Financial Fair Play

  • 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!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Brian Fantana said:
I think an independent regulator with nothing to do with government is a must. But it could just end up being another set of people with their own agendas and who don’t know what they are doing. It’s a hard one. However, it can’t go on as it has done for the last 20 years. So something has to change. No wonder the PL are shitting it though. They don’t want those skeletons falling out the cupboard I suspect.
Click to expand...
I think it will be a disaster and the last thing we need.

The government has fecked up everything it gets its hands on and the country is a mess.

Theres a weird british obsession with destroying something that is successful. In this case the premier league.
 
Brian Fantana said:
Shame it’s not on match day income only.

I am not a fan of wage caps even though player wages are stupid.
Click to expand...
Starks said:

View: https://twitter.com/FootyAccums/status/1783181446632382821?t=-qifX0clQPcw9HYGPQikkA&s=19
Click to expand...


Hard salary cap sounds scary. But 5 times the lowest teams tv money is £518m pounds. Theres probably only 1 or 2 clubs that would fall foul of that. Man United and Man City.

Even Chelsea in their wildest spending 1 year into new owership only managed to break the rules by £20m despite spending £1billion on transfers.
 
I think all of these rules are daft and in favour of big clubs.

Realistically if any club is going to turn itself into a contender, it will need to spend big for 2 or 3 years. These rules do nothing but protect the elite who have large revenues.

The other thing is the rules are going to be ridiculously complicated like in US sports. Salary caps and luxury taxes, cap space etc... Just leave football as it is.
 
PatagoniaPhil said:
I think all of these rules are daft and in favour of big clubs.

Realistically if any club is going to turn itself into a contender, it will need to spend big for 2 or 3 years. These rules do nothing but protect the elite who have large revenues.

The other thing is the rules are going to be ridiculously complicated like in US sports. Salary caps and luxury taxes, cap space etc... Just leave football as it is.
Click to expand...

The anchoring rule is wanted apparently by those not United or City and favours the lesser clubs. The other problem with no rules that to overcome the likes of Liverpool you need blood/corrupt money from the likes of Abramovich as they are generally the only ones with that level of cash and having the willingness to spend for their ego.
 
The Premier League is an INTERNATIONAL product. The local fans are unimportant to the clubs.

AFL on the other hand is very much a sport that caters for the local fans and needs a loyal local fan base to thrive.

So, it is in the interest of the international product to have a few 'top clubs' at the top dominating. Whereas something like AFL would lose fanbase entirely if 1 or 2 clubs dominated year after year.

The advantage in the Prem will always go to the most marketable clubs since they drive the product. Its rigged, its fixed, its a TV show that is carefully planned to ensure outcomes maximise revenues.

IF Man City get punished -50 points they will turn it into another TV show. People will tune in every week to see them rise up and still finish in the top 6 and be hailed as heroes fighting against the odds; and winning the domestic cups - what a wonderful underdog story. All is forgiven.
 
harry7 said:
The Premier League is an INTERNATIONAL product. The local fans are unimportant to the clubs.

AFL on the other hand is very much a sport that caters for the local fans and needs a loyal local fan base to thrive.

So, it is in the interest of the international product to have a few 'top clubs' at the top dominating. Whereas something like AFL would lose fanbase entirely if 1 or 2 clubs dominated year after year.

The advantage in the Prem will always go to the most marketable clubs since they drive the product. Its rigged, its fixed, its a TV show that is carefully planned to ensure outcomes maximise revenues.

IF Man City get punished -50 points they will turn it into another TV show. People will tune in every week to see them rise up and still finish in the top 6 and be hailed as heroes fighting against the odds; and winning the domestic cups - what a wonderful underdog story. All is forgiven.
Click to expand...

I dont agre with everything you say. But yes from a business point of view its daft to penalise City.
They are the only club in this league that challenges the European elite on a regular basis.
 
PatagoniaPhil said:
Hard salary cap sounds scary. But 5 times the lowest teams tv money is £518m pounds. Theres probably only 1 or 2 clubs that would fall foul of that. Man United and Man City.

Even Chelsea in their wildest spending 1 year into new owership only managed to break the rules by £20m despite spending £1billion on transfers.
Click to expand...
Got away with it by selling a hotel to a company owned by the same owners. Derby and Sheff Wed did similar things over past few years. 23-24 is another big problem with no hotels left to sell.
 
I didnt think it would happen. However, the figures will be quite high anyway. £466 million. I'm assuming it lies alongside the PSR rules being proposed rather than instead of.

I suspect clubs will find a way around it. Paying more in image rights or whatnot.
 
So turkeys vote for Christmas

Daft idea that will see top players move to Europe or beyond. Maybe it will create a more enjoyable title race but it hampers teams in the champions league to compete with the Europeans
 
Brian Fantana said:
I didnt think it would happen. However, the figures will be quite high anyway. £466 million. I'm assuming it lies alongside the PSR rules being proposed rather than instead of.

I suspect clubs will find a way around it. Paying more in image rights or whatnot.
Click to expand...


Sounds like it's instead of


Premier League clubs have agreed in principle to introduce a spending cap.

A majority of clubs voted in favour of the spending cap, which will be determined by the amount of money earned in television rights by the lowest-earning club in the Premier League.

If approved at June's AGM, the new model will replace the Profit and Sustainability Regulations presently used from the 2025-26 season onwards.

The league's current financial rules, which have seen Everton and Nottingham Forest penalised six and four points respectively this season, have been criticised for favouring clubs with the highest revenue.

The new model is being referred to as "anchoring".
 
I think this is peak premier league. The only way now is down.

The Yanks have a controlling stake and can do what they want and push through any rules.

In 5 years time people will realise money attracts players here and wonder where all the elite players have gone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom