• The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Management FFP / PSR Requirements & Breaches

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Brian Fantana said:
They refused to cooperate. It makes up some of the charges. But yeah, why they weren’t acted upon earlier or investigated quicker isn’t on at all. If it hadn’t been for the hacked emails nothing would have happened at all.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

As someone else said it's because Man City where full on cheating hiding money making up money and so on, and then like you say when they got caught refused to help dragging it all out.

Everton and Forrest have basically just overspent and been dumb enough to post the losses. But Everton have spent to such a ridiculous point they are fucked.

Forrest might get away with it because losses they incurred in the championship are part of this (everyone in the championship loses shit loads) and they actually would have been under if the Johnson deal happened a week earlier or something.

I can see Everton getting another deduction and Forrest a smaller one if not just a warning/transfer ban
 
Chelsea and man city bring in a lot of money into the premier league and have huge interest abroad.

I'm very curious to see what the prem does. I suspect a 10 to 20 point deduction at some point in the future and a fine which ultimately want do much except mean they finish mid table for a year or just outside relegation in Chelsea's case
 
Spursidol said:
Man City's charges (allegedly) relate in the most part to 'affiliates' of the owners providing over valued sponsorship, payments through offshore companies and the like creating falsely high revenues such that there was very large head room for high costs meaning they didn't breach the financial parameters and/or hiding costs in offshore companies. The issue is proving what the value of the sponsorship would have been to a genuinely independent company wishing to sponsor ManCity - which is a bitch of a problem to do.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They are ex-City employees who know where the bodies are buried that are ‘helping authorities with their inquiries’. You can’t cheat wholesale as they have done and be able to cover all the tracks.
 
Kaz Hirai said:
Chelsea and man city bring in a lot of money into the premier league and have huge interest abroad.

I'm very curious to see what the prem does. I suspect a 10 to 20 point deduction at some point in the future and a fine which ultimately want do much except mean they finish mid table for a year or just outside relegation in Chelsea's case
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It’s the independent panel that sets the fine isn’t it, not the PL. They present the evidence they have (I’m sure simon Jordan said they didn’t do a great job of what they’d don’t so far or so he heard) to the panel and they act on the evidence. Man City do likewise.
 
Tomo said:
Martin Samual is a tit.

FFP is a tool that will help prevent corruption in sport going forward as it will make it harder for dictators to buy clubs and shower them with money to buy trophies to massage their fragile egos while clubs with limited money (ie everyone else) risk it all trying to keep up. Without FFP Newcastle could buy anyone, while Chelsea wouldn’t need to do crazy 8 year deals.

The argument against has always been well it keeps the big clubs at the top as they have the big stadiums to generate revenue that can be used for larger spending. Well FFP allows you to invest and build 80-90k stadiums without impacting FFP so if City or Newcastle want to spend more they are welcome to knock their stadiums down and build far big ones with more corporate facilities.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They'd need to fill them. They couldn't/can't do that even when they're hoovering up trophies with a smaller stadium.

Mind you, the money's in the corporate...


Such a shame Chelsea can't build in their existing site, nor can they move and keep the name...


Gutted...

not GIF
 
Ionman34 said:
A question for the bean counters on here. If a player is given a new contract, does it restart the amortisation on the player?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It extended it (50 million over 5, 30 left after 2, new 5 year contract, yearly cost fell to 6 million) but there is now a 5 year limit on amortization after Boehly's shenanigans. Neither Sarr nor Udogie benefit from the old system (I think) but is a negligible sum either way.
 
When we win the league, and I think we will under Ange sooner rather than later, I want it to be because we won it by accumulating the most points, not because other teams had points deducted.
 
Kaz Hirai said:
Chelsea and man city bring in a lot of money into the premier league and have huge interest abroad.

I'm very curious to see what the prem does. I suspect a 10 to 20 point deduction at some point in the future and a fine which ultimately want do much except mean they finish mid table for a year or just outside relegation in Chelsea's case
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Chelsea apparently went as far as paying players and ex managers additional wages via the middle east. So off book payments which not only trashes FFP but is also criminal as it is defrauding the UK government of tax revenue. If Chelsea only get a 20-30 point deduction for that then the whole thing would be a sham.

If Everton and Forest are speeding tickets, what Chelsea and City are accused off is rape and murder. totally different level, one is negligence, the other essentially criminal in nature.
 
Tomo said:
Chelsea apparently went as far as paying players and ex managers additional wages via the middle east. So off book payments which not only trashes FFP but is also criminal as it is defrauding the UK government of tax revenue. If Chelsea only get a 20-30 point deduction for that then the whole thing would be a sham.

If Everton and Forest are speeding tickets, what Chelsea and City are accused off is rape and murder. totally different level, one is negligence, the other essentially criminal in nature.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Woolwich were caught doing something similar under Wenger i believe, paying their players offshore so essentially tax free - they managed to get away with it as the rules weren't explicit/there was a loophole at the time
 
Murphy said:
It was said that Everton may get a second charge a couple of weeks ago. Imagine that 🤣
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
And they have. The best part of Everton appeal for the 10 points is that they said they would have been ok if they hadn’t had to sell Richarlison for 20m under his proper price. He was worth 80m so they say.
I think most people thought he was overpriced at 50-60m
Deserve to be done for that ridiculous remark.
 
Kaz Hirai said:
Chelsea and man city bring in a lot of money into the premier league and have huge interest abroad.

I'm very curious to see what the prem does. I suspect a 10 to 20 point deduction at some point in the future and a fine which ultimately want do much except mean they finish mid table for a year or just outside relegation in Chelsea's case
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Relegation for city if guilty. Cannot be anything else.
They don’t bring any money into the premier league , it comes into the country but not to the league.
Sky give them plenty of money.
Chelsea have interest because they have been successful, that will soon change if it stops.
Lots of Asian supporters just follow a player. When Son leaves Spurs all the Koreans will go elsewhere.
 
Spursidol said:
Incidentally Eddie Howe at Newcastle was quite open a few days ago suggesting Newcastle may need to sell some players because they have spent too much money on transfer fees - naming Gordon as one and I think they paid £45m for him

I think this can be turned round - its fair to say Newcastle probably needed the player but if their total budget they could afford under sustainability/ffp rules and they needed say 4 players, it means they need to be careful not to overspend on each individual player.

And in turn that means that Newcastle (and all other clubs) will not be able to £45m on all the players they want (as otherwise it means they get in breach) and that in turn means that transfer fees in general will come down - maybe only £30m or £40m (tops) per player is affordable as clubs still need say 2 or 3 players a year but under ffp/sustainability the ffp budget is still say £100m.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I was thinking this earlier, nice to see I'm not alone.

If the PL has to tighten its belt for the foreseeable, surely the knock on effect is that prices come down?

It will be interesting to see how much. It could possibly see us then being able to shop from the top shelf. We're already at the point where we're shelling out £40-50M for players that fit the right profile, but aren't in the 'elite' bracket. If Europe is broke, and the top PL clubs are skirting around Profit & Sustainability, no one will be able to afford the eye watering transfer fees we've seen in recent years.

Then who's sitting at the top of the pile where FFP is concerned?

Us.

We could possibly be seeing the start of a quantum shift in the EPL, and we seem to be in the best position to take advantage of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top