Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: Stu on May 06, 2013, 07:21:20 PM
-
I was unsure where to post this, but I thought seeing how FFP will affect the future of football, particularly in England, then it really does apply to us.
An agent has lodged a complaint regarding FFP, basically saying that it will stop him from earning money: clicky (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/may/06/agent-legal-threat-uefa-financial-fair-play)
He's not going to win too many fans over with that argument, but he raises other points, and the one which faces us here in England is this: FFP will damage competitiveness in England. The clubs that have been able to get away with running at huge losses have now, through using a method that is due to be outlawed, cemented their places at the top of the table. We all know who they are; Chelsea and latterly Manchester City. This pulling up of the ladder will, I believe, damage our game beyond repair.
What do the people of H&V think of FFP? Are you for it or against it? If you are for it, do you think it will, as UEFA say, allow for greater competitiveness in football, or will it further stifle any sort of upstart challenge from a club with ambition and wealth?
-
A flat fixed fee for agents should do the trick.
-
Give the role of footballers agent to the PFA - they can't even organise a comedian at a party. so should help keep the costs down.
-
Inevitable I suppose after a French club got in on the lottery act, but FFP as implemented by UEFA is a farce. Platini has told PSG they need to be creative in the way money is injected into the club. Man City already have with the various sponsorships.
FFP by itself could never level the playing field. It really needs either or both of a salary cap not wholly based on turnover or a more equitable way of distributing the game's income.
-
FFP does seem designed to destroy competitiveness from what I can see. There will be a clearly defined pecking order based upon revenue, and without a wage cap the best players will more than ever go to the teams at the top of the tree. It's a system that will ensure teams "know their place". How is that Fair Play? It isn't.
-
FFP does seem designed to destroy competitiveness from what I can see. There will be a clearly defined pecking order based upon revenue, and without a wage cap the best players will more than ever go to the teams at the top of the tree. It's a system that will ensure teams "know their place". How is that Fair Play? It isn't.
The system as is exists purely to stop the bad press of teams being allowed to generate vast debts only to then go out of business. The commercial implications of clubs like Rangers folding are too big so uefa and the premier league want to implement a safety net to say they did everything they could.
It's not intended to be fair, but introducing a 'protecting our profit streams' policy wouldn't go over well with the fans.
-
FFP does seem designed to destroy competitiveness from what I can see. There will be a clearly defined pecking order based upon revenue, and without a wage cap the best players will more than ever go to the teams at the top of the tree. It's a system that will ensure teams "know their place". How is that Fair Play? It isn't.
The system as is exists purely to stop the bad press of teams being allowed to generate vast debts only to then go out of business. The commercial implications of clubs like Rangers folding are too big so uefa and the premier league want to implement a safety net to say they did everything they could.
It's not intended to be fair, but introducing a 'protecting our profit streams' policy wouldn't go over well with the fans.
No, it's really there because the 'big' clubs have seen increasing amounts of billionaires take over clubs and threaten the order of things and they want to pull the drawbridge up and stop it happening anymore. All FFP will do is preserve the current state of affairs.
-
There should be a simple rule which states a club or parent company should not be able to record a loss 3 consecutive season and that is it! FFP is a joke make sure the large teams now won't get competitors in the future. It's going to make the league very bland in my opinion. If someone wishes to invest a fortune in a club it should be their choice. I agree this shouldn't be through loan note/agreements but straight cash should be fine even if it's through sponsorship like Man City are doing!
-
There should be a simple rule which states a club or parent company should not be able to record a loss 3 consecutive season and that is it! FFP is a joke make sure the large teams now won't get competitors in the future. It's going to make the league very bland in my opinion. If someone wishes to invest a fortune in a club it should be their choice. I agree this shouldn't be through loan note/agreements but straight cash should be fine even if it's through sponsorship like Man City are doing!
but the man city sponsorship is, effectively, the owners sponsoring their own team at a vastly inflated fee. Any 'solution' that doesn't see that, Or selling your reserve team stadium to the council (real madrid) or any of a number of government development grants happening to be awarded to you (AC Milan) along with a whole host of others is crap.
Ad@m - I agree that's a big part of it but I think the organisations are under quite a lot of pressure to sort this out.
-
I've never fully understood why clubs have to pay agents anything. As far as I'm concerned, if a player wants to employ someone to act on his behalf, the player should pay for the service himself.
-
This FFP stuff always struck me as probably illegal. How can you punish a business for running at a loss?
-
A flat fixed fee for agents should do the trick.
A very flat nominal fixed fee for agents should do the trick.
-
I hope we wins and the FFP stuff gets declared illegal. Its only result will be to make the game less competitive and freeze out smaller clubs from having a chance at progressing. Terrible rules.
-
This FFP stuff always struck me as probably illegal. How can you punish a business for running at a loss?
Not really as you can't compare a football club to a normal business.
Normal businesses don't have league tables and massive financial rewards for finishing above a rival business in the same field.
-
This FFP stuff always struck me as probably illegal. How can you punish a business for running at a loss?
Not really as you can't compare a football club to a normal business.
Normal businesses don't have league tables and massive financial rewards for finishing above a rival business in the same field.
Also it's a competition and the organisers of the competition can set whatever rules they like surely?
-
This FFP stuff always struck me as probably illegal. How can you punish a business for running at a loss?
Not really as you can't compare a football club to a normal business.
Normal businesses don't have league tables and massive financial rewards for finishing above a rival business in the same field.
Also there's nothing illegal in a government body setting financial requirements for membership, which is effectively what is being done. You could easily do the same with a wage cap, just put it in place and promise to dock points from teams that breach it. There is nothing illegal in that despite what agents would have people believe. There are a hell of a lot of sports with such wage caps (has to be a club wide thing, wage caps on each player are unenforceable) and they are a lot stricter than the % of turnover shite that regularly comes up in these discussions. The only truly fair wage cap would be set at something like 90% of the turnover of the smallest club in the league. You'd have the small ones paying less and not hitting the cap but the gap would be significantly smaller.
-
This FFP stuff always struck me as probably illegal. How can you punish a business for running at a loss?
Not really as you can't compare a football club to a normal business.
Normal businesses don't have league tables and massive financial rewards for finishing above a rival business in the same field.
Also it's a competition and the organisers of the competition can set whatever rules they like surely?
I think so, but does that not make all the complaining about Sky, agents, money, Abramovich, referees, goal-line technology, Champions League, kick-off times, et cetera completely pointless?
-
This FFP stuff always struck me as probably illegal. How can you punish a business for running at a loss?
Not really as you can't compare a football club to a normal business.
Normal businesses don't have league tables and massive financial rewards for finishing above a rival business in the same field.
Also it's a competition and the organisers of the competition can set whatever rules they like surely?
I think so, but does that not make all the complaining about Sky, agents, money, Abramovich, referees, goal-line technology, Champions League, kick-off times, et cetera completely pointless?
Not really.
-
Why, what's the difference? They can set whatever rules they like as you rightly point out.
-
Why, what's the difference? They can set whatever rules they like as you rightly point out.
The difference is someone moaning vs someone saying its illegal. Which it isn't.
-
Yes, but surely that complaining is rendered pointless? The body in charge of a competition can do what they like, so whinging about what they choose to do is as about as redundant as suggesting that FFP is illegal.
-
Yes, but surely that complaining is rendered pointless? The body in charge of a competition can do what they like, so whinging about what they choose to do is as about as redundant as suggesting that FFP is illegal.
I'm not sure if this is a windup.
Saying something is illegal when its not is just wrong. Meaningless. Pointless. Choose your word.
Complaining about something you don't like brings about change.
I'm not sure what the issue is.
-
A wage cap although the right thing to do for the majority of clubs and fans will never be brought in Sky won't allow it.
-
Looks like a full legal challenge is a step closer.
Some interesting arguments against FFP with some alternative suggestions, that actually sound palatable, and not anti competitive as FFP probably will be, from Soccernomics author Stefan Szymanski.
How Bosman's lawyer is plotting another football revolution (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24333604)
-
This gets to the crux of it for me from the original article:-
Uefa could better rebalance European football and make it more competitive, he states, by greater sharing of money from rich clubs to small, preventing the need for them to overspend.
The FFP rules have too many loopholes to ever make a difference. If Man City can get round them through stadium sponsorship, they why can't the next oil magnate that rocks up to the same?
However, even distribution is what lead to the breakaway Premier League over 20 years ago. If they try something like that, it'll mark the start of the process that'll result in the much talked about European Super League, IMO.
-
The FFP rules have too many loopholes to ever make a difference. If Man City can get round them through stadium sponsorship, they why can't the next oil magnate that rocks up to the same?
That was the one thing which made it quite clear FFP rules were not going to work, ie if it is as easy as that to get round.
-
Anything that restores some sort or order and fair play is bad for forums like this because we will have nothing to moan about.
-
Anything that restores some sort or order and fair play is bad for forums like this because we will have nothing to moan about.
Of course we would. We'd still manage to frustrate and annoy ourselves. It's the Villa way.
-
On balance, football agents have done huge damage to the game. I am not especially fond of them I have to say. For me, Eric Hall always epitomised the profession, bless him.
-
Anything that restores some sort or order and fair play is bad for forums like this because we will have nothing to moan about.
Of course we would. We'd still manage to frustrate and annoy ourselves. It's the Villa way.
They only way they'd ever stop arguments on H&V is if they also brought in CFP (Condiment Fair Play) and banned that red shite for good!
-
Anything that restores some sort or order and fair play is bad for forums like this because we will have nothing to moan about.
Of course we would. We'd still manage to frustrate and annoy ourselves. It's the Villa way.
They only way they'd ever stop arguments on H&V is if they also brought in CFP (Condiment Fair Play) and banned that red shite for good!
I am with you, Brother John. There ideally needs to be something along the lines of the Geneva Convention to get the use of that shite banned in all free societies.
-
Anything that restores some sort or order and fair play is bad for forums like this because we will have nothing to moan about.
Of course we would. We'd still manage to frustrate and annoy ourselves. It's the Villa way.
They only way they'd ever stop arguments on H&V is if they also brought in CFP (Condiment Fair Play) and banned that red shite for good!
I am with you, Brother John. There ideally needs to be something along the lines of the Geneva Convention to get the use of that shite banned in all free societies.
Given the amount of shit in it (when bought in a bottle) could a proposal be put in place for it to be classified as a chemical weapon?
-
Not if its on a fish finger sandwich, you pair of wankers.
-
There's never an excuse for ketchup.
Esp not fish finger sandwiches. Which are vile, too.
-
Now you have crossed the line. It is one of the finest snacks around.
-
Is ketchup with fish finger sandwich really fair play?
-
It's all pointless as any issues with FFP (Fish Finger Piece) can be easily circumnavigated by placing a fried egg into said piece.
-
Now you have crossed the line. It is one of the finest snacks around.
Without doubt! Some of you lot are far worse than agents, has Benteke's agent mentioned getting rid of ketchup? Thought not, top bloke.
-
Now you have crossed the line. It is one of the finest snacks around.
Without doubt! Some of you lot are far worse than agents, has Benteke's agent mentioned getting rid of ketchup? Thought not, top bloke.
That's only because he doesn't want to bring up the subject and risk exposing his preference for fruity brown sauce, the fucking deviant.
-
Now you have crossed the line. It is one of the finest snacks around.
Without doubt! Some of you lot are far worse than agents, has Benteke's agent mentioned getting rid of ketchup? Thought not, top bloke.
That's only because he doesn't want to bring up the subject and risk exposing his preference for fruity brown sauce, the fucking deviant.
I hadn't thought about this, what a ******. He needs to come out and pledge his allegiance one way or the other.
-
I thought being Belgian he would go for mayo rather than brown or red!