UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST

[Radcliffe 1309]

A better way would be to install a football-protection fee, by the Premier League and Football League.

The clubs that buy players, should pay 10% to grassroot leagues, 15% to nonleague teams and 5% to preserve league two and league one clubs. The top two flights of football get enough to mismanage on their own. The FA, the regional FAs etc should regulate all of this. The Premier League and Football League can set a great example of proper financial fairplay that would urinate over anything UEFA could do.

This seems a sensible idea

 

[Centurions]

Equivalent amount ... Isn't that effectively 50%?

Sorry but you made me laugh out loud with that.

It's a proposed 100% tax as it's equivalent to the transfer fee even if it is 50% of the total that it would cost.


I wouldn't be against a 100% tax on transfers above a certain level (which would stop the growth of the fees involved maybe) but with the caveat that ALL of the tax gets distributed across grass roots and (say) League 1 and lower teams or the equivalents abroad.

 

[davek1808]

I'm not having it that uefa would try and come up with a scheme where the rest of the greedy cartel would get their heads in the feeding trough.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Yeah it would be a way of bypassing FFP because the idea is to replace FFP with that tax so there would be no FFP.

It’s the system they brought in in China and it’s bollocks.

So it’d be better for us then?

The owner could say ‘there’s 100m for such and such player’ then just throw another 100m in the ‘pot’ and each of the clubs would only get £3m each.

Not exactly spending with impunity but hardly something that’d put the owner off splashing his own money if he really wanted to.

 

[Stoned Rose]

If they did and we received £3m, would my season card go up in price again or would City give Mangala another new contract!

Knowing City they’d probably give that 3m to the Essex JCLs ;)

 

[waspish]

So it’d be better for us then?

The owner could say ‘there’s 100m for such and such player’ then just throw another 100m in the ‘pot’ and each of the clubs would only get £3m each.

Not exactly spending with impunity but hardly something that’d put the owner off splashing his own money if he really wanted to.

We dont need our owners to put money in we can spend 100m no problem! If we need say to revamp our whole squad needing to spend 300m then maybe we would need that cash injection, very much doubt it though we a run that good now its should be that we only need 1 2 or 3 players a season.

 

[Stoned Rose]

We dont need our owners to put money in we can spend 100m no problem! If we need say to revamp our whole squad needing to spend 300m then maybe we would need that cash injection, very much doubt it though we a run that good now its should be that we only need 1 2 or 3 players a season.

I know all that mate, was just theorising that if it came in it wouldn’t really be much of a deterrent to any wealthy owner who wanted to steam in and splash out if he wanted to.

 

[cheshirecheese]

So uefa who supposedly introduced FFP to stop clubs overspending are thinking of introducing legislation that doubles the cost of any transfers?

 

[SilverFox2]

So uefa who supposedly introduced FFP to stop clubs overspending are thinking of introducing legislation that doubles the cost of any transfers?

I suppose a bit like the uk Gov taxing cigs at the same time as telling all that cigs kill them.

 

[waspish]

So uefa who supposedly introduced FFP to stop clubs overspending are thinking of introducing legislation that doubles the cost of any transfers?

Dont why they dont bring a rule in that any team thats won champs league more than twice has first refusal on any player in europe at half the fee.