FFP rule change

John from Bootle · August 16, 2023

Tipp blue said:
The most obvious fixing of a game I've ever seen, everything was dodgy about that whole thing, from the draw to the refereeing... why Everton didn't kick up is beyond me, should have reported the whole sham to interpol.

Never mind all that, that's never gonna be provable, although you're almost certainly right.

One thing that can be proven, without doubt, is that the competition altered it's rules after both the Premier League and Champions League campaigns had ended, and then applied them retrospectively, making a mockery out of the previous season.

Almost worthy of another asterix that 5th one for the [Poor language removed].

matty1878 · August 16, 2023

Moomin said:
If they have broke any rules they will be charged but it looks like they will use amortisation to prove they haven't broke any rules regarding to FFP.

what’s amortisation?

PhilM · August 16, 2023

matty1878 said:
what’s amortisation?

You buy a player for £25m over five years: on the books, it's £5m per year, and his value depreciates at that rate. So, after a year he's worth £20m etc.

BullensRoad · August 16, 2023

Mr Popodopolous said:
Tbh, from a regulatory perspective it seems sensible to me. If you're going to do FFP it may as well be done correctly. If people think it's pointless, restrictive whatever that's obviously.

It isn't just Everton, that's a little paranoid IMO. Wolves appear to be bricking it so far and I'd thought this time about the loss thing would catch most clubs all told, in terms of the early submission.

I expect most clubs will have made a two year aggregated loss before tax hence will be captured by this rule.

I mean, the article headline has Everton in capital letter, the sub headline mentions Everton a few times, but then it mentions in the last few sentences Chelsea and Wolves - who are arguably in bigger trouble (if they get a grip of Chelsea).

Moomin · August 16, 2023

BullensRoad said:
I mean, the article headline has Everton in capital letter, the sub headline mentions Everton a few times, but then it mentions in the last few sentences Chelsea and Wolves - who are arguably in bigger trouble (if they get a grip of Chelsea).

Last time I checked it's us that has been referred to an independent panel and not Chelsea or Wolves.

spectateur · August 16, 2023

BullensRoad said:
I mean, the article headline has Everton in capital letter, the sub headline mentions Everton a few times, but then it mentions in the last few sentences Chelsea and Wolves - who are arguably in bigger trouble (if they get a grip of Chelsea).

I think his article would get more hits If Chelsea was in the headline.
After all to a large number of heil readers, Everton doesn't mean much at all.
I met one some time ago in the south who thought Everton was "one of those mill towns near Manchester"

BullensRoad · August 16, 2023

spectateur said:
I think his article would get more hits If Chelsea was in the headline.
After all to a large number of heil readers, Everton doesn't mean much at all.
I met one some time ago in the south who thought Everton was "one of those mill towns near Manchester"

I've met at least two people who didn't know Everton was in Liverpool.

But the "journalist" for that article has constantly spouted rubbish. He said the stadium was going to be stopped etc.

Jacko93 · August 16, 2023

Tel001 said:
That’s was fact mate … I have never been more sure of anything in my life.

Why would “ the worlds best ever ref”be allowed special treatment to ref for an extra year after the retirement age , just to manage a single game and then retire anyway.

Not as if it was the World Cup final and he went out on a high.

His last game had Phil Neville , Marcus bent and co in it and wasn’t even a proper cl game, it was a qualifier

In the first year that they had the unfortunate position of the champions not being able to defend it as they hadn't qualified, causing a potential imbalance of English teams in the competition.

Tel001 · August 16, 2023

Jacko93 said:
In the first year that they had the unfortunate position of the champions not being able to defend it as they hadn't qualified, causing a potential imbalance of English teams in the competition.

Was the second time it happened . It happened in Spain with Real Madrid but the Spanish fa chose them to go into cl.

Nobody expected us to get 4th and nobody expected them to win the cl.

The FA said in January of that year that the too 4 will be in the cl.

When we got it, they had to keep their word, Euefa didn’t like it and wouldn’t allow 5 English teams in the cl so they got creative , then changed the rules so that the winners qualify from now on

Joey66 · August 16, 2023

Tel001 said:
Was the second time it happened . It happened in Spain with Real Madrid but the Spanish fa chose them to go into cl.

Nobody expected us to get 4th and nobody expected them to win the cl.

The FA said in January of that year that the too 4 will be in the cl.

When we got it, they had to keep their word, Euefa didn’t like it and wouldn’t allow 5 English teams in the cl so they got creative , then changed the rules so that the winners qualify from now on

It was over the TV money for the five clubs - The other lot should have not been in it, but they are the special ones ....

MrGrumpy · August 16, 2023

Moomin said:
If they have broke any rules they will be charged but it looks like they will use amortisation to prove they haven't broke any rules regarding to FFP.

Seems that way, plus they probably take 200-400 mil in revenue before they sell players

Tin-Tin · August 16, 2023

Joke this. Some clubs going to be in trouble soon

Bigduke1234 · August 16, 2023

Joey66 said:
It was over the TV money for the five clubs - The other lot should have not been in it, but they are the special ones ....

Didn’t they threaten not to play on the World Club Championship unless they were let back in? My trust in sporting fairness died that day

Joey66 · August 16, 2023

Bigduke1234 said:
Didn’t they threaten not to play on the World Club Championship unless they were let back in? My trust in sporting fairness died that day

Since they came up in 1963 - the first Derby was a sign of things to come before that the joy of them being in a lower division - a nice period to live through.... The Indian sign they had on us was a Jinx - only Ball & Big Joe as Manager stemmed the tide a bit .....

My late father stated the L in their name + Luck - later on corruption imo

windymiller · August 16, 2023

danny147 said:
Wouldn’t pay any attention to a man that looks like the type of person you’d expect to see on one of them hunters pages on Facebook.View attachment 223017

The defendant, Hughes of Anfield Road, Liverpool, appeared in court today charged with the little known medieval crime of bellendery. The jury has now retired but it seems unlikely there will be a positive outcome for Hughes.

Windy Miller.

Chief crime correspondent, Daily Mail.