Leicester City PSR breach.
- Thread starter Hettonlass
- Start date
Ale taster
Winger
Outlaw agents and impose a player wage cap.
Regain the game.
Regain the game.
FanchesterCity
Central Defender
That really isn't the case and City fans have been saying it's a stitch up for well over a decade.
The rules were brought in to stop the likes of City and Chelsea competing with the established elite. It was happening in Europe when the European big boys wanted to create a European league (which was why the Champions League was formed to appease the European elite).
The ruse was that FFP would protect clubs from spending what they couldn't afford - but it was never ever about protecting the likes of Portsmouth or Bury, it was always about keeping the big boys in place. After the TV money came flooding in, the big boys assumed they would get all the money from it, and didn't anticipate billionaires putting their money in cheaper clubs like Chelsea and City in order to break into the elite. As soon as that started happening, the elite started inventing rules that meant the only people who could spend big were those who already had money.
Over a decade later, some of those clubs aren't doing as well any more and they want to keep changing the rules - because they are now being hindered by their own regulations!
Absolutely there needs to be some form of GENUINE financial fair play, but don't be fooled into thinking the current set of rules are anything of the sort. The PL is run by the clubs in the PL and some clubs in particular have significantly more clout than others:
Logon or register to see this image
This lot pretty much appointed Richard Masters themselves.
No surprise really. You wouldn’t want it applying to your job so why should football.
FFP/FMV/PSR will also go the same way given that they’re anti competitive constructs. Within 2-3 seasons they’ll be gone, a legal challenge against these rules isn’t that far away.
R5Skywalker
Goalkeeper
Wolves guarding the hen house mate.
City are a big wolf and are as complicit as the others.
FanchesterCity
Central Defender
Therein lies the problem. Sporting bodies have been overstepping the mark in trying to regulate businesses (clubs).
On the one hand, they want to enjoy all the financial rewards of advertising and broadcasting rights in a very business like manner, but don't want to play by business rules / laws. Instead they want to control who can invest, how much they invest, and where they can invest.
By creating FFP rules they end up causing clubs to be ever more creative in trying to find workarounds which becomes more and more problematic to regulate against.
Sporting bodies should have the ability to impose regulations in the interest of sporting fairness, but they can't have absolute carte blanche to ride roughshod over internal business laws. If you want to play in the world of international business, then expect to be judged by international business rules.
All politics aside, you can't moan about johnny foreigner billionaire investing in a club if you're hosting World Cups in their countries and earning fortunes in TV deals from their broadcasters too. The PL is one hell of a successful product, but it comes at a price. Dancing with the devil will almost certainly result in you getting burnt during the tango.
On the one hand, they want to enjoy all the financial rewards of advertising and broadcasting rights in a very business like manner, but don't want to play by business rules / laws. Instead they want to control who can invest, how much they invest, and where they can invest.
By creating FFP rules they end up causing clubs to be ever more creative in trying to find workarounds which becomes more and more problematic to regulate against.
Sporting bodies should have the ability to impose regulations in the interest of sporting fairness, but they can't have absolute carte blanche to ride roughshod over internal business laws. If you want to play in the world of international business, then expect to be judged by international business rules.
All politics aside, you can't moan about johnny foreigner billionaire investing in a club if you're hosting World Cups in their countries and earning fortunes in TV deals from their broadcasters too. The PL is one hell of a successful product, but it comes at a price. Dancing with the devil will almost certainly result in you getting burnt during the tango.
We voted against FFP, as did Villa, Fulham and West Brom. Reading abstained.
Last edited:
FoldingStars
Midfield
Not sure how you can turn a blind eye whilst charging a club with 115 breaches.
The reason it's taking so long has already been explained numerous times but sadly it seems to just get ignored.
ThreadBumper
Goalkeeper
My bad. No idea why I typed it like that.
Forest's complaint is that they were over the FFP limit but had they sold a player to fit the regulations as they should have done, they would have been undervaluing the player and sold him at the end of the season for significantly more (Brennan Johnson). The fact he then helped Forest stay up by appearing for them until the end of the season isn't being seen as cheating.Hardyman's Yugo
Striker
The issue isn’t the parachute payments, it’s the enormous gulf in finances between the premier league and the EFL. How is a club supposed to plan when relegation could mean they go out of business.?
ThreadBumper
Goalkeeper
Pretty sure that's why the European qualification rules were changed a couple of season back.
Previously, if the winner of the FA Cup had already qualified for Europe through their league position, the Cup Winners spot went to the runner up.
Now, it's been changed to the next placed EPL club gets the qualifying spot instead.
We were getting ahead of ourselves, thinking if we got past United, we'd be in Europe. Not to be.
UEFA protecting the quality of their competition I guess.
Last edited:
FanchesterCity
Central Defender
Absolutely correct.
If it had been a genuinely well intentioned set of regulations it might have had hope, but they were never well intentioned in the first place and now they're becoming a farce.
'We don't want another Portsmouth' was the very phrase used to justify FFP. What they really meant was 'we don't want any upstarts upsetting the applecart, and we don't really care about the ones who go bust trying, we are more worried about the ones who might be successful'
Governing bodies, PL,UEFA, FIFA should organise competitions, they should not involve themseleves in the legal commercial activities of clubs, it really is that simple. It wouldn’t be allowed in any other business sector and the PL are not above or exempt from Competition Law.
Altruism doesn’t exist in football, self interest does and it’s always been like that historically.
Last edited:
Hardyman's Yugo
Striker
Totally disagree. The governing bodies negotiate TV and other sponsorship deals and distribute this to the clubs. Also, we need a rules based system in any professional sport to ensure a reasonable competition. I assume you’re a bit pissed off your club isn’t allowed to spend what it wants and distort competition even further?
@FanchesterCity
Well worth a listen, quite long but interesting.
www.blackstonechambers.com
Well worth a listen, quite long but interesting.
Episode 13: The Sport and Competition Law Podcast
In episode 13 of the Sports Law Podcast, Nick De Marco KC is joined by 4 expert guests to explore 4 recent highly significant Competition Law cases in the world of sport.
www.blackstonechambers.com
Clubs who’s owners can afford to spend make the league more competitive.
Last edited:
FanchesterCity
Central Defender
This is partly why City's 115 charges (many of which are multiple instances of the same thing) are taking so long.
If (as per Forest and Everton's situation) you overspend against a rule that limits the overspending, then it's a relatively simpler matter, although even that can be open to interpretation of circumstances...
But if you're going to accuse a company of cooking the books... then everything moves up a massive notch. Now you're accusing independent financial auditors of either being complicit, or incompetent and you're also then suggesting it's not just the club that's in on the cooking of the books, but the sponsors too. It's all getting very legal at that point and the PL could end up in serious bother.
That's no to claim City are innocent (or not) - it's merely illustrating that once you start throwing more serious allegations around it's going to end up getting very legal with bigger repercussions for all concerned.
R5Skywalker
Goalkeeper
So clubs who have 1 or 2 charges, get dealt with pretty quickly, before a club with over 100 charges? It's not been explained properly imo why City have not had to deal with consequences yet, when the likes of Everton, Forest and now Leicester have to. You can see why these fans of these clubs are cheesed off.
FanchesterCity
Central Defender
Except the governing body is not independent. It's made up of the damn clubs themselves!
The PL is making up its own rules. For the good of the wider game, or for the good of themselves?
Hardyman's Yugo
Striker
Like City you mean who can just about win everything they play in? Clubs owners who have completely distorted the competition. Why are we in the position where oil rich states are owning clubs and have spent insane amounts of money?@FanchesterCity
Well worth a listen, quite long but interesting.
Episode 13: The Sport and Competition Law Podcast
In episode 13 of the Sports Law Podcast, Nick De Marco KC is joined by 4 expert guests to explore 4 recent highly significant Competition Law cases in the world of sport.
Clubs who’s owners can afford to spend make the league more competitive.
The problem here is the football authorities have acted too late, the horse has long bolted.
