In the PL - next
Chelsea and Newcastle's spending falls into what rules FFS
Has he any other family members interested in a football club??
DD#No1
The financial fair play rules only apply to the majority of clubs, the FA have a blind spot clause in it where certain clubs can hide and do what they like.
Weren't the vile about to get hit for their EFL spending before dunking diving Grealish cheated his way to a spot kick against us which eventually led to their play off final victory and promotion. A change of league and their overspend gets forgotten.
Hate the FA, premier league, the old gentlemen's club of teams that can do what they want unchecked, the changing of the rules to make it easier for the money teams to monopolize the silverware, i.e. 9 subs on the bench five allowed, Man city could field a bench (pretty much of a second team of internationals) against most teams that haven't even got 1 in their first team.
The academy rules where category A academies can steal talent from smaller clubs with less funds and slightly lesser academies. The talent then rots in B, C and D teams or gets sent out on loan. How many of our young talents been ruined by the lure of big club contracts.
Rant over.
Have I mentioned before I hate the premier league and the FA.
You can break the rules if you have enough money.
(04-02-2023, 13:00)Blue Baggie Wrote: [ -> ]You can break the rules if you have enough money.
Its not about having enough money to break the rules, its about having enough money to hire the best lawyers, to find a way to do what you want, without breaking the rules.
Wasn't it a line from the film "working girl"
When your at the top you can break the rules but, insert group (girls, boys, teams), like us can't get to the top without breaking the rules.
The FA pretty much have a protection racket for their elite exclusive gentlemen's club.
still nobody has explained how a 106 million pound spend on one player fits in to the fair pay rules.
Does that mean Chelski are generating profits of a billion pound a year, figures might be an exaggeration, but it does seem to for to me.
(05-02-2023, 12:07)4evaabaggie Wrote: [ -> ]Wasn't it a line from the film "working girl"
When your at the top you can break the rules but, insert group (girls, boys, teams), like us can't get to the top without breaking the rules.
The FA pretty much have a protection racket for their elite exclusive gentlemen's club.
still nobody has explained how a 106 million pound spend on one player fits in to the fair pay rules.
Does that mean Chelski are generating profits of a billion pound a year, figures might be an exaggeration, but it does seem to for to me.
Chelsea have been able to sign all these players by giving them long contracts. They paid 106m for Fernandez but he is on an 8.5 year contract, so his transfer fee is amortized over the course of his contract so only works out at around 12m per season for FFP purposes. His wages only count per year as well in the year they pay him. So with 450m in revenue they have a lot more cap space than most other teams. UEFA rules say clubs can only spend 70% of revenue on player costs, Premier League rules allow clubs to make a 105m rolling 3 year loss and Chelsea will likely be reporting a profit for the second successive season in their accounts for last season so are within these rules as well.
Problem for Chelsea, and possibly Liverpool will be if they do not get European football, and more importantly CL, then their revenue will drop quite a bit which will impact them in future season. They are still within FFP, both PL and UEFA, for this season even with the signings they have made but without CL football they might be pushing the rules in the not too distant future.
St Charles,
Thank you, that does explain it but also shows why nobody can compete with the top six clubs, two of which got there by spending a small countries gdp before ffp was brought in.
Bring back level playing fields.
