PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[MillionMilesAway]

Luxury tax is aimed at Middle Eastern owners I assume? Lets see what twisted bollocks they come up with now. I am probably being negative though.

Basically, a spend what you want to to catch up (hey Mr Ratcliffe, give us 500 million).
If you spend above a certain amount (not clear, but probably based on sustainability calculations), you have to pay a tax/fine which is then shared among the PL clubs who aren't getting a luxury tax.

A copy from some US sports.

 

[waspish]

This is exactly why City need to keep our case from reaching a conclusion anytime soon. The rules have never been fit for purpose. FFP to P&S to what ever else the red clubs decide. Meanwhile city are crucified at every opportunity.

1st they tried to “get us” with rules that didn’t exist then they tried to change the rules to “ entrap up” and now because it didn’t work have decided to dump the rules to allow United to spend again.

What a load of bollox. Keep it in the discovery period city and don’t let them see shit.

Awful corrupt organisation.

The premier ffp rules have changed Nearly every other year since they came in! They tweaked they thinking they'll effect us, then taken rules out to suit the rags when they needed a rebuild! That time has come again where the scum need to spend 250m+ and they look to change them again fucking stinks!

 

[wolviedinho]

I assume it has no bearing on our case as the rules at the time will continue to apply.

Come on that is a far to simplistic approach. They did try to punish city with ffp rules before ffp rules applied in the past. Nothing is off the table with these slippery pricks.

 

[dadnlad]

The premier ffp rules have changed Nearly every other year since they came in! They tweaked they thinking they'll effect us, then taken rules out to suit the rags when they needed a rebuild! That time has come again where the scum need to spend 250m+ and they look to change them again fucking stinks!

please keep up Kaveh ssn will be along shortly telling the masses that FFP/PSR are fluid and alter as new learnings come to light ( cartel clubs failing )

 

[halfcenturyup]

Basically, a spend what you want to to catch up (hey Mr Ratcliffe, give us 500 million).
If you spend above a certain amount (not clear, but probably based on sustainability calculations), you have to pay a tax/fine which is then shared among the PL clubs who aren't getting a luxury tax.

A copy from some US sports.

US sports you say? Well, I wonder whose idea that is?

I would really like 7 clubs to vote to keep things just the way they are for a while longer. Just out of spite.

 

[domalino]

And also scrapping the related-party sponsors and sister club rules.

Where did you get that from?

The PL has passed a series of ever tighter RTP rules over the last 18 months, it would be very surprising to hear they were rowing back on that.


You're not mixing this up with UEFA clarifying the existing rule in their competitions that was in the news last week?

 

[domalino]

Luxury tax is aimed at Middle Eastern owners I assume? Lets see what twisted bollocks they come up with now. I am probably being negative though.

Basically, a spend what you want to to catch up (hey Mr Ratcliffe, give us 500 million).
If you spend above a certain amount (not clear, but probably based on sustainability calculations), you have to pay a tax/fine which is then shared among the PL clubs who aren't getting a luxury tax.

A copy from some US sports.

If people actually consider the luxury tax for what it is, rather than getting angry at the idea PSR rules are being changed or the idea it's come from America then I think they'll realise it offers everybody what they want and is quite clearly the way forward.

Hedge fund vultures can sit back and get paid for other owners' ambitions.

Owners with a big plan or who want to invest can do so and just pay a small fine for a spend now, grow later approach.

It disincentivises overspending so that it's going to be temporary.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Where did you get that from?

The PL has passed a series of ever tighter RTP rules over the last 18 months, it would be very surprising to hear they were rowing back on that.


You're not mixing this up with UEFA clarifying the existing rule in their competitions that was in the news last week?

It's in Keegan's piece.
So it might be junk, or might be sanctioned kite-flying.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

US sports you say? Well, I wonder whose idea that is?

I would really like 7 clubs to vote to keep things just the way they are for a while longer. Just out of spite.

Not much chance - Keegan reckons 17 are in favour of some of it.

Which again is no surprise - my first thoughts (which may be wrong)
- have access to the PL cash already, and benefit
- if a club overspends, they have to pay all the other clubs, so free money!
- clubs getting promoted start with less and therefore will overspend more.
- more leeway for overspending to avoid relegation

 

[hertsblue]

The premier ffp rules have changed Nearly every other year since they came in! They tweaked they thinking they'll effect us, then taken rules out to suit the rags when they needed a rebuild! That time has come again where the scum need to spend 250m+ and they look to change them again fucking stinks!

Same as years ago when Rags had key players contracts running out and needed to offer new contracts and spent heavily in the transfer window and the PL quietly dropped some of its FFP increase wages rules (something like that anyhow) which allowed the Rags to do what they wanted. Stank at the time, no questions asked in the media, benefited the Rags, and looks like same again

 

[horlock_was_super]

All these ‘leaks’ on supposed proposals leave me wondering if the end game for the red cartel and Smithers is to get the EPL to turn round and say that due to confusion amongst its members, surrounding the current rules then everyone starts with a clean slate from next season.
City never get to defend themselves so the shadow hangs forever giving them the high ground for evermore.

 

[Rory Bluelow]

Not much chance - Keegan reckons 17 are in favour of some of it.

Which again is no surprise - my first thoughts (which may be wrong)
- have access to the PL cash already, and benefit
- if a club overspends, they have to pay all the other clubs, so free money!
- clubs getting promoted start with less and therefore will overspend more.
- more leeway for overspending to avoid relegation

The comments on the Daily Fail Keegan article are hilarious. City bingo on steroids. Forgetting the rival fans outraged bollocks nonsense that “city are getting away with it” they do seem to be lurching towards accepting City will not be punished/relegated etc from the charges - apparently because the Sheikh has bribed everyone involved ! Lovely.

 

[dadnlad]

Same as years ago when Rags had key players contracts running out and needed to offer new contracts and spent heavily in the transfer window and the PL quietly dropped some of its FFP increase wages rules (something like that anyhow) which allowed the Rags to do what they wanted. Stank at the time, no questions asked in the media, benefited the Rags, and looks like same again

Hi David

 

[halfcenturyup]

If people actually consider the luxury tax for what it is, rather than getting angry at the idea PSR rules are being changed or the idea it's come from America then I think they'll realise it offers everybody what they want and is quite clearly the way forward.

Hedge fund vultures can sit back and get paid for other owners' ambitions.

Owners with a big plan or who want to invest can do so and just pay a small fine for a spend now, grow later approach.

It disincentivises overspending so that it's going to be temporary.

Or, why should owners who don't want to invest in their clubs get rewarded by owners who do?, who says we are talking small fines, doesn't the article also talk about sporting sanctions?, and if we are talking small fines, it's no real disincentive to overspending ....

As well as talking about sporting sanctions, the article refers to "more flexibility and a buffer zone". Let's be honest, here. United want to spend big in the summer and can't currently. So, as always, the rules have to change. There will be no grand gesture to allow more clubs to compete, with the exception of Newcastle, I imagine, if the PL doesn't want to get sued to Kingdom come.

 

[manimanc]

I think we'll be exposing these completely farcical rules and the regulations made up for red cartel clubs pretty soon.
Khaldoon has hinted he has ammunition and said people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Let's get it right, I'm sure we have a list as long as your arm the changes Uefa and the Premier League have made to ensure utd don't get done or punished. Some on here have alluded to a few instances.

Apparently the latest change incredibly helps the rags out yet again. I'm sure khaldoon will be putting this in our evidence towards the shit show and mud slinging from masters and the other cunts at the Premier league.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

If people actually consider the luxury tax for what it is, rather than getting angry at the idea PSR rules are being changed or the idea it's come from America then I think they'll realise it offers everybody what they want and is quite clearly the way forward.

Hedge fund vultures can sit back and get paid for other owners' ambitions.

Owners with a big plan or who want to invest can do so and just pay a small fine for a spend now, grow later approach.

It disincentivises overspending so that it's going to be temporary.

I think it does too for PL owners - the downside is that it likely reinforces the split between PL and EFL.

On the face of it, I don't see why it wouldn't lend towards a fixed presence in the PL - it may be that the bigger EFL clubs (Leeds for example) will be able to displace the smaller PL clubs, but it might not be often.

 

[jrb]

The Norwegians especially, the Rags, and the Tarquins are in absolute meltdown after the luxury tax fine news came out.

 

[domalino]

Or, why should owners who don't want to invest in their clubs get rewarded by owners who do?, who says we are talking small fines, doesn't the article also talk about sporting sanctions?, and if we are talking small fines, it's no real disincentive to overspending ....

As well as talking about sporting sanctions, the article refers to "more flexibility and a buffer zone". Let's be honest, here. United want to spend big in the summer and can't currently. So, as always, the rules have to change. There will be no grand gesture to allow more clubs to compete, with the exception of Newcastle, I imagine, if the PL doesn't want to get sued to Kingdom come.

Because we don't actually want a league which has massive financial disparity. Teams that cost £1000m playing teams that cost £60m does not produce great football. You just end up with 1 team parking 11 behind the ball, wasting time from kick off and making nasty cycnical fouls.

We're already bringing in the 70% rule, Luxury tax means clubs like Villa, Leicester, West Ham can spend outside of their means, but there's a price to it which keeps teams like Luton or Burnley competitive.

Sporting sanctions obviously have to be invovled because you've got to have a limit. It's fine someone paying a tax for spending 80% one year or 110% for 3 years, but unless you have a hard ceiling then someone is going to try and spend 500% of revenue without ever bothering to increase their turnover to make it sustainable.

 

[freshie]

Where did you get that from?

The PL has passed a series of ever tighter RTP rules over the last 18 months, it would be very surprising to hear they were rowing back on that.


You're not mixing this up with UEFA clarifying the existing rule in their competitions that was in the news last week?

 

[domalino]

I think it does too for PL owners - the downside is that it likely reinforces the split between PL and EFL.

On the face of it, I don't see why it wouldn't lend towards a fixed presence in the PL - it may be that the bigger EFL clubs (Leeds for example) will be able to displace the smaller PL clubs, but it might not be often.

IMO the way to fix that potential problem is either:

1) The EFL adopts the same measures and then the relegated PL clubs would have to cut back their costs massively or end up paying loads of money to their rivals, or

2)By eliminating parachute payments and the EFL not adopting the tax system, clubs like Leicester City this year on 116% wages to turnover would have to completely gut their Premier League quality team and get out of the Championship with a Championship side or else face a huge points deduction like they are this season.

Option 2 would mean no more Norwich, Leicester, West Brom musical chairs.