Wigan , beating us in that FA cup final would have qualified for the CL, with all the juicy revenue to further their club either through infrastructure , player acquisition or however they see fit. That dream has gone full stop.And City to a degree back in the day
spot on
A sensible form of FFP would be:
1 - Owners can 'invest' money into their club without reprimand.
2 - Clubs who go into debt/loan money have a spend limit/strict transfer limits they must adhere to until debt is repaid in full
That would safeguard our clubs from extinction, which was the guise FFP was brought in to achieve (we all know the real purpose of FFP though).
The difference being is back then the Premier League supporting cast could still dream of winning the lottery & joining the scrap for honours at the top table.
Now even the richest club in the world have found their wealth is useless, because the Cartel Clubs have introduced financial rules designed to stop anyone from being able to challenge them.
Newcastle are reportedly being forced to sell SEVEN players, Almiron, Joelinton, Wilson, Botman, Isak, Guimarães & Trippier JUST to avoid the same PSR fate as Everton, let alone to allow them to be able to reinvest in their ageing injury hit squad.
The question is, would you rather the PL as it is now with FFP/PSR, or as it was 20 years ago when ambitious clubs were allowed to dream?
UEFA were rightly concerned about clubs like Leeds, Portsmouth, Fiorentina, Parma, Rangers etc over extending themselves, with over-ambitious owners levying huge debts on their clubs, sending several to the wall as they chased the dream. This is what the original iteration of FFP was supposed to prevent, not minted owners investing their own money to compete with the elite.
I do believe there should be a level of financial controls to prevent clubs from spending themselves into extinction, but not what we have today, where only the clubs at the very top stand to benefit.
Newcastle are now in the position where they have to grow 'organically'. In other words you will be kept at your level and the so called bigger clubs will be able to tap up your best players by offering them double the money that Newcastle could pay but aren't allowed to. We were so lucky to scrape past these disgusting anti competitive regulations. If nothing changes the big 6 will be set in stone.But it was hugely different when the owner of a few local car franchises could buy a couple of players, and push for a title. Even Jack Walker and his family only spent the equivalent of about £150-200m on Blackburn (and that's including inflation).
Now there are only a few hundred people on the whole planet who could safely take a Premier League club from mid table to the top.
That’s not what I was suggesting. I was suggesting a net spend limit over a 3 year period.The problem is that the money involved is at multi-billionaire/state level. Our owners put in around £1.5b and in addition could influence sponsorship deals from Abu Dhabi to add a significant sum on top of that. But Liverpool, for example, have three times the revenue that had in 2008.
If a team from mid-table, even a big city one with the fans/infrastructure, wanted to compete, then they could need £4b+ invested. That's absolutely crazy - and way above even your suggestions.
Even then, Newcastle could afford whatever they want - but Everton could quite easily bankrupted themselves well before they got anywhere near the lower figures you suggested.
The only way you're going to get competition back in any meaningful way, is to reduce the revenues of the richest clubs. Either football is a sport, or it's a business, but it can't be both.
damn i just posted something similar. great minds etc.A sensible form of FFP would be:
1 - Owners can 'invest' money into their club without reprimand.
2 - Clubs who go into debt/loan money have a spend limit/strict transfer limits they must adhere to until debt is repaid in full
That would safeguard our clubs from extinction, which was the guise FFP was brought in to achieve (we all know the real purpose of FFP though).
I very much doubt it. We’ve journeyed way beyond that point. The outrage - manufactured or otherwise - from the public, the media, our rivals etc, would be absolutely biblical, and neither side would be able to pass it off as an acceptable outcomeThe lack of information from city and the EPL as well as the curious “we can’t tell you the date yet” makes me think that the footballing authority are trying to sort out a face saving deal and we are playing hard ball. Interesting times ahead blues, it wouldn’t surprise me if there is suddenly an unexpected announcement.
Not yet PB. As of this moment, I can confirm that he’s not confirmed that he’s confirmed whether he’s confirmed anything.Has Masters confirmed whether he's confirmed anything?
We were really lucky, but ultimately we're now part of the problem.Newcastle are now in the position where they have to grow 'organically'. In other words you will be kept at your level and the so called bigger clubs will be able to tap up your best players by offering them double the money that Newcastle could pay but aren't allowed to. We were so lucky to scrape past these disgusting anti competitive regulations. If nothing changes the big 6 will be set in stone.
I understood- I was suggesting that being able to spend £750m over three years is an insane amount of money, but it's also nowhere near enough.That’s not what I was suggesting. I was suggesting a net spend limit over a 3 year period.
For example Chelsea would have blown their net spend budget during the last two transfer windows which would mean they would have to offload over the next two seasons to get back to a net spend of £500m.
We would be fine as our squad is worth more than we paid and we have academy graduates offsetting any transfers in.
A number of other teams in the league would also have some spending power left but scum utd would struggle so I guess it’s a no then.
Forget I even suggested it lol
I’m certainly not trying to belittle Lewis in any way and he has an excellent reputation as a sporting lawyer and importantly is the PL‘s KC of choice. Pannick is however arguably our Country’s leading advocate and as an aside who wouldn’t want to cross swords with him. Anybody who’s anybody in life enjoys taking on the best. That was the point I was trying to make in response to a poster who keeps banging on that Lewis would only take on winning positions…which is ridiculous.
Why tho? If we “get off” the uproar will only last a few days until it will be decided that we bribed the league and still cheated. All titles are meaningless etc. So no change to now.I very much doubt it. We’ve journeyed way beyond that point. The outrage - manufactured or otherwise - from the public, the media, our rivals etc, would be absolutely biblical, and neither side would be able to pass it off as an acceptable outcome
He confirms he's a right useless twat every time he opens his gob.Has Masters confirmed whether he's confirmed anything?
Yep. Their only concern was making sure the red tops were kept at the top & the classy newcomers knew their place in the pecking order ie mid table or belowI’m sorry but I don’t believe they were concerned in the slightest about Leeds or any other clubs.
it doesn't feel that difficult.Why tho? If we “get off” the uproar will only last a few days until it will be decided that we bribed the league and still cheated. All titles are meaningless etc. So no change to now.
The league has dug a hole and if city have real evidence to prove no wrongdoing then what option do the league have? Anything published that does not prove the allegations will be a disaster as you pointed out. Face saving behind closed doors is right up their street.
Once City provide the evidence to the tribunal, I would hope the tribunal has the required professionalism to carry out the task. I cant see how but just maybe they will follow the evidence and reach the correct non bias independent ruling.
The league is in charge of this whole proceeding and I have no doubt they will find wiggly room to make sure they come out of it ok. After all they are judge,jury and executioner. Closed door decision with most damaging parts kept private.
What City want to achieve is unclear. Cant see us going nuclear but cant see us playing ball either. So behind closed doors makes sense to the club also. We want to be in the tent.
The clubs I mentioned all legally went to the wall. Fortunately new owners were found, the assets bought & new companies under new names were formed, albeit the clubs unofficially continued to be known by their previous names.Good post, but who are the several clubs that went to the wall ? My idea of going to the wall is a business closing down permanently , liquidation , door shut with redundancies, Leeds being the perfect example, yes there financial situation meant relegation down the divisions, but they never went to the wall, its called business, sometimes you fail and suffer the consequences. Its nothing more than a closed shop now, which is a disgrace. Newcastle will never ever live the dream that we have, and its such a shame tbph. Sport IS business whether we like it or not, agreed, there has to be a new system implemented, football is very gradually killing the dreams for the match going fan. One of the CL places, even a fifth place maybe should go to the winner of the FA Cup, that opens the dream for far more clubs than just the top four.
Just thinking about this and might Newcastle be better off hanging on to all those players and taking the 10 point hit? Selling them all could end up costing them a lot more than 10 pointsThe difference being is back then the Premier League supporting cast could still dream of winning the lottery & joining the scrap for honours at the top table.
Now even the richest club in the world have found their wealth is useless, because the Cartel Clubs have introduced financial rules designed to stop anyone from being able to challenge them.
Newcastle are reportedly being forced to sell SEVEN players, Almiron, Joelinton, Wilson, Botman, Isak, Guimarães & Trippier JUST to avoid the same PSR fate as Everton, let alone to allow them to be able to reinvest in their ageing injury hit squad.
The question is, would you rather the PL as it is now with FFP/PSR, or as it was 20 years ago when ambitious clubs were allowed to dream?
UEFA were rightly concerned about clubs like Leeds, Portsmouth, Fiorentina, Parma, Rangers etc over extending themselves, with over-ambitious owners levying huge debts on their clubs, sending several to the wall as they chased the dream. This is what the original iteration of FFP was supposed to prevent, not minted owners investing their own money to compete with the elite.
I do believe there should be a level of financial controls to prevent clubs from spending themselves into extinction, but not what we have today, where only the clubs at the very top stand to benefit.
It all depends on the 3 panel members. Which is absurd! Who are these people and how truly independent are they?it doesn't feel that difficult.
Independent Panel - "Lack of context justified our investigation but with the benefit of full context, we have come to the conclusion that everything is in order. "