FFP charges?
- Thread starter Pope John XXIII
- Start date
AdebolaCornflakes
Vital Football Legend
choke on a fat one you vile snert
Apollyon
Vital Football Legend
CanadaRed
Vital Reserves Team
Apologies if someone else posted this before, I did trawl through the last 20 pages and didn’t see it mentioned. Does anyone think we would have seen a better effort and 2 extra points against Luton, if we had known about the deduction before last Saturdays game?
radfordinlondon
Vital Football Legend
my new favourite MP
clearly i think we all want to stay up, but i have thought a few times that if we went down and managed to keep most of our players, we might actually win a few games in the Champ
not if new rules come in?
To all of those cowering and thanking our lucky stars it's only 4 points for daring to challenge the establishment, read this, and then read it again.
Man City and Chelsea will never see a single punishment while us and Everton are immediately docked points.
This is why I'm pushing back. It's not remotely evenly applied and never will be.
At least in the Championship we can all talk about how we are morally superior while watching City win another Champions League. We did a similar thing watching Leicester win the PL. We were definitely the real winners.
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
Yes.
Because this current year we are in now, ending on 30th June, we are being judged under the existing rules. Fail on 30th June and it's another deduction.
The year from 1st July is judged under the new rules
TMFwanstead
Vital Reserves Team
That’s true but wouldn’t be surprised if they did a bit of a reset
sorry i meant that yes they would get a points deduction for this year, but would the new rules mean they wouldn't get punished for that overspend in the following years as the current rolling 3 year limits would be gone. So as the prior post says, Newcastle spend £200m on players, get an 8 point deduction, then go into new season and remain compliant with the new % of revenue approach?
They probably won’t spend big prior to June 30th 2024 but go big between July and end of window as that won’t be in figures until reporting in summer of 25 and won’t be charged till Jan 26. New players will have had 18months and be in top 6. They could afford 8 point reduction without a major problem and effective for one season. More likely the ne rules will apply.
BlackGold
Vital 1st Team Regular
yer right, isn't is closer to 42m?
So, we rejected a bid of £42.5m to comply (in January?) to accept a £42m bid in August to fail?
Guess we just delayed relegation by a season then.
Last edited:
BlackGold
Vital 1st Team Regular
Maguire was speculating that Forest's payment to Macquarie is around £5m - the 27m vs 32.5m that the papers reveal the bank will obtain from Spurs.
Presumably the actual payment to Forest was around £15m, hence the total being £47.5m...but Forest needed to pay for the bank's loan to gain cashflow.
Nottingham Forest take out loan in relation to Brennan Johnson transfer deal
Latest Nottingham Forest news as details of Brennan Johnson move to Tottenham Hotspur emerge in Companies House filing
www.nottinghampost.com
Think Spurs pays bank.Maguire was speculating that Forest's payment to Macquarie is around £5m - the 27m vs 32.5m that the papers reveal the bank will obtain from Spurs.
Presumably the actual payment to Forest was around £15m, hence the total being £47.5m...but Forest needed to pay for the bank's loan to gain cashflow.
Nottingham Forest take out loan in relation to Brennan Johnson transfer deal
Latest Nottingham Forest news as details of Brennan Johnson move to Tottenham Hotspur emerge in Companies House filing
radfordinlondon
Vital Football Legend
erm I support an appeal.
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
Interesting; not sure.
If they could spend 200m by 30th June they would be under the old rules, which might help; although some suggestions are that they might need to sell by 30th June to stay clear anyway (I suspect there are actually a few clubs dismayed by what the verdict means for them).
I don't know enough about how the new rules work, or even what the % of income to expenditure will be. I don't know if it's a 3 year average or just yearly
An example; Burnley had a 86M wage bill in the PL in 2021/22, with 63% wages to turnover. Assuming the % limit was something like 70-75% that doesn't give much room for manoeuvre in terms of funding transfers.
And that season Burnley's wage bill was the second lowest in the league
Obviously, 1% of Brentford's 166m turnover is going to offer a hell of a lot less spending power than 1% of Manchester United's 750m turnover.
But I imagine that is the whole point
Will the clubs all have to vote for this, at 14/6 split?
If so, why wouldn’t at least 10 clubs vote against these new set of unfair rules which yet again allow the top 6-8, who have had years to establish new revenue streams, a new set of standards which 10-12 clubs will never be able to reach
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
They have already voted for it
Probably because the existing rules are such bullshit and half the clubs are at imminent risk of points deduction if they continue
