| Fulham, Bolton and Forest 10:29 - Dec 24 with 8562 views | simmo |
All banned from buying in Jan due to FFP |  |
| ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead |
| |  |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 15:53 - Dec 24 with 2867 views | QPR_Jim |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 11:33 - Dec 24 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Yeah as I said it is flawed.
But the alternate is nothing is done, and the league is littered full of Portsmouths and Aldershots because of the stupidity of chairman who fly in and fly out. [Post edited 24 Dec 2015 11:35]
|
It's not though is it, ffp is a poor solution to a problem. The fact they've got it wrong at the first attempt of fixing the issue shouldn't stop them changing it or finding the right solution. |  | | |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 17:13 - Dec 24 with 2795 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 15:53 - Dec 24 by QPR_Jim |
It's not though is it, ffp is a poor solution to a problem. The fact they've got it wrong at the first attempt of fixing the issue shouldn't stop them changing it or finding the right solution. |
I did say it was flawed and never said don't change it. |  | | |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 17:26 - Dec 24 with 2784 views | QPR_Jim |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 17:13 - Dec 24 by BazzaInTheLoft |
I did say it was flawed and never said don't change it. |
No, you said the alternative is nothing which is what I have issue with. To my mind the alternative is that they find the right solution, whatever that may be. We shouldn't put up with a flawed set of FFP rules. | | | |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 17:28 - Dec 24 with 2772 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 17:26 - Dec 24 by QPR_Jim |
No, you said the alternative is nothing which is what I have issue with. To my mind the alternative is that they find the right solution, whatever that may be. We shouldn't put up with a flawed set of FFP rules. |
Well it was good enough for 21 football clubs who voted it in three years ago. That wasn't including us admittedly.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17841566
I didn't mean it's this FFP or nothing. I meant this legislation is better than nothing. [Post edited 24 Dec 2015 17:38]
| | | |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 17:37 - Dec 24 with 2767 views | FredManRave |
C'mon lads. It's Christmas time.
There's no need to be afraid.... [Post edited 24 Dec 2015 17:48]
|  |
| |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 18:40 - Dec 24 with 2702 views | derbyhoop |
The aim of FFP is laudable. Clubs shouldn't spend so much more than they earn. Do it consistently and it leads to bankruptcy. However it hasn't work so far.
The problem is particularly bad for teams relegated from the PL. The difference between PL earnings and Championship, even with parachute payments is far too big. Players in the PL demand big wages, but try getting a player to sign for you with a clause that leads to a 70% drop in wages on relegation. So the only solution is to sell all the players who are on big money. But, having been relegated, their value also plummets. A vicious spiral of decline for any club that doesn't get back in 3 years. |  |
| Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one’s lifetime. (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop |
| |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 18:49 - Dec 24 with 2684 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 18:40 - Dec 24 by derbyhoop |
The aim of FFP is laudable. Clubs shouldn't spend so much more than they earn. Do it consistently and it leads to bankruptcy. However it hasn't work so far.
The problem is particularly bad for teams relegated from the PL. The difference between PL earnings and Championship, even with parachute payments is far too big. Players in the PL demand big wages, but try getting a player to sign for you with a clause that leads to a 70% drop in wages on relegation. So the only solution is to sell all the players who are on big money. But, having been relegated, their value also plummets. A vicious spiral of decline for any club that doesn't get back in 3 years. |
I agree with this.
Although in OUR particular case, we overspent in every divison, position, and situation and can't really blame relegation from PL can we? | | | |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 19:27 - Dec 24 with 2659 views | QPR_Jim |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 17:28 - Dec 24 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Well it was good enough for 21 football clubs who voted it in three years ago. That wasn't including us admittedly.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17841566
I didn't mean it's this FFP or nothing. I meant this legislation is better than nothing. [Post edited 24 Dec 2015 17:38]
|
I agree it is better than nothing, I just think it should be done through a spending cap or similar and punishments should be points rather than a fine. Also I think debts should be allowed to be written off if done properly. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 00:46 - Dec 26 with 2431 views | Brightonhoop |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 18:40 - Dec 24 by derbyhoop |
The aim of FFP is laudable. Clubs shouldn't spend so much more than they earn. Do it consistently and it leads to bankruptcy. However it hasn't work so far.
The problem is particularly bad for teams relegated from the PL. The difference between PL earnings and Championship, even with parachute payments is far too big. Players in the PL demand big wages, but try getting a player to sign for you with a clause that leads to a 70% drop in wages on relegation. So the only solution is to sell all the players who are on big money. But, having been relegated, their value also plummets. A vicious spiral of decline for any club that doesn't get back in 3 years. |
In a nut shell, aims are laudable. ffp is tackling people trafficking with torpedos. Utterly flawed and unable to put their hands up to it. That's the problem. |  | | |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 01:29 - Dec 26 with 2413 views | Pommyhoop |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 15:34 - Dec 24 by timcocking |
This is becoming ridiculous. Clearly, something needs to change somewhere along the line.
I blame the agents, footballers almost retarded IQs, and mainly, of course, Briatore. And those pr!cks at Nike.
Mind you, what's with all those weird side-neck adidas tracksuits the managers are being forced to wear this week in the press conferences? Embarrasingly sh!t. I felt genuinely uncomfortable seeing respectable senior fellas like Sam Allardyce and Guus Hiddink sat ther wearing those. Christ, somebodies' been trying way too hard again. Hideous failure in taste.
It'd be an interesting dissertation, whether good taste actually is regressing. Maybe people will start getting perms again soon. |
Proper manager's apparel.
Proper pitch too  |  |
| |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 09:32 - Dec 26 with 2344 views | gobbles |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 01:29 - Dec 26 by Pommyhoop |
Proper manager's apparel.
Proper pitch too |
... and badge #voteoption1 |  | | |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 09:51 - Dec 26 with 2319 views | CamberleyR |
The thing that REALLY irks me is that the scum can post record loss after record loss yet because they have a high level of turnover (about £250m in 2013) they always somehow seem to comply with the criteria for FFP.
Since Abramovich:
2004 - Loss £74.7m
2005 - Loss £131.6m
2006 - Loss £77.1m
2007 - Loss £65.6m
2008 - Loss £69.2m
2009 - Loss £45.8m
2010 - Loss £69.2m
2011 - Loss £70.7m
2012 - Profit £1.4m
2013 - Loss £49.4m
Those numbers show one man rich enough to have lost over £650m pounds on what is tantamount to his hobby which means the criteria for FFP are virtually meaningless. |  |
| |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 10:39 - Dec 26 with 2282 views | CiderwithRsie |
Some triffic posts on this thread, and I'd just like to record my appreciation for Clive's explanation of why we aren't in the stocks while all round us are being dragged off by the bailiffs, to share in the best wishes to our good neighbours Konk and indeed Switchingcode, JoeDenman's wry smile at the double standards applied to Bournemouth and QPR, and Camberley's outrage at the way it doesn't seem to bite on CheeseFC while seemingly acting as a brake on the likes of Brentford.
I'll only say that if FFP is the cause of QPR declaring an intention to get the squad down to a reasonable size, and specifically off-loading the likes of Barton and Ferdinand (pleasepleaseplease Traore) then its not entirely a bad thing. |  | | |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 10:51 - Dec 26 with 2275 views | Metallica_Hoop |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 09:51 - Dec 26 by CamberleyR |
The thing that REALLY irks me is that the scum can post record loss after record loss yet because they have a high level of turnover (about £250m in 2013) they always somehow seem to comply with the criteria for FFP.
Since Abramovich:
2004 - Loss £74.7m
2005 - Loss £131.6m
2006 - Loss £77.1m
2007 - Loss £65.6m
2008 - Loss £69.2m
2009 - Loss £45.8m
2010 - Loss £69.2m
2011 - Loss £70.7m
2012 - Profit £1.4m
2013 - Loss £49.4m
Those numbers show one man rich enough to have lost over £650m pounds on what is tantamount to his hobby which means the criteria for FFP are virtually meaningless. |
"2005 - Loss £131.6m " I wonder how much that would be today. I suspect not far off our entire 180M that was 'written off'.
By comparison we look like the small plain looking lady who like pints and wore some bling for the dancing at the club but left early as she didn't pull. (or something like that there is an analogy in there somewhere) |  |
| Beer and Beef has made us what we are - The Prince Regent |
| |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 11:25 - Dec 26 with 2234 views | Rangersw12 |
If they really want things to be fair then go back to splitting gate receipts 50/50
At the moment it's just a tool to keep all the big clubs big | | | |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 14:42 - Dec 26 with 1992 views | BlackCrowe |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 09:51 - Dec 26 by CamberleyR |
The thing that REALLY irks me is that the scum can post record loss after record loss yet because they have a high level of turnover (about £250m in 2013) they always somehow seem to comply with the criteria for FFP.
Since Abramovich:
2004 - Loss £74.7m
2005 - Loss £131.6m
2006 - Loss £77.1m
2007 - Loss £65.6m
2008 - Loss £69.2m
2009 - Loss £45.8m
2010 - Loss £69.2m
2011 - Loss £70.7m
2012 - Profit £1.4m
2013 - Loss £49.4m
Those numbers show one man rich enough to have lost over £650m pounds on what is tantamount to his hobby which means the criteria for FFP are virtually meaningless. |
 |  |
| |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 15:05 - Dec 26 with 1977 views | Pommyhoop |
 | |
| |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 15:11 - Dec 26 with 1976 views | Dorse |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 11:02 - Dec 24 by switchingcode |
Brentford is in the London borough of Hounslow situated in the west of London |
Spokesman for Hounslow disavows any association with Brentford and declares Isleworth to be the Neutral Zone. Residents braced for backlash. |  |
| 'What do we want? We don't know! When do we want it? Now!' |
| |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 21:21 - Dec 26 with 1896 views | TGRRRSSS |
If Bournemouth come down they will face problems next season - quelle surprise.
FFP is in my view a laudable idea, doomed to failure. |  | | |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 07:12 - Dec 27 with 1814 views | themodfather |
millwall broke the rules too but no as they were relegated?
they still broke the rules so what's the point in having them?
qpr's situation is a joke, are we in trouble or is it swept aside/forgotten? | | | |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 07:24 - Dec 27 with 1812 views | BrianMcCarthy |
So Bolton aren't allowed to spend the money they don't have? |  |
| |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 08:53 - Dec 27 with 1760 views | distortR |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 07:24 - Dec 27 by BrianMcCarthy |
So Bolton aren't allowed to spend the money they don't have? |
Don't see why. It's never stopped us. | | | |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 09:05 - Dec 27 with 1747 views | PunteR |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 07:24 - Dec 27 by BrianMcCarthy |
So Bolton aren't allowed to spend the money they don't have? |
Put succinctly. |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 09:52 - Dec 27 with 1716 views | TheBlob |
They won't give it up because it's easy money.I can't think of one other example(please correct me if I'm wrong)of trading where you get fined for making a loss?Credit is somewhat different,and more responsibility should be placed on the providers.
Anyway,it's about time someone sought the services of some aggressive legal firm to set a proper precedent over this sorry mess.Owt isn't better than nowt,the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
(back to bed with the hot water bottle Blob.) |  |
| |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 11:19 - Dec 27 with 1676 views | switchingcode |
| Fulham, Bolton and Forest on 15:11 - Dec 26 by Dorse |
Spokesman for Hounslow disavows any association with Brentford and declares Isleworth to be the Neutral Zone. Residents braced for backlash. |
lol nice one | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.