PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Name them.

You seem like a bright bloke, I'm sure you can work it out.

 

[Invisible Man's Bandage]

It's touching to see the faith on here that an independent regulator is going to make a fundamental change to how the PL is run.

 

[KS55]

Why isn't it right for the 20 clubs to vote on rules that govern them? That's what they've been doing for 30 years and in that time the Premier League has gone from strength to strength, become one of the country's biggest cultural exports, generates billions for the economy and is the best football league in the world.

What exactly do you think getting this current government involved is going to improve? Are you happy with OFCOM? Are you happy with any statutory corporation in this country? TFL, British Rail, BBC etc.?

The issue with the PL making the rules is that they are clearly not impartial under the baleful influence of the redshirts. The ‘associated‘ rule and the group rules were clearly aimed at us and no-one else.
The rules must be justifiable as genuine efforts at fair competition and as protection for clubs against rogue chairmen. That is the problem with UEFA ffp, the G14 simply refused to accept any regulation of debt and that has skewed them ever since.
Against that, I take your point on current regulators: look at OFWAT and their failure on sewage spillages, for example.

 

[Father Paul]

Because they'll just put self-interest over wider issues. This has long been the case in the EFL, where obvious changes for the better that would benefit the collective have been voted down because many of the clubs think that it might negatively impact them at some future point.

If you're not already aware of it, Google 'Tragedy of the Commons'.

Aristotle even recognised the phenomenon over 2,000 years ago "What is common to many is taken least care of, for all men have greater regard for what is their own than for what they possess in common with others."

So I take it there is no update on the charges then?

 

[domalino]

You seem like a bright bloke, I'm sure you can work it out.

I want you to name them, because as soon as you do, the idea that the entire league is built and organised around benefitting them crumbles.

It's touching to see the faith on here that an independent regulator is going to make a fundamental change to how the PL is run.

It's complete madness. The same posters will be in the politics thread later compliaining bitterly about the BBC or OFCOM but they're in here begging for a football version.

 

[mattcity5]

The difference is that the PL is a group of 20, not a group of 72 spread across 4 divisions and the Premier League has shown itself to be incredibly successful under it's own governance.

They've been putting self interest over wider issues for 30 years and it's made them the most successful football league in the world.

You want to pretend that the Premier League is incapable of running itself because, but what evidence is there for that? Is it not more successful than any other sports league? Is it not growing quicker? Is it not the most competitive of the big football leagues? Where is it failing?

Just because it's successful, doesn't mean it isn't working more for some than others. It also doesn't mean that changing something will stop it being successful, or that it couldn't have been even more successful if things had been done differently.

I don't really have a point here, so I'll stop now. :)

 

[KS55]

Again you're just copying and pasting buzzwords.

It's a cartel? Who is? The entire league or the the clubs that you're convinced are running things and yet have won 1 of the last 10 league titles?

Those cosy lunches between the dippers and the rags discuss current art and science issues, I understand.

 

[domalino]

The issue with the PL making the rules is that they are clearly not impartial under the baleful influence of the redshirts. The ‘associated‘ rule and the group rules were clearly aimed at us.

Remind me, is that the redshirts that have won 1 of the last 10 Premier League titles between them?

They're the ones controlling everything are they? The club in 7th?

And the associated rule that you're certain is aimed at us, was that brought in 6 months after our takeover to cripple our progress? Or was it brought in 15 years later when we'd already won 7 league titles, but 6 months after Newcastle's takeover?

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

I want you to name them, because as soon as you do, the idea that the entire league is built and organised around benefitting them crumbles.


It's complete madness. The same posters will be in the politics thread later compliaining bitterly about the BBC or OFCOM but they're in here begging for a football version.

Will they, can you provide evidence of this? Show me.

 

[domalino]

Will they, can you provide evidence of this? Show me.

If you're not going to answer a simple question when asked twice, stop replying, there's obviously no point to this conversation.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

The issue with the PL making the rules is that they are clearly not impartial under the baleful influence of the redshirts. The ‘associated‘ rule and the group rules were clearly aimed at us.
The rules must be justifiable as genuine efforts at fair competition and as protection for clubs against rogue chairmen. That is the problem with UEFA ffp, the G14 simply refused to accept any regulation of debt and that has skewed them ever since.
Against that, I take your point on current regulators: look at OFWAT and their failure on sewage spillages, for example.

That's a good point - I'm working on the cosy assumption that an independent regulator would function effectively. The ones you mention seem to have encouraged price fixing rather than competition and been toothless to address failings so perhaps not the utopian solution we'd hope for. After these trumped up charges against us and the desperate way the pl have tried to shackle our spending I'm thinking any alternative may be at least slightly less bent

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

If you're not going to answer a simple question when asked twice, stop replying, there's obviously no point to this conversation.

So you are not going to answer then?

 

[cheekybids]

Remind me, is that the redshirts that have won 1 of the last 10 Premier League titles between them?

They're the ones controlling everything are they? The club in 7th?

And the associated rule that you're certain is aimed at us, was that brought in 6 months after our takeover to cripple our progress? Or was it brought in 15 years later when we'd already won 7 league titles, but 6 months after Newcastle's takeover?

You are assuming that the rules have been manipulated to make them champions. City & the Geordies were sold in the region of £200m & Chelsea £2b. The protection was to stop the worst houses on the best street being sold to billionaires for peanuts allowing more to invest on players & reducing the value of clubs like the Rags who couldn’t compete.

 

[JPAMCR]

Seems to me that the only reasonable punishment is a transfer ban, minimum 1 year and continuing until the club show that they meet the rules, whatever they are that week.

Financial penalties do nothing other than make the problem worse, and points deductions penalise the fans.

 

[Coatigan]

That's because we've paid them off

Plus, the whole organisation is related to the Sheikh.

Even our striker, whose dad Al-Fēe Halàl helped broker the deal.

 

[KS55]

The difference is that the PL is a group of 20, not a group of 72 spread across 4 divisions and the Premier League has shown itself to be incredibly successful under it's own governance.

They've been putting self interest over wider issues for 30 years and it's made them the most successful football league in the world.

You want to pretend that the Premier League is incapable of running itself because, but what evidence is there for that? Is it not more successful than any other sports league? Is it not growing quicker? Is it not the most competitive of the big football leagues? Where is it failing?

Yes, but the EFL clubs will say the PL success has partly been at their expense. Currently, the PL cannot agree a reasonably fair financial support for the roots clubs on whom the pyramid depends.
It is perfectly possible to make a case for an elite league of limited numbers (PL) and a semi professional, self supporting set of leagues of the rest, but that is not our preferred model. The unified pyramid needs financial support to make it work.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Seems to me that the only reasonable punishment is a transfer ban, minimum 1 year and continuing until the club show that they meet the rules, whatever they are that week.

Financial penalties do nothing other than make the problem worse, and points deductions penalise the fans.

If we are still going to pretend that these rules are an attempt to keep the league fair and clubs out of financial trouble then it's quite hard to find a sanction that doesn't make said finances worse.

 

[domalino]

Yes, but the EFL clubs will say the PL success has partly been at their expense. Currently, the PL cannot agree a reasonably fair financial support for the roots clubs on whom the pyramid depends.
It is perfectly possible to make a case for an elite league of limited numbers (PL) and a semi professional, self supporting set of leagues of the rest, but that is not our preferred model. The unified pyramid needs financial support to make it work.

And yet after approaching 40 years of the PL being in charge and seperate from the EFL, Britain has the deepest and best attended footbally pyramid in Europe and the Championship is the 7th or 8th richest league in the world.

This is pretty central to my point, a lot of posters are depserate to come at the Premier League from the perspective that it's failing and not fit for purpose...but it's just not. It's one of the most successful businesses and industries in the country. It's got some potential long term problems on the horizon, but they're taking steps to fix them by exploring changing regulations.

 

[nellyonthewing]

I wouldn’t be surprised if they try and spin it out until after the general election and try and bury it in the distraction.

 

[waspish]

The ceiling is already being set with the new FFP/PSR rules where spending (on players and wages and some other stuff) can't be more than 70% of revenue.

So that's where the limit is. You pay tax into a big pot for every £1 you spend over your limit.

In American sports all the tax money is then pooled and given out to the teams that are under their limit - but that doesn't have to be set in stone.

The main point of the new proposal is that it makes it possible to overspend short term, but makes it unsustaiable long term by being expensive, and you get diminishing returns the more you overspend because more and more of your "extra" money is going to tax instead of your squad.

That PSR rule hasn't been voted on. All the reports was they were going the uefa ffp road and it could be 85% that was just the chat at last meeting! They seem to come up with this new one which will be discussed next meeting