FFP

[paul_e]

If Man Utd were better run and had no debt, god only knows how much they’d be able to spend. Up the Glazers!

Yes but that's why the rules need to change, we can't always rely on knights in shining armour like the Glazers or Clearlake Capitol to work their magic.

Not sure Man Utd fans would consider them knights in shining armour.

He meant from our pespective of doing gods work to keep the twats from really exploiting their size.

[Beard82]

Cool - if everyone else thinks the PL have nailed it than I'm happy to concede.

They clearly haven't "nailed it". I don't think it's possible to "nail it", there isn't a way to do this which is completely fair and will make everybody happy. But that's not a new development, things tend to be weighted towards bigger, more successful teams. Something we've benefited from more than most over the years. 

But my point of contention is the conflation between things being bad and annoying for us, also being something that is bad for football. If the rules changed tomorrow to allow us to spend willy-nilly, that's great for Villa. It's not something that makes the league or the game any better than it currently is.

Yeah - but I am not suggesting for a minute that anyone should be allowed to spend willy nilly.  I just think if it was more of a level playing field it would make for a better league, and less stockpiling of players and wasting of talent.

I reckon the playing field is as level as it's been in decades, in the Premier League at least.

Pretty much every team is rich enough that if they really want to keep a player they've got the financial heft to do so. Brentford and Bournemouth can go and spend tens of millions of pounds on stars who go on to play for Brazil in the World Cup and there's no real chat about other teams coming and taking them off them. The possibility of any team beating any other is probably greater than any other major league. There are various different teams winning the title and loads of different names qualifying for Europe each season.

If any playing field needs levelling (and I don't think it does) to make things "fairer", the place to start is the one between the Premier League and the other leagues in Europe.

As soon as a player does well at Brentford or Bournemouth they move on.  There effectively allowed to incubate talent under one of the bigger clubs wishes to take the player.  There are various different teams winning things,

I agree across Europe it needs to be a more level playing field.   

[Dante Lavelli]

I do think it is a joke that there is nothing in the rules about debt.

Are interest and repayment costs factored into what can/cannot be spent? 

If these rules are to safeguard the clubs then the repayment costs should be factored in first so its clear they can service the debt if the owners decide to leave.  I've no idea whether this is factored in already. 

[Beard82]

I do think it is a joke that there is nothing in the rules about debt.

Are interest and repayment costs factored into what can/cannot be spent? 

If these rules are to safeguard the clubs then the repayment costs should be factored in first so its clear they can service the debt if the owners decide to leave.  I've no idea whether this is factored in already.

I think it is - not exactly sure how - but im pretty sure it is. 

[Dogtanian]

Wasn't one of the issues Everton had around excluding interest payments on something they shouldn't have done?

[Beard82]

I think it was - I think there argument was the interest on the money they borrowed to pay for the stadium / or an overrun on it - wasnt included.

I think it was something like the capex is exempt, but the interest isnt?

[Dogtanian]

Yeah, that sounds right. Slippery swine.