twinkletoes
Well-Known Member
fbloke said:
You seem quite knowledgable about this but I still see it as a grey area to be exploited either way.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Uefa shelves proposals to impose a transfer ban (FFP)
- Thread starter MSP
- Start date
You seem quite knowledgable about this but I still see it as a grey area to be exploited either way.
twinkletoes said:fbloke said:twinkletoes said:How do rugby league get away with it?
The subtle difference is that its not European wide, its one league that has rules in place and does not discriminate or limit the free movement of players throughout Europe.
There is also the fact that all clubs joined the misnomic Super League knowing that the wage cap existed from the off.
You seem quite knowledgable about this but I still see it as a grey area to be exploited either way.
I have posted about this a few times and in the early months even called UEFA directly about it.
The world knows what FFPR is for and it's not about saving clubs from bad financial management it actually promotes the opposite.
And there are all manner of ways round it for clubs like City.
BrianW
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 Mar 2006
- Messages
- 5,198
- Team supported
- There's Only One City
Anyone who has a brain knows that FFP is a crock of shite. At best it will put UEFA between a rock and a hard place. Try to enforce it, and they'll face legal action from the likes of City. Fail to enforce it and they'll face legal action from the likes of Dipperpool.
I happen to think it's just a bad, bad rule. Bad legislation generally comes about when thick tits perceive a problem and come up with some off-the-cuff solution that looks superficially attractive. (See Dangerous Dogs Act for working example.)
If they really wanted to make football clubs sustainable they would pass a law restricting the amount of debt a club can be in, relative to turnover. This would be hard to argue against. Saying, in effect, that investors cannot put in new equity is bonkers. Imagine if that rule was introduced into the Stock Exchange! Capitalism would collapse within five years.
I happen to think it's just a bad, bad rule. Bad legislation generally comes about when thick tits perceive a problem and come up with some off-the-cuff solution that looks superficially attractive. (See Dangerous Dogs Act for working example.)
If they really wanted to make football clubs sustainable they would pass a law restricting the amount of debt a club can be in, relative to turnover. This would be hard to argue against. Saying, in effect, that investors cannot put in new equity is bonkers. Imagine if that rule was introduced into the Stock Exchange! Capitalism would collapse within five years.
bluemanc
Well-Known Member
Twatini failed to get a "immune from prosecution card"over FFP rules, is this the start of him binning it altogether.