FFP

[AV82EC]

I don’t see what we are asking for here to be in anyway beyond the pale. As others have pointed out, the PSR limits were set 10 years ago (?) and inflation and the general global
Economy has had a deleterious effect on income/costs ever since so Im at a loss as to why the majority of clubs would not want to go to an indexed approach which allows for these things to move with how costs are changing over time.

I’d be intrigued as to how much Nas/Wes have tried to influence others as to the sensible nature of this proposal? Has Nas just got frustrated and lashed out with his legal action threat. I’d suggest he goes back to the clubs who he thinks he can influence and try again.

I also don’t see what this has got to do with C115y at all, they may agree with us but for imv utterly spurious reasons, the sportswashing ******.

[Ads]

The clubs above aren't going to vote to make it more likely for us to regularly gatecrash. The clubs below won't vote against their vested interest of not letting us get too far ahead either. It's a stupid rule, everybody agrees. We're not using pre-action protocol or potential litigation to slow down a punishment process for widespread cheating. As I say, silly comparison, strange hill to die on.

[ozzjim]

Exactly. Although Palace even posted a motion similar to ours that got shot down. The  club's who are not ambitious and just want to ride the Premier league gravy train won't vote for anything that makes Villa and Newcastle stronger. Having 8-9 top clubs makes their survival more difficult.

[VillaTim]

I don't expect many to agree with me & I respect that is everybody's individual prerogative, but if we take legal action against the Premier League, then that is the cue for me to walk away from football for good.

And while I agree with a lot of what Sawiris is saying regarding the unfairness of the current system, I would have the very same feelings that I had against ManC with their ridiculous "tyranny of the majority" bullshit quote when they explained their legal action, if we went the same route.

I personally have nothing but utter contempt towards them for their actions. So to change my view just because it is Villa, no matter how much I want to, well, thats not going to happen.

We signed up to the league & all its rules & regs. We helped set them all up so the league would be a democracy.

We tried to change the FFP/PSR rules recently but got shot down by the democratic process that we helped set up. If we go back & try to change the system using the democratic process available, then fine. We highlight all of our complaints, concerns & issues with the system at that point & if successful, then great.

If not, then we keep trying with different options until we get somewhere, in the way that other clubs did with the subs rule.

But to try to blow up the system because we cant get our own way, no matter how just our concerns may be, simply makes us ManC light & I want fuck all to do with that.

It will hurt, because I have loved Villa for over 40 years through all the shit we have had to endure.

But I fucking despise todays modern game with a passion & if Villa take legal action, then we will merely become part of everything that I despise.

So I will be out...

Nail on head. Sawaris has been making some strange noises lately, sympathy for C115y , moving to Abu Dhabi, and now this . If true i would also walk away.

[pablo_picasso]

Strange hill to die on, regulations which are unfair, which you agree are unfair and designed with the intention to keep the likes of us from doing what we did last season.

And we tried to change them using the democratic process that we helped setup.

Which is great. I agree 100% with that & really hope the rules get changed when we go back in again with amended options.

And if we fail again, then we keep going back until we are satisfied.

But to take legal action against the democratic process that we helped set up because we didn't get our own way?

Fuck no. Not for me. We either do it right, or we don't do it at all.

What happens when Wolves don't get their next VAR vote through? Or ManC put a vote through that goes against Villas interests & that fails?

Do we just accept that they are entitled to take legal action every time a vote goes against them that they don't like?

They would also be looking after their own interests that benefit their clubs for their future.

What makes us special?

Like I said, I don't expect everyone to agree with me.

I respect the fact that you don't. You are perfectly entitled to your opinion & I understand that it comes purely from a place of love for Aston Villa Football Club.

But I think that there is a bigger picture here other than who has the richest & most litigious owners in the league.

[Ads]

We're not taking legal action, we're seeking advice on a complaint to lodge.

Calling the Premier League a democracy is a misnomer. It's more akin to an oligarchy of the Res Publica. It's about a select band looking after narrow interests, for selfish reasons.

I want the custodians of my club, that is special to me in ways I couldn't begin to pen, to fight for our interests. At present, that is in a dry, dull way over finance and getting the rules increased to match inflation for example. They must do what they have to and if the gaming table is rigged, as is agreed, then they have my support to knock it over.

[Dogtanian]

The increase proposal was on a hiding to nothing.

You need 14 clubs to support it? The top six don't need it and it works in their favour, so there's six votes gone already.

For the rest of the teams, it's effectively raising the entry fee to play in the Premier League, typically to be bankrolled by the owners. If you're getting what you want from the Premier League, why would you vote to pay more to do it?

[paul_e]

It would depend on what it is we are seeking. I am all in favour of a rule change that doesn't force us into having to sell our better players, especially to clubs who finished above us, as punishment for finishing 4th. I don't want our stay around this neck of the woods to be as fleeting as Leicester found.

I'm far more bothered by the fact that the current rules encourage teams to sell their academy players which is the one remaining 'romantic' aspect of most sports, the whole local lad done good going on to lead his team to victory and now not only are we seeing the likes of Grealish going to the lure of big wages and easy medals but we're also seeing clubs choosing the fill their bench with the likes of Chambers and Dendoncker instead of giving those spots to Archer/AJ Ramsey because the finances of selling the kids are so much better for us.

The academy farms at clubs like Man City and Chelsea are an abomination that needs to be destroyed.

[pablo_picasso]

We're not taking legal action, we're seeking advice on a complaint to lodge.

Calling the Premier League a democracy is a misnomer. It's more akin to an oligarchy of the Res Publica. It's about a select band looking after narrow interests, for selfish reasons.

I want the custodians of my club, that is special to me in ways I couldn't begin to pen, to fight for our interests. At present, that is in a dry, dull way over finance and getting the rules increased to match inflation for example. They must do what they have to and if the gaming table is rigged, as is agreed, then they have my support to knock it over.

And the fact that we haven't actually taken any legal action is why I haven't walked away yet.

I was just making my feelings known about how I would deal with any potential actions that are hinted at in the article direct from the man himself.

I would have preferred to see a direct quote though, as opposed to how the journalist wrote it.

Time will tell how it all plays out.

As for democracy, in the football sense, it's as good as it's going to get. I get that it's not perfect & the politics of every club are there for them to each look after their own interests, both at the top & the bottom, as is their right, so it's up to us to change their minds by making changes to our proposals, lobbying the clubs, etc, & repeating the process until we ate satisfied.

And I agree, I want the rules changed.

But if kicking the board over means that the board gets kicked over every time others don't get their own way, then no, Im not prepared to support our club going that far...

[kippaxvilla2]

For years in fact decades we were seen as nice, lovable, come to Villa Park and they will give you a game but you will come out easy victors, accepting of stupid tapping up charges Aston Villa.  Now we aren't and people don't like that either.  If we are getting under people's noses I am all for it as yes we signed up to the rules.  Time has evolved, they are clearly now not fit for what they were designed to do so need looking at.  It is not a hard concept.

[chrisw1]

I don't see why owners who have ploughed multi millions into their clubs should sit and meekly accept rules that were transparently created to create a glass ceiling to hold their clubs back.  A system that makes teams like us and Newcastle sell our best players just as we get to the point of challenging the elite, despite having no debt.

I accept that unlimited money from state-owned clubs isn't the answer, but nobody can convince me we should accept the status quo because it's more morally acceptable either.

If you don't push back then we may as well pack up, go home and let the sky 6 share the trophies as they see fit.

[Toronto Villa]

I'd be against anything that would benefit our rivals over us, so probably. I'm not here for some altruistic, Corinthian hand clap good chaps of football exprience. I'm here for what benefits us, as I would expect the overwhelming majority of football fans are.

I dont want to do it by cheating. Which I think makes a big difference with Man City and why the comparison of "Man City lite" is silly.

I said the same the other day. We’ve got this far and just as we want to take that critical step to securing a more solid spot in the top 4 and CL versus visiting for a year, the rules are forcing us to sell one of our best players. All while Chelsea who finished below us keep on spending, Man U will when they enter the market, and the sides above us are able to as they choose. The rules are doing precisely what Nas is stating. We want to do things legally. This whole sympathize with Man City suggestion was bollocks. He wants to continue to invest in the club without bending rules or compromising what he already has just to bridge the gap.

[pablo_picasso]

It would depend on what it is we are seeking. I am all in favour of a rule change that doesn't force us into having to sell our better players, especially to clubs who finished above us, as punishment for finishing 4th. I don't want our stay around this neck of the woods to be as fleeting as Leicester found.

I'm far more bothered by the fact that the current rules encourage teams to sell their academy players which is the one remaining 'romantic' aspect of most sports, the whole local lad done good going on to lead his team to victory and now not only are we seeing the likes of Grealish going to the lure of big wages and easy medals but we're also seeing clubs choosing the fill their bench with the likes of Chambers and Dendoncker instead of giving those spots to Archer/AJ Ramsey because the finances of selling the kids are so much better for us.

The academy farms at clubs like Man City and Chelsea are an abomination that needs to be destroyed.

Agreed on this too.

And tbf, we have joined this abomination too with recent sales. I fully expect Iroegbunam to be sold soon too.

I don't know how we get round this though, other than maybe having independent valuations being placed on youth players every 6-12 months?

I admit, that I don't know enough about business finance to be able to know how this could be fixed & the idea above is probably utter garbage, but it was the first thing that popped into my head...

For years in fact decades we were seen as nice, lovable, come to Villa Park and they will give you a game but you will come out easy victors, accepting of stupid tapping up charges Aston Villa.  Now we aren't and people don't like that either.  If we are getting under people's noses I am all for it as yes we signed up to the rules.  Time has evolved, they are clearly now not fit for what they were designed to do so need looking at.  It is not a hard concept.

It's not about being seen as anything. I couldn't give a flying fuck what other fans think of us.

And I want us to be difficult, physical, everything & anything accepted within the rules of the game on the pitch. I want other teams to hate playing us because they aren't given an easy ride.

And that hasn't changed since I was a kid watching Villa. But being seen as "loveable" & easy on the pitch is a whole different animal to being litigious because the democratic option we took failed this time.

And some of the rules aren't fit for purpose, I agree. Including the one Sawiris is complaining about.

But I don't want Villa to kick the board over just because the first crack we had at changing those rules failed. The fact that we brought up the vote in the first place shows that it is "being looked at".

We just need to keep bringing it up, lobbying, highlighting it in the media, etc, until we are satisfied.

These are the views I would have if any other club did what one of our owners are hinting at. I don't see why they have to change just because its Villa...

[pablo_picasso]

I don't see why owners who have ploughed multi millions into their clubs should sit and meekly accept rules that were transparently created to create a glass ceiling to hold their clubs back.  A system that makes teams like us and Newcastle sell our best players just as we get to the point of challenging the elite, despite having no debt.

I accept that unlimited money from state-owned clubs isn't the answer, but nobody can convince me we should accept the status quo because it's more morally acceptable either.

If you don't push back then we may as well pack up, go home and let the sky 6 share the trophies as they see fit.

I have never said "don't push back".

But we do it in the right way. We keep pushing back via the democratic process available, we amend our changes, lobby clubs, go the press route, etc, etc. And then we keep doing that until we are satisfied, just like the clubs who wanted the extra subs did a couple of years ago.

Otherwise, if we kick the board over because our vote failed, whats to stop other clubs kicking the board over every time their vote fails?

It will become utter chaos with lawsuit after lawsuit.

Just look at the ManC one. How long is it after theirs that we have hinted at one via the press?

We will open up a pandoras box of lawsuits.

[Ads]

But it's not a democracy and it's not a fair process. If you are a fan of democracy, then why object to litigation (not that anybody has issued proceedings) for a judicial resolution?