FFP

[lovejoy]

Any "independant" panel implemented by this government will simply be another opportunity to appoint some mates for favours to be repaid at a later date. 

Someone to blame when things go wrong and a buffer (see court scene in Godfather 2).
Such as Bank of England and inflation.

[lovejoy]

Has anybody else noticed since the Manc punishment delay that the media, Sky Sports News in particular, have started to use P&S instead of FFP to describe the whole drawer bridge raising farce?

It was 2 months later, a full transfer window. Why should they have 7 windows for sales while everyone else has 6?

Exactly.

If it's late, it's late.

Thats on nobody other than Forest.

If any purchaser tried to take advantage, then thats unfortunate.

They shouldn't have purchased first & made that sale need so desperate.

They had the benefit of the purchased players, the player they didn't sell & then the extra money they got by delaying 2 months.

How is that fair on everyone else down in the relegation battles?

Who does he think he is Andre Arshavin?

[Villatillidie25]

Has anybody else noticed since the Manc punishment delay that the media, Sky Sports News in particular, have started to use P&S instead of FFP to describe the whole drawer bridge raising farce?

It was 2 months later, a full transfer window. Why should they have 7 windows for sales while everyone else has 6?

Exactly.

If it's late, it's late.

Thats on nobody other than Forest.

If any purchaser tried to take advantage, then thats unfortunate.

They shouldn't have purchased first & made that sale need so desperate.

They had the benefit of the purchased players, the player they didn't sell & then the extra money they got by delaying 2 months.

How is that fair on everyone else down in the relegation battles?

Who does he think he is Andre Arshavin?

@Pablo: It's being called PSR because that's the rebranded official name. FFP is just the name that's stuck amongst the public but it's not a term the media should be using. Also, it's not a drawbridge exercise and never has been. In order for PSR to have been brought in, 14 of the 20 member teams of the PL needed to agree on it. It isn't some big 6 conspiracy that they've forced on teams. I'd also argue that the rules aren't that close to drawbridge levels. Newcastle were bound for relegation until they were taken over. since then, they've invested and got to a cup final and the champions league. We've not that long been promoted and have consistently improved to the point that we are now chasing a Champions League place. With the right ownership, team and a bit of luck, it can be done. Maybe it just takes a bit longer than when City and Chelsea got investment. I, personally, don't think that is a bad thing because we all know that a sugar-daddy can get bored, lose their money or generally just be a bit rubbish. If that's the case and they've been able to spend carte blanche you end up in the position we very nearly did, which is clubs facing winding up orders. Surely it is better for teams to progress sustainably so that they are not reliant on rich owners?

I broadly agree with your comments on Forest though. I can, however, understand their argument that they wanted to sell Johnson to the highest bidder, which meant waiting until later in the window and after the PSR deadline. However, nobody forced them to purchase players ahead of that timeline. I'm not sure whether they'd have been PSR compliant if they'd have delayed those summer purchases though (given the way costs are amortised). it's possible, but not definite. What it does scream though is that the PSR deadline should be the start of the season/end of the transfer window (which I think should be one and the same but that's a separate issue). In that instance, you avoid this scenario where Forest, rightly, secured the highest bid for their player but in doing so, fell foul of a relatively arbitrary deadline.

[pablo_picasso]

@Pablo: It's being called PSR because that's the rebranded official name. FFP is just the name that's stuck amongst the public but it's not a term the media should be using. Also, it's not a drawbridge exercise and never has been. In order for PSR to have been brought in, 14 of the 20 member teams of the PL needed to agree on it. It isn't some big 6 conspiracy that they've forced on teams. I'd also argue that the rules aren't that close to drawbridge levels. Newcastle were bound for relegation until they were taken over. since then, they've invested and got to a cup final and the champions league. We've not that long been promoted and have consistently improved to the point that we are now chasing a Champions League place. With the right ownership, team and a bit of luck, it can be done. Maybe it just takes a bit longer than when City and Chelsea got investment. I, personally, don't think that is a bad thing because we all know that a sugar-daddy can get bored, lose their money or generally just be a bit rubbish. If that's the case and they've been able to spend carte blanche you end up in the position we very nearly did, which is clubs facing winding up orders. Surely it is better for teams to progress sustainably so that they are not reliant on rich owners?

I broadly agree with your comments on Forest though. I can, however, understand their argument that they wanted to sell Johnson to the highest bidder, which meant waiting until later in the window and after the PSR deadline. However, nobody forced them to purchase players ahead of that timeline. I'm not sure whether they'd have been PSR compliant if they'd have delayed those summer purchases though (given the way costs are amortised). it's possible, but not definite. What it does scream though is that the PSR deadline should be the start of the season/end of the transfer window (which I think should be one and the same but that's a separate issue). In that instance, you avoid this scenario where Forest, rightly, secured the highest bid for their player but in doing so, fell foul of a relatively arbitrary deadline.

I understand, it's just before the Manc charges, it was called FFP by most of the media. If the timing is coincidental, then fair enough. And I suppose you have a point, if it is now officially called P&S, then that is the term the media should be using.

I do see it as a drawer bridge raising exercise because some clubs have been allowed to push far in advance of others & have retained all of the benefits from that advantage.

And then that advantage has been taken away for other clubs to be able to utilise, so the playing field has not been fair & level.

Granted, 14 clubs had to vote for things to change, but we are seeing that gap in full & vivid detail now we are at the precipice of joining those clubs, meaning that we are having to sell our youngsters or a first teamer, just to be able to improve the squad.

And yet most of those around us are still spending ridiculous amounts because that is the advantage they gained & kept.

Don't get me wrong, I understand why it was brought in. I just think that they went about it the wrong way.

Instead of allowing those clubs to spend a percentage of their profit, there should be a standard cap across the league that is the same for all clubs in each respective league. Whether thats spending, wages or both, there should not be a position where Chelsea, as poorly as they are run but had the advantage of a money laundering Oligarch buying them success & the subsequent sponsorship deals that raised their profits, are able to spend £1 billion in about a year because the percentage of those ill gotten gained profits are higher than that of Villa, who are run magnificently but did not have the advantage of ill gotten gained profits, & have to sell our academy players just so we can afford one extra quality body into the club so we can push on from where we are.

Chelsea sell them too, but thats the choice they make so they can spend £1B instead of £0.75B.

The fact that Chelsea & Manu are shitly run & Tottenham & Arsenal have consistent wobbles aren't the reason that we are sat in 3rd, but it is obviously helping. But it doesn't deter from the fact that we are sitting in 3rd & challenging those around us with one financial hand tied behind our back.

I think the 115 charges against Manc highlight the main issue I have with FFP / P&S. They didn't give two fucks about the rules, yet are allowed to continue operating with all of the advantages & benefits they gained while accruing those 115 charges. For me, as soon as they refused documents & started slowing things down with high priced lawyers, they should have faced an instant punishment. A point lost each month they fuck about. A transfer ban until they co-operate. Etc.

Something.

Anything...

I agree entirely with you about the dates for P&S. They should make logical sense in terms of the transfer windows & the season.

[Rigadon]

Agree with you Pablo. A level playing field is all very well when you are all starting from that same point - as you right say, we are most definitely not doing that. 

[Villatillidie25]

Really good post. I think the crux of your complaints (& mine) are that historical issues (ie previously ill gotten gains) are still benefitting those teams today even if not directly in the current year. I’m not sure if it’s possible to remedy that to be honest but the recent changes are heading in the right direction (expedited, in season, reviews and punishments).
With a bit of luck Chelsea’s splurge will come and bite them in future years given the amortisation of those transfer fees will keep forcing them to sell players for years to come. And hopefully City get done for some or all of their breaches.

[Toronto Villa]

Would it be a huge surprise if the Saudi owners of Newcastle decided to sell up? They have to be frustrated that they can’t just muscle in and buy what or who they want. I can’t imagine they saw this level of restriction to their “project” when they bought the club. When so many predicted domination through their resources they simply cannot do that now.

[Villatillidie25]

Would it be a huge surprise if the Saudi owners of Newcastle decided to sell up? They have to be frustrated that they can’t just muscle in and buy what or who they want. I can’t imagine they saw this level of restriction to their “project” when they bought the club. When so many predicted domination through their resources they simply cannot do that now.

It's possible but I think unlikely. Firstly, it would be a pretty big backwards step in their PR onslaught of the sporting world and secondly, i'm not sure they are focussed on the quick splurge. The first players they bought were the likes of Dan Burn and Matt Targett, which hardly screams let's get the cheque book out and splash the cash.

[Sexual Ealing]

I'd imagine they knew the landscape before they bought them.

[chrisw1]

The current dates do make sense.  By including the full summer window on the previous seasons accounts you are focussing entirely on selling clubs trying to recover from overspending.  But the converse is teams can't spend any of the new season's budget because it doesn't kick in until the transfer window has closed.  Which is more daft?

[Somniloquism]

The current dates make sense because traditionally (since transfer windows were a thing) the season runs from Jul 1st to Jun 30th and anyone bought after Jan 31st is normally only registered at the new club from Jul 1st. You could argue that even if Nottingham did sell Johnson in June, it would have made no difference as the deal wouldn't have started until Jul 1st, the next football financial year. So in theory, the PL would have done them a favour allowing it to count anyway. (If he had gone to Brentford, I suspect he would have been on the 2023/24 accounts and not the ones prior).

As Forest then decided to wait a further 2 months until Levy's wonderful negotiating skills kicked in, any goodwill they hoped from the PL would have vanished. In theory they were as desperate to sell in June as they were in August so the "lets wait and hope Spurs sell Kane and then overbid for Johnson" was as much a gamble as "lets hope he doesn't get injured whilst he helps us win valuable points this season, but inform the PL we will be selling soon, promise....."

[Drummond]

I don't see any way the Forest excuse stands. They want 7 full transfer windows when everyone else has 6 for FFP. They sold him on the last day of that 7th window. If it was allowed as an excuse then loads of clubs can try and go down that route. And as i've said, if Johnson had gotten himself crocked in the matches he played during window 7, or in training, what was their plan as no one would be spending nearly £50m on him if he'd just done a Mings or Buendia.

I think the fact that he actually played during Window 7 is the issue. If he hadn't played for them whilst awaiting clearance or whatever, then you could see some mitigation, but if he actually played, then there's none.

[AV82EC]

Another thing people forget is that Spurs entry into the so called big 6 was on the back of a decent Manager, player trading and driving commercial performance. They were probably pretty similar to us in the late noughties but over the next 10 years as we stagnated they drove forwards. We can catch up but player trading will be part of that equation.

[PeterWithesShin]

To me the issue is they are trying to massively bend the rules in their favour. For the period they want his sale to count they had to have sold him by the end of the Jan window. Instead he played another 20+ games for them and they sold him on the last day of the summer window. It's not like the rules were changed on the accounting periods. They're taking the piss. How about we try and claim the Cam sale for a previous financial period. It's nonsense and i'm surprised anyone is defending them, and wonder if it was Man Utd or Newcastle trying to pull this stunt if they'd have the same sympathy.

[pablo_picasso]

Another thing people forget is that Spurs entry into the so called big 6 was on the back of a decent Manager, player trading and driving commercial performance. They were probably pretty similar to us in the late noughties but over the next 10 years as we stagnated they drove forwards. We can catch up but player trading will be part of that equation.

In the lst 30 years, Villa & Spurs have won the same amount of trophies & Villa have finished higher than Spurs in the table more times than not.

And thats without us being in the league for three hears & having to go through Lerners divorce & then that Del Boy type imbecile from China...