Premier League confirmed that it would adopt a form of squad cost control similar to the UEFA model



delilah 555 said:
We blew £50 million on our return to the championship and have spent a bit since , but my point is if the owners have the funds and can cover the debts then why can’t you spend
Click to expand...
What if they walk away and dump the club lack a sack of shite? Clubs should only be able to spend what they as a business generate imo, otherwise its just about who's the biggest sugar daddy.
 
Apart from the usual clubs benefiting, the only other thing I can see coming out of this is potential investors will turn their backs and go elsewhere..
 
Qwerty said:
It would need a system where the owner signs away any right to money they put in.
Just like Ellis Short did.
Click to expand...
If they ploughed a load of cash in to the point where it was only sustainable through them making future donations to cover wages etc then that leaves the clubs exposed. Also where do you draw the line in terms of competitiveness, when allowing free reign for owners to spend their own money however they wish, with a minority of clubs having access to what's essentially limitless resources.
 
Inside Forward said:
I think it’s funny that it stops them competing but we all know it’s just another way of protecting the “big six”.

I love listening to my dad’s stories about the seventies when a charismatic man like Brian Clough could build a club from also-rans into European champions and fans of every club could dream, not just the glory hunting wankers who follow Liverpool and City.

I detest football but I love Sunderland. I don’t watch any games that don’t involve my club.

In all honesty I have more interest in cricket and rugby these days.
Click to expand...
Rugby League & Union does have a salary cap as I recall, but it is actually a fair cap where it's the same for all clubs.
 
delilah 555 said:
We blew £50 million on our return to the championship and have spent a bit since , but my point is if the owners have the funds and can cover the debts then why can’t you spend
Click to expand...

Because all it does it reduce a once-competitive sport to a battle of the bank balances, and which bloated plutocrat is daft enough to piss their fortune up the wall of ownership.

It's everythiing football should not be about.
 
delilah 555 said:
We blew £50 million on our return to the championship and have spent a bit since , but my point is if the owners have the funds and can cover the debts then why can’t you spend
Click to expand...
Because it makes football a league of who has the most money. It's completely unsustainable and bad for the game.

The correct approach is to have a squad wage limit that is identical for every club in the league regardless of income.
 
Mnemonic said:
Because it makes football a league of who has the most money. It's completely unsustainable and bad for the game.

The correct approach is to have a squad wage limit that is identical for every club in the league regardless of income.
Click to expand...
problems is there's all sorts of backdoor schemes like image rights etc etc where they can manipulate salaries.
You can guarantee we will have a Bosman type court case from a player in regards to restriction of trade
 
delilah 555 said:
We blew £50 million on our return to the championship and have spent a bit since , but my point is if the owners have the funds and can cover the debts then why can’t you spend
Click to expand...
The way a lot of premier league teams take the piss with spending I agree with you,surprised the fa/efl whatever haven’t given stoke a points deduction for whatever reason as they only seem to pick on the lesser/lower teams so to speak..
 
There's no way this can be allowed to carry on as it's fundamentally uncompetitive.

The Premier League is one of the very few industries that the UK leads the world in - and rather than encourage outside investment in the billions, they are actually preventing it.
 
El Gen said:
problems is there's all sorts of backdoor schemes like image rights etc etc where they can manipulate salaries.
You can guarantee we will have a Bosman type court case from a player in regards to restriction of trade
Click to expand...
The rule is at club level, e.g. every premier league club can only spend £100M on payments to players in any shape or form.

A club is free to spend all of that on 1 player if they choose.

Then it's for the club to demonstrate their income, and show they've only spent £100M on payment to players. If they don't, they get docked points.

Any backdoor payments would be against the rules, as they are now.
ftm1974 said:
There's no way this can be allowed to carry on as it's fundamentally uncompetitive.

The Premier League is one of the very few industries that the UK leads the world in - and rather than encourage outside investment in the billions, they are actually preventing it.
Click to expand...
But the investment is pointless as it just goes through the clubs and directly to players. It's not benefitting the wider game or supporters at all.
 
rob79safc said:
The way a lot of premier league teams take the piss with spending I agree with you,surprised the fa/efl whatever haven’t given stoke a points deduction for whatever reason as they only seem to pick on the lesser/lower teams so to speak..
Click to expand...
We should get a points deduction for impersonating a football team
Grumpy Old Man said:
Because all it does it reduce a once-competitive sport to a battle of the bank balances, and which bloated plutocrat is daft enough to piss their fortune up the wall of ownership.

It's everythiing football should not be about.
Click to expand...
Like it is now with the top six
 
Last edited:
the problem now is that so many wealthy people have so much invested in the game that they are going to block any reasonable moves that might make it a level playing field.

The world is corrupt and football is a massive example of it. The rich pay off authorities and make it worthwhile for them to turn a blind eye.

Ideally a wage cap and transfer spend cap which increases the further up the pyramid you go makes it better. We would be alone in doing it though so the better players of the world would ply their trade abroad and we’d lose top talent.

If clubs have rich owners they can invest it infrastructure like stadiums and training grounds which might make them more appealing prospects against other English clubs for the better players but they’d have their heads turned by big offers from abroad as soon as they came in
 
Sollentuna15 said:
51% owned by fans is the only way.
Click to expand...
Teams are allowed a under 21 squad of 22 and a senior squad of 22...no loans at all ....pay the buggers what you like!..it....this will lead to better players being spread wider amongst other teams !get rid of the payments fees for transfer system and players simply sign a contract of employment! Agents only get paid by the player.
 

Back
Top