Interesting article re FFP & SUFC

[Blade56]

For those who've not seen it, makes a mockery of the system

 

[PeteBlade]

Give us a hint...

 

[grafikhaus]

Seen what?

 

[Paulus]

This is a good quiz

 

[Bladebri]

Pass

 

[metalblade]

I bet nobody has seen that before

 

[grafikhaus]

While we're waiting, Fatty Samuels wrote this t'other day:

Kevin De Bruyne cost more than Bournemouth have spent on players. Not this season, not even this squad — in their entire history. Added together, every Bournemouth player purchased since the club were elected to the Football League in 1923 — and this isn’t a net total, so money recouped from players’ sales is not included — wouldn’t get within a ballpark £20million of what City paid for De Bruyne. It would barely outstrip the £31.8m City lavished on the underachieving Eliaquim Mangala, in fact.

Yet when the Football League announced their financial fair play (FFP) punishments last week, guess who turned out to be the bad guys? That’s right: Bournemouth. The club with the young English manager and a starting XI that cost £2.7m and beat Chelsea. The club that regularly play Harry Arter, a £4,000 signing from Woking; a club that, without a doubt, are one of the feelgood, success stories of English football. They now face a £10m fine.

Also facing scrutiny from the Football League — Leicester City. Another of the reasons this year has been among the most cherished in recent memory. They are yet to satisfy with their accounts from season 2013-14, when they lost £20.8m, substantially more than the £8m permitted.

Link to full story

 

[Blade58]

For those who've not seen it, makes a mockery of the system

B56, did you get a magic set for Xmas

 

[JohnDenver]

For those who've not seen it, makes a mockery of the system

I believe you.

 

[Blade56]

Oooops Was just checking the Lamb and forgot the link, or was it checking the link and forgot the Lamb?

Why shouldUnited botherdoing their sums?
http://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/shef...ould-united-bother-doing-their-sums-1-7651063

 

[Bladesman]

Here is the article in full:

Why should United bother doing their sums?

So there you have it.

Sheffield United’s efforts to comply with the Football League’s Financial Fair Play and Salary Cost Management Protocol regulations have been a complete waste of time.

Football League clubs must make difficult financial decisions

The announcement that AFC Bournemouth failed to meet their obligations in the Championship last term have not only revealed the supposed romanticism surrounding Eddie Howe’s side to be a total sham. (A fact long highlighted by many of us in the media but conveniently ignored by others due to its sober narrative. The second coming of Wimbledon they most definitely ain’t). But confirmation they could be fined as little as £1 because they are now under the jurisdiction of the Premier League is a slap in the face for teams like United and tomorrow’s opponents Peterborough who, for many seasons now, have played assiduously by the book.

Make no mistake, FFP and SCMP in particular have caused United plenty of headaches since being relegated from the second tie in 2011. Most notably when, having found themselves in League One, only a firesale of the entire squad would have brought them below the 65 per cent wages to turnover threshold. A compromise was brokered at the FL’s AGM and salary levels were reduced on a step by step basis. And, crucially, on time.

A lot of rubbish has been spoken about FFP after it was revealed Bournemouth, Nottingham Forest, Bolton Wanderers and Fulham, all failed to comply following the most recent audit. Much of it, unfortunately, by folk who, paid to pontificate on drivetime radio and television magazine programmes, really should have a better grasp of their brief. Market tests, which designed to prevent wealthy benefactors from circumnavigating the rules by ‘negotiating’ inflated sponsorship agreement are rarely raised or discussed.

FFP might not be perfect. Yes, in its present form it could simply preserve the status quo. Some adjustments are required but the principles behind it are well-meaning if, like me, you believe clubs are more than just a business or rich man’s play thing. Nobody has their ashes scattered in the frozen food aisle of the local Tesco Express after all.

Sheffield United have met their FFP and SCMP obligations �2015 Sport Image all rights reserved

Bournemouth could be fined 100 per cent of any excess losses if they total more than £10m. But, as they prepare to face Leicester City at The Walkers Stadium, billionaire owner Maxim Demin is unlikely to shed too many tears either way. Forest and Wanderers are subject to transfer embargoes. Supposedly a less severe sanction because they did not gain promotion but, given the riches top-flight status brings, actually more tough.

It is a farcical situation with a simple solution. Punish those who break the rules with meaningful points deductions and ensure the system is governed by one ruling body. Not two.

 

[UnitedBlade]

United do their sums because the owners don't want to inject "equity" investment on an annual basis. They are very rich but not billionaires.

The bloke at Bournemouth was prepared to chuck tens of millions at it in L1 and the Championship. Fair play he's gambled and won.

It has never, is not and never will be a level playing field.

Good point by Fatty about Man City though - untouchable whatever the rules.

 

[FTPE]

So basically it's ok to break the rules as long as you get promoted into the premiership.
As long as the prince is willing to spend 10million this month then we should be ok.
Would 10mil even guarantee it?

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

This isn't how football is run, this is how society is run.

 

[spongebobblade]

Fatty Samuels has quoted transfer fees but surely wages make up a huge part? While this only heaps further exasperation with regards Man City let's not forget Bournemouth (Av attendance 10.265) spent a fortune on wages. Lee Camp, Ian Harte, Callum Wilson, Matt Ritchie and Kenwyne Jones will have all been on decent wages. The point is that they're are ways and means around the rules if you desperately want success or you can use them as an excuse to cut funding. As per the bladesway we fall into the latter. Money guarantees nothing but without doubt it helps

 

[Pedro Verde]

The Rules in the Premiership and Championship differ to the rules in L1 and L2

 

[BushBlade]

Fatty Samuels has quoted transfer fees but surely wages make up a huge part? While this only heaps further exasperation with regards Man City let's not forget Bournemouth (Av attendance 10.265) spent a fortune on wages. Lee Camp, Ian Harte, Callum Wilson, Matt Ritchie and Kenwyne Jones will have all been on decent wages. The point is that they're are ways and means around the rules if you desperately want success or you can use them as an excuse to cut funding. As per the bladesway we fall into the latter. Money guarantees nothing but without doubt it helps

He also ignores the fact that contracts are binding. The rules were set up to protect clubs from owners. Imagine this scenario; Tuna man sanctions a wage bill of 120% of turnover, because he can cover the losses. Then he goes bust. The swine then have a wage bill they can't sustain. They go bust. Hilarious but it could happen to any club.
You can't allow a situation whereby if the owner pulls the plug on the money the club collapses, like Bolton. (Which is worth a thread on its own but not on this forum).

 

[judge]

While we're waiting, Fatty Samuels wrote this t'other day:

Kevin De Bruyne cost more than Bournemouth have spent on players. Not this season, not even this squad — in their entire history. Added together, every Bournemouth player purchased since the club were elected to the Football League in 1923 — and this isn’t a net total, so money recouped from players’ sales is not included — wouldn’t get within a ballpark £20million of what City paid for De Bruyne. It would barely outstrip the £31.8m City lavished on the underachieving Eliaquim Mangala, in fact.

Yet when the Football League announced their financial fair play (FFP) punishments last week, guess who turned out to be the bad guys? That’s right: Bournemouth. The club with the young English manager and a starting XI that cost £2.7m and beat Chelsea. The club that regularly play Harry Arter, a £4,000 signing from Woking; a club that, without a doubt, are one of the feelgood, success stories of English football. They now face a £10m fine.

Also facing scrutiny from the Football League — Leicester City. Another of the reasons this year has been among the most cherished in recent memory. They are yet to satisfy with their accounts from season 2013-14, when they lost £20.8m, substantially more than the £8m permitted.

Link to full story

He has a real hard on for sticking up for cheats doesnt he ?

Bournemouth and leicester have benefitted financially from breaking the rules
Rules that other clubs did not break and did not benefit the massive financial gain of the prem

Guy is a fucking prick

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Idea: the Football League decides against promotion to the "Premiership" and sets up its own League, which it tries to run less like a libertine orgy of exploitation and more like a sport.

Also that way we become a Division 2 team without the inconvenience of promotion.

 

[UnitedBlade]

He also ignores the fact that contracts are binding. The rules were set up to protect clubs from owners. Imagine this scenario; Tuna man sanctions a wage bill of 120% of turnover, because he can cover the losses. Then he goes bust. The swine then have a wage bill they can't sustain. They go bust. Hilarious but it could happen to any club.
You can't allow a situation whereby if the owner pulls the plug on the money the club collapses, like Bolton. (Which is worth a thread on its own but not on this forum).

The owner at Bolton has said time and again he wouldn't call in the debt. It will be very interesting to see what happens when they go down to L1.

Can't see a buyer on the horizon unless they do a cheap Mandy-type deal.

 

[northsomersetblade]

Golly, football clubs breaking the rules that exist to govern them fairly. Who'd have thought it?

No doubt the wrongdoers will soon find that justice is swift, righteous and without mercy.

 

[Leonardo Green]

Everyone ignores FFP, except for our board who hide behind it.

 

[judge]

I also dont get the hate towards man city
Most of the financial fair play rules were invented to protect the g14 clubs and keep man city,psg and chelsea out of the excvlusive money club that has been in existence since their chairman realised they can screw their customers ( us the fans) for gazillions

Man city are the new wimbledon or cloughs forest
The only way to compete with the big boys nowadays is with more money than them

 

[PeteBlade]

Everyone ignores FFP, except for our board who hide behind it.

By 'hide behind it' I assume you mean comply with the rules?

 

[BushBlade]

The owner at Bolton has said time and again he wouldn't call in the debt. It will be very interesting to see what happens when they go down to L1.

Can't see a buyer on the horizon unless they do a cheap Mandy-type deal.

I'm not sure he's called the loan in. My understanding is that he's just refused to continue to fund the losses. HMRC are pursuing an outstanding tax bill and they have cash flow problems.

 

[UnitedBlade]

I'm not sure he's called the loan in. My understanding is that he's just refused to continue to fund the losses. HMRC are pursuing an outstanding tax bill and they have cash flow problems.

plus Trevor Birch and Terry Robinson !

I think I'll stick with our soap opera

 

[Leonardo Green]

By 'hide behind it' I assume you mean comply with the rules?

It's a rule that helps the big clubs but hinders the small clubs.

We are by far the biggest club in the division, yet the board keep banging on about how it hinders us, we have to do this, comply with that etc.... when in reality the rule should allow us to blow everyone else in this league out of the water.

 

[blade too long]

The Rules in the Premiership

Are those with bigger budgets run the show
who going to try and rein n man city when man city are paying the rule makers salaries

 

[bladesmanluke]

While we're waiting, Fatty Samuels wrote this t'other day:

Kevin De Bruyne cost more than Bournemouth have spent on players. Not this season, not even this squad — in their entire history. Added together, every Bournemouth player purchased since the club were elected to the Football League in 1923 — and this isn’t a net total, so money recouped from players’ sales is not included — wouldn’t get within a ballpark £20million of what City paid for De Bruyne. It would barely outstrip the £31.8m City lavished on the underachieving Eliaquim Mangala, in fact.

Yet when the Football League announced their financial fair play (FFP) punishments last week, guess who turned out to be the bad guys? That’s right: Bournemouth. The club with the young English manager and a starting XI that cost £2.7m and beat Chelsea. The club that regularly play Harry Arter, a £4,000 signing from Woking; a club that, without a doubt, are one of the feelgood, success stories of English football. They now face a £10m fine.

Also facing scrutiny from the Football League — Leicester City. Another of the reasons this year has been among the most cherished in recent memory. They are yet to satisfy with their accounts from season 2013-14, when they lost £20.8m, substantially more than the £8m permitted.

Link to full story

They got promoted at the expense of other football league clubs by cheating the FFP system. They deserve the fine

 

[derryblade]

Whether the Blades comply with the rules or hide behind them is irrelevant surely the question is do our managers use the money they do receive wisely.