Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

Mr Popodopolous

OTIB Supporter
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation


Recent Profile Visitors

15,351 profile views
  1. Dunno how well this comes out but here are some estimates for Aston Villa- based on calculations of transfer profit, parachute payments and yes some guesswork- e.g. how much their FFP exclusions maybe, based on a mix of averages combined with what their accounts do indicate. Transfermarkt is used for Contract lengths and fees- possibly a bit of rounding involved but if you can get it in £ then it's a useful enough source.
  2. I think for a first full competitive international- it'd be someone like Kosovo personally. Unless that's already confirmed as being somewhere else? Though, Montenegro have generally (okay not tonight) been competitive opponents. Opponent doesn't really matter I guess- a full competitive international against whoever would be great.
  3. Mr Popodopolous


    Okay, are we talking about now or when the law was originally constituted In 1985, football was in a very, very different place. That law probably had a fair bit of justification then- and I say that as a critic of this and some other football specific laws and regulations. Now? The situation, it's all changed- and that law should go the same way.
  4. That is a good point that- each case on its own merits, with the points deduction sliding scale as a guide, a means to an end rather than an end in itself. Maybe one option. Surely the £4m could class as an aggravated breach though, or no points added back on for good behaviour? Because if you know you are going to breach and do it anyway, it'd be seen as deliberate, based on that graphic I saw by @ploehmann I think it was? @Davefevs Gibson and Lansdown doesn't surprise. Nottingham Forest too in a way- because Marinakis for all of the claims about him in Greece, or the fact he can be quite trigger happy with managers...I've always considered he may well be respectful of FFP. He kept Olympiakos sufficently compliant to get into CL each year, read online that under their prior owner/President...it would certainly not have been the case! The Evening Post article has one error though- Wolves were close to the 3 year FFP limit, but promotion bonuses do not count towards costs, nor do other promotion costs- they were probably a couple to a few £mn off breaching it. Whether that aspect needs looking at, who knows but they did not breach it most likely.
  5. That was the exact reason for the projected accounts. I fully agree, it has to be implented without fear or favour. As per the sliding scale that seemingly is the formula that I found earlier. I would expect Aston Villa for example to get more hammered than Derby say as their losses seem to be higher and Derby selling the players they sold shows an effort of some sort, whereas Aston Villa have done nothing of the sort.
  6. Agree, the projected accounts thing must be enforced. By rights, if I was Barnsley or Burton who were well within FFP? Fuming! Birmingham in breach for the 3 years and eventually this was delayed by nearly a year. Well done BTW on the sliding scale- pretty close indeed. Will look at them both later but it seemed on point.
  7. Mr Popodopolous


    Apologies mate, my bad probably. Yeah, wires crossed by me- perhaps getting overtime and club charges mixed up. I believe there's a London weighting for police, but likely no great differentials between WMP and Avon & Somerset.
  8. A win Saturday would have sealed safety- any sort of win- in practical terms, but I still think Bristol have done enough... Bear in mind that 10 points separate the bottom half and it could be a real scrap until the last 2 games- teams will take points off each other too. Still, those sides who *could* theoretically go down. 5 games left so say even 5th placed Northampton 12 points above the drop Run-in for those theoretically in a relegation scrap: Weekend of 5th-7th April 2019 5th April 2019 Sale v Harlequins 6th April 2019 Bath v Bristol (Twickenham?) Wasps v Worcester Saracens v Newcastle Leicester v Exeter 7th April 2019 Northampton v Gloucester Weekend of 12th-14th April 2019 12th April 2019 Newcastle v Leicester 13th April 2019 Worcester v Sale Gloucester v Bath Bristol v Saracens 14th April 2019 Exeter v Wasps Weekend of 26th-28th April 2019 26th April 2019 Sale v Bath 27th April 2019 Newcastle v Northampton Leicester v Bristol Wasps v Saracens 28th April 2019 Worcester v Gloucester Weekend of 3rd-5th May 2019 3rd May 2019 Bristol v Sale Harlequins v Leicester 4th May 2019 Northampton v Worcester Gloucester v Newcastle 5th May 2019 Bath v Wasps 18th May 2019- all fixtures kick off same time? Exeter v Northampton Newcastle v Bristol Leicester v Bath Worcester v Saracens Sale v Gloucester Wasps v Harlequins In reality I think it is between the bottom 4. It won't come to last game, felt Bristol were safe after that win v Gloucester, in practical terms at least. I think Bath, Sale, Northampton and maybe Wasps will move towards safety sooner if not later.
  9. Mr Popodopolous


    Mentioned them a fair few times myself in this thread- sales commission competition incoming! On a serious note though, you clearly do a good job on here and obviously you can't comment on them but some of the laws...seem a bit dated.
  10. I believe it to only be the limits for 15/16-last season, which is roughly where I thought they maybe. The limits to this season- these pose the huge challenge. Think after FFP deductions, they have smashed it- lost somewhere between 60-77% of their 3 limit this season alone! Still going to do my calculations but if they have breached it, and them especially given their arrogance, I hope they get points removed this season. Can't get away with it.
  11. Mr Popodopolous


    Let's hope justice is done either way then, however that may fall. Always good when people have solid and knowledgeable legal representation- which in this area of law, I believe FSF Faircop and Football Legal most certainly would be classed as.
  12. Mr Popodopolous


    Thanks for clarifying. Yes it was a fairly extreme leap, just was mainly using it (perhaps erroneously) as an example of what could happen. In extremis, with a particularly top heavy force. Perhaps some forces are better than others. Three years ago I appreciate, but it's happened before though I hasten to add, I don't know where in the UK- presumably not here! FSF Faircop does excellent work at highlighting cases such as this.
  13. Mr Popodopolous


    Tbh @Fordy62, I am as I possibly did say, working on the basis of a couple of assumptions here- which is why I'm keen on finding out how far out I am or more accurately the WMP PCC is? Mainly that WMP PCC figures are indeed correct, and also that there aren't regional differences. Would the Avon and Somerset be equally available or might an FOI be in order to try and shed a bit of light?
  14. Mr Popodopolous


    Ok, my understanding is that quite a few of those were brought in during the early 90's Football Offences Act. Some are justified- i.e. Prohibition of racist chanting, yeah absolutely, throwing of missiles yeah fine- of those first 3, the main one is the playing area- it is a bit too catch all, for the simple reason that not all pitch incursions are for malevolent purposes for the reasons stated in my above post. Once again, I understand even the context of the time- fences had just come down, there had been 2 decades on and off of trouble surrounding football so they needed a deterrent to keep people off the pitch- but that third one merits being looked at again IMO. The 1999 one appears to be much broader in scope. International Banning Orders. Fair enough if absolutely guilty and particularly of racism or violence. Problem is, again it seems to be a bit of catch all. You could get an international banning order (in theory) for something as innocuous as drinking in view of the pitch- nuts. An offence yes- more on which later- but hardly proportionate. Sale of tickets by unauthorised persons. How many people lend tickets to mates- how many people cannot make a game so sell them on forums at face value say? Loads! Now touting is different and people who tout are generally bellends and for being a bellend alone the punishment or the deterrence is justified in their case, yet your ordinary fan who wishes to recoup a bit of cash after a family emergency or make sure their season ticket does not go to waste? Well, they could get an FBO, a club ban or even in extremis- albeit I can't see the grounds for it- an International Banning order? Couldn't they... The 1985 alcohol in view of the pitch law. Now you're not in favour of it and that is your prerogative, but plenty are. There was trouble and lots of it in the 1980s and unrestricted alcohol at football? Probably played a part- things are different now, times have changed. Arrest rate is so much lower, demographics at football have shifted quite a bit in 20-30 years. I've gone on a bit but in summary, I'd scrap the all seater requirement, the alcohol in view of the pitch law and would amend the law about pitch incursions.
  • Create New...