We need to ignore PL rules about spending

[Brett Angell Delight]

I stand by it. There is a difference to being referred and being punished. I don’t think anything will come of this because it would not stand up to scrutiny or challenge from a legal perspective I don’t believe.

Either way, I have voiced my opinion and while your use of emojis suggests you think you know better, none of us really know.

We kinda know.

 

[4737carlin]

The time to do that was with Carlo when we could have survived any consequences of it and had a manager who could attract world class players.

Not sure about that, under Carlo for a fee we signed Ben Godfrey, Doucoure, Allan and Nkounkou

 

[Rob17896]

I think we are at a stage where we need Moshiri to really dig deep in Jan and buy three quality signings and spend over £100m to keep us in this league.

City have shown that these FFP/P&L things cannot be enforced so we need to ignore it and go all out.

At the very least we need to treat this window as a case of better to ask for forgiveness than permission

I agree. This is why I ignore rules in general, what can they do except deduct enough points to relegate and therefore bankrupt you? Your suggestion was a bit silly.

 

[Rob17896]

What about the fella we had never heard of, and forgetten his name already, that signed for spurs.

He would have further impoved the wage bill with no discernible return, whoever he was/is/would not have been.

 

[sd_1992]

I stand by it. There is a difference to being referred and being punished. I don’t think anything will come of this because it would not stand up to scrutiny or challenge from a legal perspective I don’t believe.

Either way, I have voiced my opinion and while your use of emojis suggests you think you know better, none of us really know.

I think the reason the punishments are usually tolerable is because it will fall at the first legal challenge it faces.

Fine and/or transfer embargo at worst. Point deductions are media fantasies of relegating Everton

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

I think the reason the punishments are usually tolerable is because it will fall at the first legal challenge it faces.

Fine and/or transfer embargo at worst. Point deductions are media fantasies of relegating Everton

Well I'm unsure on this because the Football League have managed to have all of theirs upheld albeit with some amendments at times but points wise never has a points deduction at EFL level been overturned.

Wonder if the PL are as good at putting together cases.

It is also applied at the point of the verdict. Which can lead to scenarios whereby some points are added back on appeal later!

 

[sd_1992]

Well I'm unsure on this because the Football League have managed to have all of theirs upheld albeit with some amendments at times but points wise never has a points deduction at EFL level been overturned.

Wonder if the PL are as good at putting together cases.

It is also applied at the point of the verdict. Which can lead to scenarios whereby some points are added back on appeal later!

Correct me if i'm wrong but there has never been a points deduction for not complying with FFP. Plenty for clubs failing to pay wages etc.

FFP almost certainly breaks laws around competition which is why severe punishments are not handed out.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Correct me if i'm wrong but there has never been a points deduction for not complying with FFP. Plenty for clubs failing to pay wages etc.

FFP almost certainly breaks laws around competition which is why severe punishments are not handed out.

Depends which League you're looking at?

Birmingham 2018-19...-9 points. They also were charged for breach of a Business Plan in 2019-20. Guilty but no points. 3 year period ending 2017-18 then the Business Plan charge related to 2018-19.

Derby 2021-22 although this went back as far as a 3 season period ending in 2016-17 and beginning in 2014-15, -9 points and 3 more suspended thrashed out..oh and a Business Plan. By rights the League could have pushed for -17.

Reading 2021-22..-6 and a further 6 suspended if Business Plan adhered to. This 2nd -6 is currently under dispute/review. There could be further as the suspended-6 wouldn't serve to offset or mitigate against any other breach, they also had a soft embargo in 2020-21 and maybe since January 2020. For 3 year period ending 2020-21. By rights the breach size was -12.

Sheffield Wednesday...-12 although EFL partially culpable saw it halved.

Varied soft and not so soft embargoes.

 

[Moomin]

Correct me if i'm wrong but there has never been a points deduction for not complying with FFP. Plenty for clubs failing to pay wages etc.

FFP almost certainly breaks laws around competition which is why severe punishments are not handed out.

Derby got a 9 point deduction.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Derby got a 9 point deduction.

See my above post, there have been multiple.

Had they fought it an aggregation of the 3 breaches- £6.67m, £11m and £1.9m would be 6 + 8 + 3 which if bundled into one collective Hearing would have entitled the League to go for 17.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Reading look like they're getting docked another 6 this week.

The system works. I remember projecting issues for them as far back as 2020.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

My more considered take is that...

1) Reading after allowables and Covid add-backs (EFL seem to have criteria and limits for this second bit) exceeded P&S/FFP by £18-19m to 2021.
Had they raised £37-38m in transfer profits by end of June 2021 it may have been resolved or kicked down the road. (2 years, combined average etc).
2) They agreed a 6 point deduction and a Business Plan with that second 6 suspended until the end of June 2023.
3) This suspended -6 would be triggered if they breached FFP ie the loss limit itself, obligations of transparency ie documents in on time or any asorxt on the Business Plan which gave targets on wages, transfer profit, amortisation and probably some other bits.
4) They appear to have breached some aspect of the Business Plan so -6 it might be but here's the kicker.

Such a breach with the suspended-6 would neither substitute, offset or mitigate against a punishment for the breach or failure itself. -6 would just be automatically triggered in addition to such charges etc.

 

[ClausThomsen]

Depends which League you're looking at?

Birmingham 2018-19...-9 points. They also were charged for breach of a Business Plan in 2019-20. Guilty but no points. 3 year period ending 2017-18 then the Business Plan charge related to 2018-19.

Derby 2021-22 although this went back as far as a 3 season period ending in 2016-17 and beginning in 2014-15, -9 points and 3 more suspended thrashed out..oh and a Business Plan. By rights the League could have pushed for -17.

Reading 2021-22..-6 and a further 6 suspended if Business Plan adhered to. This 2nd -6 is currently under dispute/review. There could be further as the suspended-6 wouldn't serve to offset or mitigate against any other breach, they also had a soft embargo in 2020-21 and maybe since January 2020. For 3 year period ending 2020-21. By rights the breach size was -12.

Sheffield Wednesday...-12 although EFL partially culpable saw it halved.

Varied soft and not so soft embargoes.

Ssshhhh. Facts don't come into it for people who base their opinions on FFP and other regulations on a complete misunderstanding / wilful ignorance of what actually happened and is happening with the likes of Citeh and Chelski.

 

[Joey66]

See my above post, there have been multiple.

Had they fought it an aggregation of the 3 breaches- £6.67m, £11m and £1.9m would be 6 + 8 + 3 which if bundled into one collective Hearing would have entitled the League to go for 17.

EPL teams get points deducted - no one in the prem ever gets points deducted ...... urm watch this space .....

 

[The binman chronicles]

I agree it will be the last thing they expect if we blow 300 million on players. They won't even give our books a second look next year as they'd think no one would be that silly to mot balance after being referred...