PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
As soon as they seek to regulate debt to the extent of spending I might believe it's sincere.
Click to expand...

Maybe they could make it so transfer fees have to be paid in one go, when the player is signed. That way if a club does go bust any clubs don't end up being owed money that they'll never see.

Won't happen, obviously.
 
domalino said:
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.
Click to expand...
I said I assume the luxury tax is aimed at the likes of City. I dont know. And thats because we were sold FFP as something to stop Bury happening, and that has turned out to be total bollocks. Its not what it said on the tin, so I assume this is the same.

You sound like you trust our PL owners, the PL business world, as being completely honest, open, fair. They're not. It seems everything they do is to benefit the top tier, thats human nature, to suggest theyre going to suddenly be fair and everyone just trust them is naive.
 
domalino said:
Why isn't it right for the 20 clubs to vote on rules that govern them?
Click to expand...
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."
 
Gorton_Tubster said:
You sound like you trust our PL owners, the PL business world, as being completely honest, open, fair. They're not. It seems everything they do is to benefit the top tier, thats human nature, to suggest theyre going to suddenly be fair and everyone just trust them is naive.
Click to expand...

The Premier League is not some mythic beast. It's 20 clubs voting for their own self interest.

Not the interest of those at the top, or those in the middle or the bottom, just 20 clubs voting for themselves usually in very predicatable and transparent fashion. And the EFL is exactly the same, they don't care about fans or the future of football any more than the PL.

It's in the interest of the majority of the league to have financial rules that benefit existing owners and potential new investors and keep things competitive at the top. So that's what they'll vote for IMO.
 
WRicko said:
You have to obey the law as it is now why would this be any different
Click to expand...
Actually, it is the regs at the time of the alleged infringement.
Interestingly, you could make a case that punishments that were not in force at the time cannot be used retrospectively for old cases. Hmmmm…. Calling Pannick…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.