The Bury game | Page 10 | Vital Football

The Bury game

lets be honest guys, the team we had last night SHOULD have been more than enough to see off bury

then we had the standard set piece goal and the keepers red....didnt help issues but still should have enough

we have shed loads of possession but we lack any killer pass/vision in the final 3rd, and the worrying thing for me is we dont seem(it could change with our players) seem to have anyone willing to play that role
 
redderthanred said:
Carvalho came in on the never - never in order to keep us down under the FFP threshold - think first years down payment was something like £5m.
Click to expand...

There is still confusion over FFP . When you PAY for a player has no effect on FFP whatsoever. It’s simply the COST of the player divided by the contract length that gets charged to the accounts each year, plus obviously whatever salary is paid in the year.
 
Only Byram and Robinson came out of the game with any real credit. Hefele was quite good, but Dawson looked below par . Yates was Watson mark two, with everything from this pair going sideways or backwards. No creativity from midfield , no decent crosses, and Murphy left isolated. Soudani didn’t look happy to come off , but hopefully was being saved for Saturday. Byram is worth a promotion to the first eleven.
 
Lienking said:
There is still confusion over FFP . When you PAY for a player has no effect on FFP whatsoever. It’s simply the COST of the player divided by the contract length that gets charged to the accounts each year, plus obviously whatever salary is paid in the year.
Click to expand...

There is no confusion; your assessment is quite correct.

The transfer fee is amortised over the length of the contract.
 
mao tse tung said:
There is no confusion; your assessment is quite correct.

The transfer fee is amortised over the length of the contract.
Click to expand...

Redderthanred is saying we are paying in instalments to get round FFP though. May be good for cashflow but doesn’t affect FFP , which is obviously confusing some people!
 
It
Lienking said:
Redderthanred is saying we are paying in instalments to get round FFP though. May be good for cashflow but doesn’t affect FFP , which is obviously confusing some people!
Click to expand...

It does not make the slightest difference if the fee is paid up front or in instalments; the same rule applies:

The cost of a players transfer fee is amortised over the length of the contract, period.

Taken from FFP explained:

http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/financial-fair-play-explained.php

3. Transfer Fees

An important part of the rules relates to the way that player transfers have to be accounted for. Although a club will often pay a transfer fee to another club immediately, from a Break Even perspective the financial cost of acquiring a player has to be written-off over the duration of the contract. We need an example: let's assume Torres was signed for £50m on a 5 year contract and that Chelsea paid Liverpool £50m via an immediate bank transfer. As far as the Profit & Loss section of accounts is concerned (and the Break Even test), Torres' purchase price would be depreciated (or amortised) evenly over the 5 years of the contract. So, during the first 12 months, only £10m would be incurred as a cost in the accounts and Torres would end the year with a 'book value' of £40m. After 5 years, Torres' contract would have ended and he would be free to leave the club (he would also have a book value of zero). If the club sells Torres part way-through the contract, the club the difference between the amount they receive for the player and the book value at the date of the sale is accounted for immediately in the accounts (and the Break Even test) as a 'loss/profit on player trading'. This is important as it explains how a club can sell a player for below the original purchase price and still record a profit in the accounts during the year of sale. If Liverpool sell Andy Carroll for anything above £18m in the summer, they will record the difference as a profit on player sales during 2013/14. If we assume that Falcao comes to Chelsea for £50m on a 5 year deal in the summer, the club's P&L account for the year will only include £10m as an expense (under the heading 'amortisation'). The club will also, of course, have to include the player wages as an expense in the Profit & Loss account. If you want to know more about 'amortisation', see the video at the foot of this page.
 
It's fairly normal for fees for players to be paid in installments.

Apart from when chancers like Fawaz want all the cash upfront in exchange of a smaller overall fee, that's the way football transfers generally work I believe.
 
paplane said:
It's fairly normal for fees for players to be paid in installments.

Apart from when chancers like Fawaz want all the cash upfront in exchange of a smaller overall fee, that's the way football transfers generally work I believe.
Click to expand...


Clubs demanding fees up front are getting more and more common; paying by instalments still takes place though.
 
If we can score 2 goals in a game...it would possibly put us in the driving seat....and let's score first ...not asking for too much
 
Lienking said:
Redderthanred is saying we are paying in instalments to get round FFP though. May be good for cashflow but doesn’t affect FFP , which is obviously confusing some people!
Click to expand...

When payment is made makes no difference to the profit and loss. if a player costs £10 million and has a contract of 5 years then £2 million per year is apportioned to the Accounts. It’s just like depreciating a £10k car over 5 years at £2k per year, the fact that the car maybe paid through a loan, makes no difference whatsoever.
 
Lienking said:
There is still confusion over FFP . When you PAY for a player has no effect on FFP whatsoever. It’s simply the COST of the player divided by the contract length that gets charged to the accounts each year, plus obviously whatever salary is paid in the year.
Click to expand...

Right - Thank you for clearing that one up. (y)
 
finbar70 said:
4 games, 4 goals, 3 games at home. Not great
Click to expand...

Think this is the reason, as u point out lots of games, lots of new players.

It was not great but we are through and we need lots more patience. If we r still doing the same in December I will start thinking about moaning.
 
Lets get this game in proportion. Fourth game of the season so early days. For many it was first game of the season. Some looked as if they hadn't worked with each other before, such as Hefele and Dawson for first 30 mins. Which was true.

What was it that we wanted from the game?
To get thru till next round. Tick.
To get a game in to the legs of some players (Hefele, Byram, Robinson). Tick.
To get a second game and some consistency in others (Murphy, Watson etc) Tick.
To give likes of Yates a start and Soudani a try out at role behind the striker. Give further experience to likes of Goncalves. Managed half a game each. This objective was sacrificed for objective one and win the game.

Any thing learnt? Yates and Smith likely to go out on loan for at least till Xmas? Steele surely has played himself in to number two slot.

Murphy struggled again? Does he need more time, the team to play to his strengths more or has he passed his best. AK needs to decide which of these it is. Do we need a further loanee striker? Does he feel BB is second to Grabben and Murphy now third? Does this mean BB not going out on loan and is required as cover. Expect this issue to be tested out over next few games/training sessions as decision will be made by end of month. Murphy will play several 15 minute slots, whilst AK decides.

Has Hefele jumped above Worrall in CB's. Are Forest likely to play three at the back? Is Worrall better off going out on loan? Again till Xmas.

How important is Osborn to Forest? When in need of extra legs who did AK go to?

Has Cash, Lolley or Byram played themselves in to the first team? No doubt all three will be in squad.

A useful exercise. Still many questions for AK.
 
End of the day we were damn lucky to get through the tie.

We can say it was a professional job etc etc but at the end of the day we got lucky right at the death and struggled at home against a team we should have blown away.
 
Last seasons promotion contenders Middlesbrough and Villa both struggled against league 2 opposition too. These cup games are rarely easy. First competitive game of the season for a lot of players Letting in an early goal and then going down to 10 men. Still won the tie. Still through.Won a penalty shoot out.Still unbeaten.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.