Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
It's a paywall unfortunately
FFP charges?
- Thread starter Pope John XXIII
- Start date
It's looking like PGMOL might not relegate us now so the league has to look for other ways to try and do it.
AdebolaCornflakes
Vital Football Legend
The whole basis of that article is a quote from Kieran Maguire - a football finance expert - saying that we are sailing close to the wind with FFP limits.
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
It is what it is.
Marinakis has so far done very well at spending some money while keeping us well clear of FFP problems, so I had hoped he had his figures right here. The Johnson sale and other activity seemed quite calculated around meeting obligations.
But they may have got their figures wrong or the rules wrong.
I think the rules are bullshit and designed to make the whole league a closed shop.
But if we've broken the rules then we've broken them. We take the punishment, take the relegation and say thanks for the memories I guess.
Marinakis has so far done very well at spending some money while keeping us well clear of FFP problems, so I had hoped he had his figures right here. The Johnson sale and other activity seemed quite calculated around meeting obligations.
But they may have got their figures wrong or the rules wrong.
I think the rules are bullshit and designed to make the whole league a closed shop.
But if we've broken the rules then we've broken them. We take the punishment, take the relegation and say thanks for the memories I guess.
I'd be surprised if this is the case only 18 months after promotion. As you say we have spent large, and looked to spread payments over the term of player contracts.
We have 50m almost from Johnson, and between January and from June we will have around 12 players off the payroll.
We may need to sell Worrall if these rumours are true for the clear 15m, but I can't see any club who has gotten into trouble within 18 months. I am sure that the P&L will be assessed 18 months from now and its what we do from now until then which will determine that fate
What? By selling a good and largely performing player and using the money to bring in what at best could be described as a very mixed bag?
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
That has nothing to do with it.
The £47m counts now. What we spent counts over 4-5 years
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
Doesn't sound great if we need a defence.
Rules are surely clear. We've either met them or we haven't
Rules are surely clear. We've either met them or we haven't
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
Ok, so the crux of it is apparently this; our accounts run to June 30 and potentially they breach on that deadline.
Forest will argue that we would have received a far lower fee for Brennan Johnson if they sold him by 30th June. All that was on the table was £30m from Brentford then.
Not sure if that is going to fly to be honest, but we'll see
Forest will argue that we would have received a far lower fee for Brennan Johnson if they sold him by 30th June. All that was on the table was £30m from Brentford then.
Not sure if that is going to fly to be honest, but we'll see
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
Apologies for the flurry, but this is the football finance expert that the Times article is basing it on
LynxRed
Vital Squad Member
Seems a bit stupid to have the FFP cut-off for accounts in the middle of a player trading period. If that's the rule then so be it, but it's not well thought out. Surely it makes way more sense to assess a clubs financial incomings and outgoings outside of the two limited trading periods.
The general running of the club is a shambles and we deserve to be penalised and possibly relegated if this is the case.
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
Not really sure what else we could have done. You sell players to meet FFP, but if you have to do that before an arbitrary date only 1/3 of the way through the transfer window?
Yes, they wasted plenty too, no doubt.
But the plan was always to sell Jonno and we couldn't do that before we did really.
Worth remembering that several transfers were contingent on selling him and wouldn't have happened if we didn't. So clearly they felt that we were ok without selling him anyway.
It will come down to whether we got the sums right I guess, but ultimately our accounts are our accounts. They either breach or the don't.
Seems very harsh on promoted clubs that you are judged on championship seasons with far fewer allowable losses.
Rules are rules and if you don't follow them, regardless of how harsh, then you deserve to be punished.
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
Yeah, I agree with following rules.
I don't agree with these rules and how they work, or the premise of them.
But I don't disagree. If we have breached then, as I said, whatever comes comes
But they need to sort that shit out quickly so we know what we need to do.
Don't be deducting 10 points in April when we can do fuck all about it when they took years to do anything to Everton and gave them 2/3 of a season to make it up
And as you say Everton have always been in the premier league. We are 18 months into it, and regardless of the June 30th date, if the sale of Johnson 2 months later corrects this, then disepensation should be granted here, due to the fact being a newly promoted club. Also, if we don't go down this season, the allowable limit is 101m I believe, so they really cannot assess anything until they know the outcome of this season
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
Unfortunately, any punishment comes in April
Which is ludicrously unfair, giving the team no opportunity to respond to it on the pitch and no idea what they need to do
Which is ludicrously unfair, giving the team no opportunity to respond to it on the pitch and no idea what they need to do
I cannot see us falling foul of this.
Hucknall Red
Vital Reserves Team
Can't see us being in breach, Marinakis put about 11million into the club only a week or two ago, don't you think if we were a few million short he would have plugged the gap.
