QldVilla Posted February 8 VT Supporter Share Posted February 8 4 hours ago, AshVilla said: I can't see this going through it will need 16 votes to pass? Who in their right mind outside the cartel would vote for it. Possibly Villa, West Spam, Brighton as they are wanting to be regulars in Europe and will have to comply anyway with UEFA rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Thanks! You'd have to hope that sense is seen and that spending on infrastructure and the women's game are removed from these calculations. Be a disaster if half the WSL ends up shuttering their teams just to get the wage space for a backup right-back or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Random Precision Posted February 8 Visiting Supporter Share Posted February 8 (edited) 2 hours ago, HanoiVillan said: Thanks! You'd have to hope that sense is seen and that spending on infrastructure and the women's game are removed from these calculations. Be a disaster if half the WSL ends up shuttering their teams just to get the wage space for a backup right-back or whatever. I agree, infrastructure, academies and womens teams should remain outside of FFP. These new rules, if implemented will strangle the ambitions of many clubs other than the most wealthy, the existing order. Football is special some argue but now it’s a multi billion £ industry it isn’t as special as it thinks it is. It also isn’t exempt from Competition Law as it may well find out, governing bodies organise competitions and shouldn’t involve themselves in clubs commercially activities unless they can prove fraud or other criminal activities. https://www.blackstonechambers.com/podcasts/the-sports-law-podcast/the-sport-and-competition-law-podcast/ Lengthy but worth a listen. Edited February 8 by Random Precision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 People think the PL changes are "major changes" when they only impact clubs who are not in Europe or who aim to be in Europe on a regular enough basis. As PL are just going to mirror UEFA rules which we and the other top clubs have to comply with. So PL changes to the rules are a benefit for us be making Palace and Brentford and Leicester and Everton etc.. follow squad cost rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 On 08/02/2024 at 04:49, AshVilla said: I can't see this going through it will need 16 votes to pass? Who in their right mind outside the cartel would vote for it. 14 votes isn't it? Super six + Saudi FC 2&3 Maybe Brighton might vote for it if they think they can keep churning out transfer market success, but that's a foolish thing to bank on. The rules in that way won't be approved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Random Precision Posted February 9 Visiting Supporter Share Posted February 9 Legal action or the threat was always likely. https://x.com/MarkKleinmanSky/status/1755903700093005929?s=20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wishywashy Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 11 minutes ago, Random Precision said: Legal action or the threat was always likely. https://x.com/MarkKleinmanSky/status/1755903700093005929?s=20 So tired of 'elite' football outside of Villa nowadays. Nation states playing the game with lawyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Just kick City out of the league at this stage. Just making a mockery of the Premier League 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Random Precision Posted February 9 Visiting Supporter Share Posted February 9 15 minutes ago, wishywashy said: So tired of 'elite' football outside of Villa nowadays. Nation states playing the game with lawyers. It’s about Competition Law, governing bodies of football are not exempt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Man City are a cancer in English football. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Random Precision Posted February 10 Visiting Supporter Share Posted February 10 (edited) Apparently Villa abstained at the PL meeting yesterday, the other was Crystal Palace. Edited February 10 by Random Precision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WallisFrizz Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 7 minutes ago, Random Precision said: Apparently Villa abstained at the PL meeting yesterday, the other was Crystal Palace. Seen this. Was trying to work out purpose of abstaining. I guess maybe we’d be able to make it work in our favour if the vote wasn’t passed but don’t want to get on the wrong side of the others and vote against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Random Precision Posted February 10 Visiting Supporter Share Posted February 10 2 minutes ago, WallisFrizz said: Seen this. Was trying to work out purpose of abstaining. I guess maybe we’d be able to make it work in our favour if the vote wasn’t passed but don’t want to get on the wrong side of the others and vote against it. Now it’s been passed it makes it even more likely whoever the club is taking the PL to a Competition Arbitration Tribunal on the basis the rules are anti competitive and breach Competition Law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Townsend Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 2 minutes ago, MaVilla said: amazing that Spurs' salaries to revenue figure is in the mid 30%'s, where as ours is 70%+. Shows the difference in revenue, their stadium makes them an absolute packet. Their stadium does make them a packet, no doubt. Ah well, at least we can rest easy that we have cancelled our redevelopment and mustn't question the smart people making these decisions.... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul514 Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 44 minutes ago, Captain_Townsend said: Their stadium does make them a packet, no doubt. Ah well, at least we can rest easy that we have cancelled our redevelopment and mustn't question the smart people making these decisions.... I know, don't question what is clearly a dumb decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allani Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 1 minute ago, allani said: Both Everton and Forest (and allegedly Wolves) have ended up in this position and been punished for holding out for better offers at the end of the summer. I think there will be a lot of clubs circling for blood trying to land a bargain for any clubs on the brink of the FFP limit. So the chances of selling anyone before the end of June and not getting mugged off will be remote. I think it is fair to say that if we has to sell a player in June we wouldn't be able to get better than 50% of their value because (a) it is unlikely that other clubs will have significant FFP headroom to fund a large purchase and (b) our bargaining position will be incredibly weak - if a club offers say £40m for Luiz and we say that we want £80m then they'll just say fine - take the 10 point deduction, good luck. The FFP regulations being set at a different timeline to the transfer windows are going to cause a real issue - with poor clubs being forced into selling assets to rich clubs for way below their market value. It's going to create an artificial market almost the reverse of insider trading. Clubs are going to effectively hold other clubs to ransom because they know that they could face a points deduction if they don't take a ridiculous deal that results in players being sold well below market value. Another example of FFP being poorly implemented in terms of protecting the integrity of football for all. The two transfer window option is already a bad decision (as it forces clubs to stockpile players because they can't afford to not have cover for injuries sustained outside the window) and this is going to make it worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 23 minutes ago, allani said: Both Everton and Forest (and allegedly Wolves) have ended up in this position and been punished for holding out for better offers at the end of the summer. I think there will be a lot of clubs circling for blood trying to land a bargain for any clubs on the brink of the FFP limit. So the chances of selling anyone before the end of June and not getting mugged off will be remote. I think it is fair to say that if we has to sell a player in June we wouldn't be able to get better than 50% of their value because (a) it is unlikely that other clubs will have significant FFP headroom to fund a large purchase and (b) our bargaining position will be incredibly weak - if a club offers say £40m for Luiz and we say that we want £80m then they'll just say fine - take the 10 point deduction, good luck. The issue comes in that the new UEFA rules have only a 2 season window for the calculation next season before moving to a 3 year window the season after. I think we might be able to include a summer sale in there as mitigation. I don't know. We are totally fine for the Premier League PSR though as we have our 21/22 accounts there for calculation purposes. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allani Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 46 minutes ago, maqroll said: You know there is something seriously long with the FFP rules when Barcelona are showing an almost 3 times greater profit than any other club on the list. Absolute bull****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ROTTERDAM1982 Posted February 19 Popular Post Share Posted February 19 I'm a bit perplexed about FFP. Man Citeehhh and Chelsk have had at least a decade to build their club up to their current financial position without any threat of FFP. I would argue that they have made the League better because the traditionally richer clubs have been joined by them. So instead of just Arse and Ure like it was, there are now 4/5 clubs who are competative. Noocastle and Villa , who have rich owners, could probably run at a loss for a short period of time, to raise the profile/ revenue of their clubs, to possibly join them clubs and make the league even more competative. On a lower level, I would argue that if Forest had not spent the £100m plus, then they would have been relegated, so by spending the money, and running at a significant loss, they actually protected the future of the club. FFP is a tool used to protect the status quo, its restrictive, and unnecessary, Villa and Noocastle as football clubs, should not be consticted by accountants. The arguement is going to be that you are protecting the future of the clubs, but when was the last time a reasonably sized club went bust? its a lazyt misnomer to deflect from the true reason for the inception of FFP, which is protecting the self annoited big clubs. I hope Citeeeh or Noocastle take them to court for a restriction of trade. Amazon buy, or destroy , their competitors, it happens in all forms of industry/business. Instead of us talkinfg about signing Neto for example, we are saying we might have to sell Ramsey. Its ridiculous. You get to the level where you are about to compete, and the carpet is pulled from unser your feet. The PL needs to be careful it doesn't become a boring cartel 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 1 hour ago, allani said: You know there is something seriously long with the FFP rules when Barcelona are showing an almost 3 times greater profit than any other club on the list. Absolute bull****. They sold part of their commerical rights and future tv revenue etc.. so that comes as cash in now and they lose future income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts