnover will benefit him more than him picking the thing up deep in our half with his back to goal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is bang on the money!
posted on 21/6/23
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 29 minutes ago
Does Levy and the Tax Dodger need the money?
Do me a fekin favour
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow....you have really mastered missing the point.
Absolutely clueless!
posted on 21/6/23
What point!!!!!
There was no talk of fairness when Spurs became a listed company and began to branch out into gyms and sports clothes
Most professional sport is unrecognisable from what it was 50 years ago, learn to swim or prepare to drown
posted on 21/6/23
If I was a defender with the ball and I saw Son running at me I wouldn't be bothered in the slightest, I would just flick him away.
posted on 21/6/23
Gary Neville weighing in and I completely agree with him...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/65956434
posted on 21/6/23
There was no talk of fairness when Spurs became a listed company and began to branch out into gyms and sports clothes
===========
Why would there be?
posted on 21/6/23
comment by Robbing Hoody - At the end of a storm (U6374)
posted 4 hours, 42 minutes ago
I would think the government would look very foolish if the team they appointed to ensure the sale of our club hadn't taken care to cover who the owners were and who was behind them else how would they ensure that a Russian wasn't benefitting somewhere along the line.
=========
If there is one thing the Tories HATE, it's corrupti.... oh
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They have proven you can't hide it at least.
posted on 21/6/23
With Neves looking like he’s gonna be loaned to Newcastle there needs to be something done, they’re taking the absolute P
posted on 21/6/23
Let me get this right OP, you are accusing Chelsea of using the Saudi group to amass fees to counter FFP.
Do you actually realise we are selling the players at a loss. Ziyech is going for 8 mil, we paid 33 mil, Mendy we may just about get our money back.
That is some clever manipulation, selling players at a loss. Do you not think if we were doing that we would get profits on them. Give your head a wobble.
Do you think Boehly and the Clearlake consortium became millionaires by being stupid. Do you not think if they were doing that it would be so obvious, its just ridiculous and could cause issues .
The problem you have is Chelsea yet again and Sandy keeps predicting the end for us, are actually getting back inline and order.
Its jealousy on your part and also Nevilles part, he aint happy if its not Man U dominating everything.
Nevilles a joke, moaned about all the clubs getting big backers and especially Newcastle and then when its announced Man U may get the billionaire backers in saudi onboard he says and I quote " that ship has sailed " meaning hes happy with it now if it happens, pure hypocrite.
And not long ago a lot of Spurs fans, not saying all were salivating especially Sandy, total hypocrite when they heard about the super league and how much money they would have got to spend on players etc .
The post you have produced is a joke
posted on 21/6/23
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 59 minutes ago
What point!!!!!
There was no talk of fairness when Spurs became a listed company and began to branch out into gyms and sports clothes
Most professional sport is unrecognisable from what it was 50 years ago, learn to swim or prepare to drown
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Most clubs have learned to swim.
Not all of them view cheating as part of that.
We know where your morals sit on this one!
posted on 21/6/23
comment by Bridge of dreams (U8917)
posted 8 minutes ago
Let me get this right OP, you are accusing Chelsea of using the Saudi group to amass fees to counter FFP.
Do you actually realise we are selling the players at a loss. Ziyech is going for 8 mil, we paid 33 mil, Mendy we may just about get our money back.
That is some clever manipulation, selling players at a loss. Do you not think if we were doing that we would get profits on them. Give your head a wobble.
Do you think Boehly and the Clearlake consortium became millionaires by being stupid. Do you not think if they were doing that it would be so obvious, its just ridiculous and could cause issues .
The problem you have is Chelsea yet again and Sandy keeps predicting the end for us, are actually getting back inline and order.
Its jealousy on your part and also Nevilles part, he aint happy if its not Man U dominating everything.
Nevilles a joke, moaned about all the clubs getting big backers and especially Newcastle and then when its announced Man U may get the billionaire backers in saudi onboard he says and I quote " that ship has sailed " meaning hes happy with it now if it happens, pure hypocrite.
And not long ago a lot of Spurs fans, not saying all were salivating especially Sandy, total hypocrite when they heard about the super league and how much money they would have got to spend on players etc .
The post you have produced is a joke
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes I get the sentiment with regards to small fees. But you are looking to be getting anything for these players given their contracts are running out and Mendy, Kante and Ziyech between them earn close to half a million a week.
posted on 21/6/23
Lucky to be getting*
posted on 21/6/23
Belfast Kante at end of contract, we get NO fee.
Ziyech, we could have sold for 10 mil to PSG but paperwork screw up stopped that so now we sell at 8 mil , 2 mill less.
Mendy still 2 years on hes contract and still quite highly regarded despite issues. we may if lucky end up getting our money back.
So yet again how the hell are we pulling a fast one.
The OP article is pure BS and yet again is just trying to find something to put on Chelsea.
If I did not know better I would of thought it was another Sandy sock account,
posted on 21/6/23
comment by Bridge of dreams (U8917)
posted 12 minutes ago
Let me get this right OP, you are accusing Chelsea of using the Saudi group to amass fees to counter FFP.
Do you actually realise we are selling the players at a loss. Ziyech is going for 8 mil, we paid 33 mil, Mendy we may just about get our money back.
That is some clever manipulation, selling players at a loss. Do you not think if we were doing that we would get profits on them. Give your head a wobble.
Do you think Boehly and the Clearlake consortium became millionaires by being stupid. Do you not think if they were doing that it would be so obvious, its just ridiculous and could cause issues .
The problem you have is Chelsea yet again and Sandy keeps predicting the end for us, are actually getting back inline and order.
Its jealousy on your part and also Nevilles part, he aint happy if its not Man U dominating everything.
Nevilles a joke, moaned about all the clubs getting big backers and especially Newcastle and then when its announced Man U may get the billionaire backers in saudi onboard he says and I quote " that ship has sailed " meaning hes happy with it now if it happens, pure hypocrite.
And not long ago a lot of Spurs fans, not saying all were salivating especially Sandy, total hypocrite when they heard about the super league and how much money they would have got to spend on players etc .
The post you have produced is a joke
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its everything you could ever want as a selling club with players on big expensive contracts on your books adding big wage and amortisation costs to your accounts:
Given the finances of European football, they aint buyer PL players, they can barely afford a transfer fee let alone the stupid wages these guys are on. PSG wanted Ziyech in Jan, on loan. SO even money bags PSG werent interested in taking the player on permanently.
This route see CFC divested of all the financial burden of these players on massive contracts, costing the club a fortune.
posted on 21/6/23
comment by Bridge of dreams (U8917)
posted 1 minute ago
Belfast Kante at end of contract, we get NO fee.
Ziyech, we could have sold for 10 mil to PSG but paperwork screw up stopped that so now we sell at 8 mil , 2 mill less.
Mendy still 2 years on hes contract and still quite highly regarded despite issues. we may if lucky end up getting our money back.
So yet again how the hell are we pulling a fast one.
The OP article is pure BS and yet again is just trying to find something to put on Chelsea.
If I did not know better I would of thought it was another Sandy sock account,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You havent seen what you are getting for these players yet spo one cannot judge how much of a con it is.
As for Ziyech, PSG wanted him on loan, not to buy!
https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12800609/hakim-ziyech-paris-saint-germain-claim-chelseas-document-gaffe-scuppered-loan-move-for-winger
posted on 21/6/23
Do away with FFP rules and set a maximum spend limit at £300m, which includes wages and transfer fees. That would mean every club in the prem would have a fighting chance of winning something. Somehow, I don't see any of the top 7 wanting this rule.
posted on 21/6/23
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 10 minutes ago
comment by Bridge of dreams (U8917)
posted 12 minutes ago
Let me get this right OP, you are accusing Chelsea of using the Saudi group to amass fees to counter FFP.
Do you actually realise we are selling the players at a loss. Ziyech is going for 8 mil, we paid 33 mil, Mendy we may just about get our money back.
That is some clever manipulation, selling players at a loss. Do you not think if we were doing that we would get profits on them. Give your head a wobble.
Do you think Boehly and the Clearlake consortium became millionaires by being stupid. Do you not think if they were doing that it would be so obvious, its just ridiculous and could cause issues .
The problem you have is Chelsea yet again and Sandy keeps predicting the end for us, are actually getting back inline and order.
Its jealousy on your part and also Nevilles part, he aint happy if its not Man U dominating everything.
Nevilles a joke, moaned about all the clubs getting big backers and especially Newcastle and then when its announced Man U may get the billionaire backers in saudi onboard he says and I quote " that ship has sailed " meaning hes happy with it now if it happens, pure hypocrite.
And not long ago a lot of Spurs fans, not saying all were salivating especially Sandy, total hypocrite when they heard about the super league and how much money they would have got to spend on players etc .
The post you have produced is a joke
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its everything you could ever want as a selling club with players on big expensive contracts on your books adding big wage and amortisation costs to your accounts:
Given the finances of European football, they aint buyer PL players, they can barely afford a transfer fee let alone the stupid wages these guys are on. PSG wanted Ziyech in Jan, on loan. SO even money bags PSG werent interested in taking the player on permanently.
This route see CFC divested of all the financial burden of these players on massive contracts, costing the club a fortune.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s the point I was making Devon. Spot on. It’s like City a while back when they had loads of players they wanted to ship out but had to pay percentages of the players wages for seasons after they left just to get them off the books. Now it seems clubs don’t have this problem with their sister clubs hoovering up these types of players. And in doing so tidying up their squads, amortisation sheets and wage bills. It may not be breaking the rules by the letter of the laws. But it is I’m bad spirit and is certainly a grey area that needs looked at.
posted on 21/6/23
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 4 hours, 26 minutes ago
Do away with FFP rules and set a maximum spend limit at £300m, which includes wages and transfer fees. That would mean every club in the prem would have a fighting chance of winning something. Somehow, I don't see any of the top 7 wanting this rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It will also be the quickest way to run down the premeirship as a major European player.
posted on 21/6/23
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 4 hours, 45 minutes ago
Do away with FFP rules and set a maximum spend limit at £300m, which includes wages and transfer fees. That would mean every club in the prem would have a fighting chance of winning something. Somehow, I don't see any of the top 7 wanting this rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would business want restrictions like that?
posted on 21/6/23
comment by AmAngeda Postecogginkiss (U11574)
posted 13 hours, 51 minutes ago
comment by PhilspursFGR (U3278)
posted 11 hours, 10 minutes ago
I honestly think a super league is the answer. Let all the state owned clubs join the league, it can even be a completely global league. The only requirement to join is based on the owners net worth or something. Have no salary caps, spending limits, FFP etc. They'll have the pick of more or less any player in the world, they'll have some truly epic games and the football will be entertaining.
The rest of the clubs stay in their domestic leagues with appropriate financial restrictions etc and it's far more competitive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't like it, but it's clearly the direction of travel and I think it's inevitable at this point.
Others can nitpick about the geographical errors in the OP but the principle is accurate - there will soon be a subset of clubs to whom the financial rules effectively don't apply, which makes a mockery of those clubs who have attempted to be self-sustaining within FFP parameters
----------------------------------------------------------------------
FFP was written for 1 reason only, to enable those that had their nose in the trough to exclude everybody else. Anybody believing otherwise is kidding themselves.
posted on 21/6/23
comment by bomdia (U13941)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
comment by AmAngeda Postecogginkiss (U11574)
posted 13 hours, 51 minutes ago
comment by PhilspursFGR (U3278)
posted 11 hours, 10 minutes ago
I honestly think a super league is the answer. Let all the state owned clubs join the league, it can even be a completely global league. The only requirement to join is based on the owners net worth or something. Have no salary caps, spending limits, FFP etc. They'll have the pick of more or less any player in the world, they'll have some truly epic games and the football will be entertaining.
The rest of the clubs stay in their domestic leagues with appropriate financial restrictions etc and it's far more competitive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't like it, but it's clearly the direction of travel and I think it's inevitable at this point.
Others can nitpick about the geographical errors in the OP but the principle is accurate - there will soon be a subset of clubs to whom the financial rules effectively don't apply, which makes a mockery of those clubs who have attempted to be self-sustaining within FFP parameters
----------------------------------------------------------------------
FFP was written for 1 reason only, to enable those that had their nose in the trough to exclude everybody else. Anybody believing otherwise is kidding themselves.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Na. That's definitely a benefit for them clubs but 1. FFP has other benefits to others. And 2. It hasn't worked anyway. Spurs have increased their revenues organically so we're nearly competing with the most spendingest clubs. Newcastle.
posted on 22/6/23
It's okay for the PL to be the biggest spenders taking from smaller leagues but when the predator becomes prey suddenly its unfair. Total joke that.
Anyway, Saudi League will probably never fully take off like the CSL didnt. If it does then fair play, ill tune in.
posted on 22/6/23
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 11 hours, 44 minutes ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 4 hours, 45 minutes ago
Do away with FFP rules and set a maximum spend limit at £300m, which includes wages and transfer fees. That would mean every club in the prem would have a fighting chance of winning something. Somehow, I don't see any of the top 7 wanting this rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would business want restrictions like that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because football is supposed to be a sport, where everyone/team is supposed to have a chance of competing. It clearly is not a level playing field with financially doped clubs distorting and cheating their way through the rules as they stand.
posted on 22/6/23
comment by Bãleš left bootecoglou (U22081)
posted 12 hours, 39 minutes ago
spendingest
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I hate you
posted on 22/6/23
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 5 hours, 35 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 11 hours, 44 minutes ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 4 hours, 45 minutes ago
Do away with FFP rules and set a maximum spend limit at £300m, which includes wages and transfer fees. That would mean every club in the prem would have a fighting chance of winning something. Somehow, I don't see any of the top 7 wanting this rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would business want restrictions like that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because football is supposed to be a sport, where everyone/team is supposed to have a chance of competing. It clearly is not a level playing field with financially doped clubs distorting and cheating their way through the rules as they stand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There’s never been a time where there hasn’t been “financially doped” teams. What’s changed a lot now since the change in ownership rules in the eighties is there’s a lot of owners that believe they can reap the rewards of the humungous asset growth themselves with no risk.
I’m all for a change to pre eighties ownership and distribution model and a fit for purpose FFP that looks at the balance sheet as well as the P&L.
Page 3 of 4