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

fishy

Newcastle Preparing For Life In The Championship/Steve Bruce Resigns (Merged)

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Owl Visiting said:

How dare you! 

I made a joke on Twitter last night that Bruce will probably want to watch the Ashes series before taking over.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, fishy said:

I've asked my people to contact his people. 

20190710_200425.jpg

He'd eat all the profits!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I made a joke on Twitter last night that Bruce will probably want to watch the Ashes series before taking over.

I wouldn’t open with it .... bury it somewhere in the middle of your routine ... 😄✌️🍷

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I made a joke on Twitter last night that Bruce will probably want to watch the Ashes series before taking over.

He’s got a few weddings to go to first  mind 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Southport Red said:

If it happened @Owl Visiting how would you feel?  Angry? Betrayed? Relieved?

Not that bothered really, we've done well since he arrived but the revival had begun before he came along. Until the financial situation is sorted I don't really think it makes much difference who's in charge really.

He's walked out on several clubs for another job, (managed Sheffield United before us and Birmingham before Villa so I don't think his Sunderland past will effect his likelihood of taking the Newcastle job) so don't expect him to stay loyal after we waited for him patiently at the beginning of the year.

Everyone seems to want Hughton if he goes but apparently he's not keen on managing in the north again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Owl Visiting said:

Not that bothered really, we've done well since he arrived but the revival had begun before he came along. Until the financial situation is sorted I don't really think it makes much difference who's in charge really.

He's walked out on several clubs for another job, (managed Sheffield United before us and Birmingham before Villa so I don't think his Sunderland past will effect his likelihood of taking the Newcastle job) so don't expect him to stay loyal after we waited for him patiently at the beginning of the year.

Everyone seems to want Hughton if he goes but apparently he's not keen on managing in the north again.

That sounds like good stuff for a stonking triv question ... there can’t be many managers who’ve been at the helm at that many pairs of rivals - Sheff Utd/Sheff W .... Birmingham/Villa ... Sunderland/Newcastle (potentially) ... cracking! Anyone know any others? 

Danny Wilson?

Does he count? City/Swindon ... Barnsley/Sheff W ... Barnsley/Sheff Utd ...Sheff Utd/Sheff W ... Chesterfield/Barnsley...

Edited by BS4 on Tour...
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Owl Visiting said:

Everyone seems to want Hughton if he goes but apparently he's not keen on managing in the north again.

Always rated Houghton. Thought he was shafted by Newcastle. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Southport Red said:

Always rated Houghton. Thought he was shafted by Newcastle. 

Yeah he was, and I really liked his Brighton side, thought it was one of the best Championship sides I've seen. Been a victim of his own success on a couple of occasions. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Owl Visiting said:

Not that bothered really, we've done well since he arrived but the revival had begun before he came along. Until the financial situation is sorted I don't really think it makes much difference who's in charge really.

He's walked out on several clubs for another job, (managed Sheffield United before us and Birmingham before Villa so I don't think his Sunderland past will effect his likelihood of taking the Newcastle job) so don't expect him to stay loyal after we waited for him patiently at the beginning of the year.

Everyone seems to want Hughton if he goes but apparently he's not keen on managing in the north again.

Fair comment OV. In all honesty, with Bruce, I had you down as an outside bet for the top 6 next season. He just knows what he's doing at this level. Without him, and I would be happy to be proven wrong, I don't think you'll threaten the promotion places WTGR.

As you said, the finances are the overbearing issue but, with Bruce, you've a chance, without him, given your precarious finances, I'm not so sure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, RUSSEL85 said:

IRA Stock plan:blink:

Back in the early 1990's many people actually that was related to the Irish lot @RUSSEL85

I can remember protests outside stores in London 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Southport Red said:

Always rated Houghton. Thought he was shafted by Newcastle. 

Definitely shouldn't have taken that penalty against the USA though...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Owl Visiting

No offence to you personally, you're a good poster etc but your club are cheating scumbags.  No wonder Gibson rounded on you and some other clubs.

Selling Hillsborough for £38m profit- cheats- cheating pricks. I hope Bruce leaves and your new free signings kick off as they're no longer under him. *******.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

@Owl Visiting

No offence to you personally, you're a good poster etc but your club are cheating scummers.  No wonder Gibson rounded on you and some other clubs.

Selling Hillsborough for £38m profit- cheats- cheating pricks. I hope Bruce leaves and your new free signings kick off as they're no longer under him. *******.

I don't necessarily agree and, at times like this, I'm reminded of the fact that - if I've got my history right as I am bit too young for this and it is based on what I've read rather than my own memory - in 1982 we were the first club to go bankrupt but continue by restarting as a new business and taking the old business' place in the league. It is common practice these days but I understand there was abuse and resentment for other clubs as we were perceived to be cheating the situation.

The point I am making I suppose is that this is sport, and it's not surprising that teams aim to get whatever advantage they can under the rules. I don't like clubs getting around FFP by selling their stadiums, and I wonder if it is a mistake in the long-term as it could have unforeseen consequences - but I feel it is more of a need for the league to tighten up the rules rather than a need to condemn clubs for utilising loopholes that exist. Perhaps I am being too generous though. 

  • Hmmm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

I don't necessarily agree and, at times like this, I'm reminded of the fact that - if I've got my history right as I am bit too young for this and it is based on what I've read rather than my own memory - in 1982 we were the first club to go bankrupt but continue by restarting as a new business and taking the old business' place in the league. It is common practice these days but I understand there was abuse and resentment for other clubs as we were perceived to be cheating the situation.

The point I am making I suppose is that this is sport, and it's not surprising that teams aim to get whatever advantage they can under the rules. I don't like clubs getting around FFP by selling their stadiums, and I wonder if it is a mistake in the long-term as it could have unforeseen consequences - but I feel it is more of a need for the league to tighten up the rules rather than a need to condemn clubs for utilising loopholes that exist. Perhaps I am being too generous though. 

The rule was removed for reasons unknown it appears- this is on the EFL too, clubs should be consulting lawyers in all honesty, if only to force an enquiry. How will SL be feeling about this??

It's cheating, end of story- if it is to a related party such as these 3 moves were. Increased cheating when it is substantially above net book value- net book value may not represent sales price but there's certain reasonable upticks and there's taking the piss. These 3 moves appear to fall into the latter camp.

We went bankrupt or all but, and paid a penance, had a long period of rebuilding- this is a way of circumventing a penance- in modern parlance either an embargo, points deduction or even just stagnation/few years transition. We were the first to do this yes, but we paid a heavy price.

I don't feel I was too harsh in my post at all.

Their net book value for Hillsborough based on a 2013 revaluation and subsequent additions and depreciation was around £22-23m, they sold it to their owner or a related party for £60-61m.

That's before even factoring in, when was it sold- how can it be in 2017/18 accounts if sold say after July 2018?

Cheating scumbags is spot on IMO.

Hope Bruce leaves and Sheffield Wednesday crash and burn. Arrogance in abundance, like Aston Villa.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

That sounds like good stuff for a stonking triv question ... there can’t be many managers who’ve been at the helm at that many pairs of rivals - Sheff Utd/Sheff W .... Birmingham/Villa ... Sunderland/Newcastle (potentially) ... cracking! Anyone know any others? 

Danny Wilson?

Does he count? City/Swindon ... Barnsley/Sheff W ... Barnsley/Sheff Utd ...Sheff Utd/Sheff W ... Chesterfield/Barnsley...

Depends on how vague you are with 'rivals' I suppose.

On the above basis, anyone who's managed Barnsley would have a shot at being up there!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would laugh myself silly if Bruce went and Sheff Wed hired say Hollowhead. Newcastle preparing for life at this level, would be preparing for life in League One! 😆

Edited by Mr Popodopolous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LondonBristolian said:

I don't necessarily agree and, at times like this, I'm reminded of the fact that - if I've got my history right as I am bit too young for this and it is based on what I've read rather than my own memory - in 1982 we were the first club to go bankrupt but continue by restarting as a new business and taking the old business' place in the league. It is common practice these days but I understand there was abuse and resentment for other clubs as we were perceived to be cheating the situation.

The point I am making I suppose is that this is sport, and it's not surprising that teams aim to get whatever advantage they can under the rules. I don't like clubs getting around FFP by selling their stadiums, and I wonder if it is a mistake in the long-term as it could have unforeseen consequences - but I feel it is more of a need for the league to tighten up the rules rather than a need to condemn clubs for utilising loopholes that exist. Perhaps I am being too generous though. 

Too generous by half.

For 3 seasons Villa, Derby and Wednesday, along with the rest of the championship clubs,  knew full well the financial rules and constraints that would be applied and  for which they would be accountable come the Spring of 2019. In Villa's case those 3 years were the season in which they also enjoyed premier league parachute payments.

During those three years most championship clubs took whatever steps were appropriate - including selling players, recruiting cheaper players, i.e. compromising their competitive position on the pitch - in order to ensure they did not breach ffp. Despite having the same 3 years in which to get their act together, Villa, Derby and Wednesday all had to resort to seeing their stadia ( in an artificial way - which is what so many are het up about) in order to bail themselves out of the ffp mess into which they had mismanaged.

That one of those clubs gained promotion is what really makes many mad, as by not taking financially prudent steps, as the majority of their competitor clubs had done, they gained an on field advantage, which paid off. You say it's not surprising that teams aim to gain whatever advantage they can, but does that make it right? WE now know that the EFL cocked up the issue of stadium sales within the new rules, but these in my view these 3 clubs have stuck 2 fingers up to the integrity of the championship competition and their fellow championship clubs.

As far as I am aware  none of these 3 clubs have "sold" their stadia in order to keep the club afloat and avoid administration/bankruptcy. However, in 1982 the steps that City took were to keep the club in existence. The clubs might not have liked it at the time, but I don;t think you compare that to what has happened in the last few months at Derby, Villa and Wednesday.

  • Like 4
  • Flames 2
  • Robin 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, downendcity said:

Too generous by half.

For 3 seasons Villa, Derby and Wednesday, along with the rest of the championship clubs,  knew full well the financial rules and constraints that would be applied and  for which they would be accountable come the Spring of 2019. In Villa's case those 3 years were the season in which they also enjoyed premier league parachute payments.

During those three years most championship clubs took whatever steps were appropriate - including selling players, recruiting cheaper players, i.e. compromising their competitive position on the pitch - in order to ensure they did not breach ffp. Despite having the same 3 years in which to get their act together, Villa, Derby and Wednesday all had to resort to seeing their stadia ( in an artificial way - which is what so many are het up about) in order to bail themselves out of the ffp mess into which they had mismanaged.

That one of those clubs gained promotion is what really makes many mad, as by not taking financially prudent steps, as the majority of their competitor clubs had done, they gained an on field advantage, which paid off. You say it's not surprising that teams aim to gain whatever advantage they can, but does that make it right? WE now know that the EFL cocked up the issue of stadium sales within the new rules, but these in my view these 3 clubs have stuck 2 fingers up to the integrity of the championship competition and their fellow championship clubs.

 As far as I am aware  none of these 3 clubs have "sold" their stadia in order to keep the club afloat and avoid administration/bankruptcy. However, in 1982 the steps that City took were to keep the club in existence. The clubs might not have liked it at the time, but I don;t think you compare that to what has happened in the last few months at Derby, Villa and Wednesday.

:clap:

Bloody well said- my thoughts exactly. I still maintain Derby fall into a bit of a middle ground as I looked at their 3 year accounts and am unsure they breached and as part of this they sold significant players, but well said indeed. The worst for me are Aston Villa and Sheffield Wednesday IMO.

EFL, the best we can say about them is that they cocked it up that's for sure. None did it to avoid bankruptcy, whereas our situation was literally do or die! Completely different as you rightly say.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, RUSSEL85 said:

IRA Stock plan:blink:

I hate to be all serious, but this is what led to the myth that Avon Cosmetics supported the IRA in the 70s.

IRA in America is something to do with pensions, and is often seen in job related salary stuff.

  • Hmmm 1
  • Aubergine 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

:clap:

Bloody well said- my thoughts exactly. I still maintain Derby fall into a bit of a middle ground as I looked at their 3 year accounts and am unsure they breached and as part of this they sold significant players, but well said indeed. The worst for me are Aston Villa and Sheffield Wednesday IMO.

EFL, the best we can say about them is that they cocked it up that's for sure. None did it to avoid bankruptcy, whereas our situation was literally do or die! Completely different as you rightly say.

I’m not clear on our own situation in 82 to compare it to what Villa and Wednesday have done...but we were trying to save the club, getting rid of players, cutting costs left right and centre....and we ultimately left a set of unpaid creditors who got virtually zilch or zilch, so we can’t take complete moral high ground, but it appears vastly different to what Villa and Wednesday have done.

Derby I have a bit of sympathy because they have tried to control costs by selling some players.

What do we think about Reading....have they done a sell and leaseback too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Coxy27 said:

Depends on how vague you are with 'rivals' I suppose.

On the above basis, anyone who's managed Barnsley would have a shot at being up there!

Not quite, only if someone had managed all their rivals too, think you missed the point a bit - Wilson has managed both Sheff clubs, Barnsley and Chesterfield ... as well as City and Swindon ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I’m not clear on our own situation in 82 to compare it to what Villa and Wednesday have done...but we were trying to save the club, getting rid of players, cutting costs left right and centre....and we ultimately left a set of unpaid creditors who got virtually zilch or zilch, so we can’t take complete moral high ground, but it appears vastly different to what Villa and Wednesday have done.

Derby I have a bit of sympathy because they have tried to control costs by selling some players.

What do we think about Reading....have they done a sell and leaseback too?

Agreed, well and truly. As you say quite a few creditors did get shafted somewhat, but yeah we paid a penance too, we took a medicine I think- certainly my understanding in any case.

Agreed- always had the gut feeling but had to wait for these apparent Sheffield Wednesday accounts that Aston Villa and Sheffield Wednesday the worst 2- I think I consistently doubted Derby had necessarily breached FFP throughout the year, independent of their ground transaction- unclear either way still, but different kettle of fish to these two IMO. Player sales definitely would count in their favor as a mitigating factor too.

Reading- now this is an odd one. Sale and leaseback to owners, it appears to be the Madejski. I assumed given the profit and indeed the sale price was so low that it was the traning ground, a carpark being sold for flats or some general high value land the club owned. Losing money undoubtedly, Sale Price £26.5m- however that in no way reflected the profit which was a mere £6.5m. They sold their ground to their owners to allieviate FFP, yet didn't do it much hence the soft embargo they're still under and now don't own their ground, they pay rent! Both the profit and above all the sale price are strikingly low, considering it was an RPT to help allieviate FFP. Built 1998 or completed then at least, holds 24,000- modern ground. Strikingly low like I say- but maybe they carried out the process and treated it as if it was a truly third party transaction?:dunno:

Here's the other thing too- accounts which were due April 30th 2019, as they were to July 31st 2018, were signed off on June 21st 2019- got to have doubts about the dates of this particular transaction. Big doubts- cannot believe an RPT would take not far off 11 months!

Struggle to see how the Land Registry stuff would take 11 and a bit months to turnaround too!

A penny for Birmingham's thoughts right now...hopefully consulting lawyers as we speak.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, downendcity said:

Too generous by half.

For 3 seasons Villa, Derby and Wednesday, along with the rest of the championship clubs,  knew full well the financial rules and constraints that would be applied and  for which they would be accountable come the Spring of 2019. In Villa's case those 3 years were the season in which they also enjoyed premier league parachute payments.

During those three years most championship clubs took whatever steps were appropriate - including selling players, recruiting cheaper players, i.e. compromising their competitive position on the pitch - in order to ensure they did not breach ffp. Despite having the same 3 years in which to get their act together, Villa, Derby and Wednesday all had to resort to seeing their stadia ( in an artificial way - which is what so many are het up about) in order to bail themselves out of the ffp mess into which they had mismanaged.

That one of those clubs gained promotion is what really makes many mad, as by not taking financially prudent steps, as the majority of their competitor clubs had done, they gained an on field advantage, which paid off. You say it's not surprising that teams aim to gain whatever advantage they can, but does that make it right? WE now know that the EFL cocked up the issue of stadium sales within the new rules, but these in my view these 3 clubs have stuck 2 fingers up to the integrity of the championship competition and their fellow championship clubs.

As far as I am aware  none of these 3 clubs have "sold" their stadia in order to keep the club afloat and avoid administration/bankruptcy. However, in 1982 the steps that City took were to keep the club in existence. The clubs might not have liked it at the time, but I don;t think you compare that to what has happened in the last few months at Derby, Villa and Wednesday.

The clubs concerned probably knew the rules and knew if they sold there stadium, effectively to themselves, they would comply with FFP as a last resort, IMO. This was not a case of a last minute Hail Mary it is a case of clubs lawyers telling them there was a get out of jail free card if necessary 

Obviously it might be a case of one of them knew and the other two said FLI CK Me what a good idea, but I doubt it. 

You only have to look at the multi billion dollar business soccer is to know the boards of directors get very good advice...What I don’t understand is why people seem surprised by that...Look around you, you know there is at least ONE multi billionaire at every game we play within 150 yards of you where-ever you sit!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/07/2019 at 22:56, BS4 on Tour... said:

That sounds like good stuff for a stonking triv question ... there can’t be many managers who’ve been at the helm at that many pairs of rivals - Sheff Utd/Sheff W .... Birmingham/Villa ... Sunderland/Newcastle (potentially) ... cracking! Anyone know any others? 

Danny Wilson?

Does he count? City/Swindon ... Barnsley/Sheff W ... Barnsley/Sheff Utd ...Sheff Utd/Sheff W ... Chesterfield/Barnsley...

John Ward?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I’m not clear on our own situation in 82 to compare it to what Villa and Wednesday have done...but we were trying to save the club, getting rid of players, cutting costs left right and centre....and we ultimately left a set of unpaid creditors who got virtually zilch or zilch, so we can’t take complete moral high ground, but it appears vastly different to what Villa and Wednesday have done.

Derby I have a bit of sympathy because they have tried to control costs by selling some players.

What do we think about Reading....have they done a sell and leaseback too?

Do the sins of the father pass on to the son? Should Germany be punished again for the wars? 

What happen to us was 35 years ago when football on and off the field was immeasurably different those that cheat should be punished!

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some strong words here.

I’m not sure it’s cheating if it’s in the rules. If the rules are wrong, blame the rule makers, not the clubs trying to do their best within the rules.

if SL was able to take advantage of the rule, do we seriously think he wouldn’t, and what would be our view of him then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, REDOXO said:

The clubs concerned probably knew the rules and knew if they sold there stadium, effectively to themselves, they would comply with FFP as a last resort, IMO. This was not a case of a last minute Hail Mary it is a case of clubs lawyers telling them there was a get out of jail free card if necessary 

Obviously it might be a case of one of them knew and the other two said FLI CK Me what a good idea, but I doubt it. 

You only have to look at the multi billion dollar business soccer is to know the boards of directors get very good advice...What I don’t understand is why people seem surprised by that...Look around you, you know there is at least ONE multi billionaire at every game we play within 150 yards of you where-ever you sit!

EFL lifted the regs for reasons unknown it appears- you only have to read the old and new regs to see this is quite possibly the case. Under the old ones it wouldn't have counted towards FFP calculations, whereas now it does.

Dunno why you're defending these people--they're cheating the competition, but more importantly us. Glad Hirst left Sheffield Wednesday via a loophole, glad they're being disrupted via this Bruce shit, glad they quite likely lost out on Bidwell while under a soft embargo.

1 hour ago, HitchinRed said:

Some strong words here.

I’m not sure it’s cheating if it’s in the rules. If the rules are wrong, blame the rule makers, not the clubs trying to do their best within the rules.

if SL was able to take advantage of the rule, do we seriously think he wouldn’t, and what would be our view of him then?

Strong but fair IMO.

Cop Out that- these rules, lifted for reasons known it would appear, question is when, why and by whom?

Well I'd dispute that- I would because SL with his accounting knowledge, hell he's a chartered accountant by trade would be able to work this one out easy, and probably many more beside. I like to think he has a bit more integrity- dare I say looking for workarounds not so uncommon in the regulatory environment of a lot of these owners, dots to be joined etc?

Sounds like @Lewisdabaron happy for the competition but quite specifically us to be cheated here.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Not quite, only if someone had managed all their rivals too, think you missed the point a bit - Wilson has managed both Sheff clubs, Barnsley and Chesterfield ... as well as City and Swindon ...

I didn't miss the point, there's no need to patronise.

I'm just saying your trivia question answers would depend on how you define 'rivals'. I made a tongue in cheek comment about Barnsley because to me, despite them being 'South Yorkshire' derbies, Barnsley v Sheffield clubs isn't a true 'rivalry'.

Personally, I would say you need a black and white definition to make it a good quiz question. For me that would be clubs who's main rivals are each other. So Sheffield United and Sheffield Wednesday, Barnsley might hate Sheffield Wednesday the most, but to Wednesday, Barnsley are a distant second (if that), so I wouldn't count it. Otherwise where do you draw the line? Are us and Swansea rivals?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

EFL lifted the regs for reasons unknown it appears- you only have to read the old and new regs to see this is quite possibly the case. Under the old ones it wouldn't have counted towards FFP calculations, whereas now it does.

Dunno why you're defending these people--they're cheating the competition, but more importantly us. Glad Hirst left Sheffield Wednesday via a loophole, glad they're being disrupted via this Bruce shit, glad they quite likely lost out on Bidwell while under a soft embargo.

 

I wasn’t defending them. That was your interpretation of what I said, however the point I was making is that football clubs like any other company in a multi billion dollar industry will have a damn good idea where the loopholes are in the regulations and take calculated risks when necessary!

Newspapers and media dumb down contracts and deals for the short attention span of the stakeholders, particularly supporters, however there is to much at stake for clubs not to be intimately aware of where the get out of jail free cards lay.

The letter of the law is muted if the spirit of the law is ignored, but that is how it is in most big industries. Football is now among the biggest.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

I wasn’t defending them. That was your interpretation of what I said, however the point I was making is that football clubs like any other company in a multi billion dollar industry will have a damn good idea where the loopholes are in the regulations and take calculated risks when necessary!

Newspapers and media dumb down contracts and deals for the short attention span of the stakeholders, particularly supporters, however there is to much at stake for clubs not to be intimately aware of where the get out of jail free cards lay.

The letter of the law is muted if the spirit of the law is ignored, but that is how it is in most big industries. Football is now among the biggest.

Would help if the EFL didn't open a closed loophole, would it not?

Why did they open it- because it appears that they did.

SL didn't do it- because he has more respect for the spirit of the regulations than those from certain jurisdictions let's say.

Without wishing to stereotype in any way, it is notable that 3 of the 4 who have done this are from certain jurisdictions. The rumoured 5th to have done it is also from a similar to the other 3.

If anything the EFL should be tightening the loopholes, not loosening them- I don't believe there are all that many- they should always be looking at shutting off potential ones though.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ANyway, I fear Steve Bruce may stay.

Chansiri a very tough negotiator apparently- compensation price or not at all. I hope it backfires but I cannot see Mike Ashley paying £5m or whatever it is- Nixon says it is "substantial".#

Jammy bastards either way- the new Aston Villa

Edited by Mr Popodopolous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Would help if the EFL didn't open a closed loophole, would it not?

Why did they open it- because it appears that they did.

SL didn't do it- because he has more respect for the spirit of the regulations than those from certain jurisdictions let's say.

Without wishing to stereotype in any way, it is notable that 3 of the 4 who have done this are from certain jurisdictions. The rumoured 5th to have done it is also from a similar to the other 3.

If anything the EFL should be tightening the loopholes, not loosening them- I don't believe there are all that many- they should always be looking at shutting off potential ones though.

Problem with closing the loophole now is that other clubs will try and do the same prior to the amendment to the rules. The issue then becomes if Villa Derby Sheffield Wed etc can do this why can’t we. Thus the look of bias continues. However if they find the clubs guilty of breaches of the rules, disqualify their company accounts and deduct them 15 points and bring Villa back down a league then change the rules that would be consistent....Point is the EFL like the FA are a gutless institution who will only find against smaller clubs under any circumstances and will apply loopholes to the benefit of certain clubs. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

Problem with closing the loophole now is that other clubs will try and do the same prior to the amendment to the rules. The issue then becomes if Villa Derby Sheffield Wed etc can do this why can’t we. Thus the look of bias continues. However if they find the clubs guilty of breaches of the rules, disqualify their company accounts and deduct them 15 points and bring Villa back down a league then change the rules that would be consistent....Point is the EFL like the FA are a gutless institution who will only find against smaller clubs under any circumstances and will apply loopholes to the benefit of certain clubs. 

 

 

 

My compromise then is to let all clubs do it once then close the loophole- but the truth is the loophole was closed but the EFL opened it, one Tweet suggested they "deleted it in error"- yeah right.

Think the best we can hope for in terms of Aston Villa would be some sort of deduction in waiting or carried over. In terms of Derby, it's a grey area because I'm still unconvinced they broke it necessarily, in terms of Sheffield Wednesday there are big red klaxons all over this- look at the accounting period of transaction v accounts, look at the fact there is no transaction on the land registry and the fact that it still states owned by Sheffield Wednesday FC, look at the fact the accounts were signed "21st June 2019"- for an accounting period that a) Ran to July 31 2018 which is fine but what is very interesting in that is b) Which is that the accounting period as said ran to July 31 2018, accounts due May 31 2019 yet accounts signed 21 June 2019- I have very little faith that it fell in the correct reporting period.

It also transpires that the new owner of Hillsborough is not listed and- see the FFP thread actually- Sheffield Wednesday when quizzed on this earlier by BBC journo said they "Did not know when the transaction occurred" or words to that effect. EFL should be all over this one as a high priority and an urgent one- not pissing about with MK Dons v Wimbledon!

Then clubs should be lawyering up against the EFL, either clubs who have complied or been punished. Gibson suing Derby is an interesting start but not quite sure he's got the right strategy there.

Oh yeah, hope Steve Bruce goes- always had more inclination towards Sheff Utd anyway and nothing this week has disabused me of the view.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Hi @Pheasant plucker

You are another apologist I see. What it basically means is that we sold certain playerd when maybe in light of all this we didn't need to sell all.

Seems like you and @Lewisdabaron are happy for us to be at a disadvantage to financial creativity so just you crack on. :yes:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Think you have the wrong end of the stick old boy.

My laughing emoji was aimed at your rather clumsy and aggressive post......not the content of it. For the record I agree with most of what you say regarding FFP.

Has someone pissed in your beer or something Mr P? You posting style is pretty aggressive today, when it's usually just quite aloof. May one kindly suggest you go and find something else to do if your in that frame of mind?

I gather you feel strongly about this subject - as do I, but don't have a pop at your own pal.

Kind regards xxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/07/2019 at 07:58, HitchinRed said:

Some strong words here.

I’m not sure it’s cheating if it’s in the rules. If the rules are wrong, blame the rule makers, not the clubs trying to do their best within the rules.

if SL was able to take advantage of the rule, do we seriously think he wouldn’t, and what would be our view of him then?

We love Steve, and all he has done for us, but he is a bit "front row of the class, tie done up neatly, shoes polished, homework done on time, hand up waiting to answer teacher's question" while yer Wolves, Wednesday, Villa, Derby owners are at the back of the class sniggering, lobbing things at Steve, and, we fear, getting snogs off the girls later while Steve/we stay in to do our arithmetic, before watching University Challenge.  

In football, is it the keeners at the front of the class playing by the rules that prevail, or the jack-the-lads messing about at the back, getting away with what they can get away with? 

Or can it be both?

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/07/2019 at 09:34, Pheasant plucker said:

Think you have the wrong end of the stick old boy.

My laughing emoji was aimed at your rather clumsy and aggressive post......not the content of it. For the record I agree with most of what you say regarding FFP.

Has someone pissed in your beer or something Mr P? You posting style is pretty aggressive today, when it's usually just quite aloof. May one kindly suggest you go and find something else to do if your in that frame of mind?

I gather you feel strongly about this subject - as do I, but don't have a pop at your own pal.

Kind regards xxx

Right fair enough, I'm frankly glad I got off the subject and gave this place a bit of a swerve this weekend- reviewed my posting style last couple of days of the week and it wasn't great at times, freely admit to that.

Fair.

Aloof? Not sure if I agree but fair to say I won't argue the toss- did enough of that and aggressively at times earlier in the week. Indeed I did, and my posting style was reviewed and has been moderated accordingly.

Agreed yeah- I was getting pretty riled about thinking of the players we sold and how we did it by the book- certainly noted and amended.

Apologies to yourself and others I had a pop at.

PS, your Rovers emoji is of course not a true reflection because I'm obviously not 😆 as I'm sure you know, but once more I won't argue the toss as I've done enough of that.

ON the subject of Bruce, given Mike Ashley's renowned tightness I do wonder if he maybe stuck there- time will tell I guess.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah well, him and his assistants appear to have resigned- just before the season too?

That's surely good for us- they had a pretty good run from just before Christmas and their new free transfers look solid signings I'd say- would be a shame were that disrupted so close to the season. :thumbsup:

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder what notice period they all have?

Simon Jordan made Bruce see out his contract by putting him on gardening leave. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/07/2019 at 11:55, Moments of Pleasure said:

We love Steve, and all he has done for us, but he is a bit "front row of the class, tie done up neatly, shoes polished, homework done on time, hand up waiting to answer teacher's question" while yer Wolves, Wednesday, Villa, Derby owners are at the back of the class sniggering, lobbing things at Steve, and, we fear, getting snogs off the girls later while Steve/we stay in to do our arithmetic, before watching University Challenge.  

In football, is it the keeners at the front of the class playing by the rules that prevail, or the jack-the-lads messing about at the back, getting away with what they can get away with? 

Or can it be both?

 

Steve spent his business career building one of the Uk's for most financial services companies. In so doing he was subject to stringent regulatory and compliance requirements. 

Unlike the EFL, financial reegulators police thir rules and rather than favouring big players, look to make examples of them for breaking their rules. I know someone who dealt with SL over a long period of time and he says Steve is one of the straightest me. You could wish to deal with. 

I doubt many other wealthy owners built their fortunes in such a heavily regulated environment and while not suggesting that any of the are crooks, suspect that many have bent the rules when it was to their advantage. 

I can't imagine SL changing his attitude from the one that brought him success, and would hope he never will.

There is little e ough integrity left in the game as it is. If SL holds on to his and this reflects on the club, then I for one am glad. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Right fair enough, I'm frankly glad I got off the subject and gave this place a bit of a swerve this weekend- reviewed my posting style last couple of days of the week and it wasn't great at times, freely admit to that.

Fair.

Aloof? Not sure if I agree but fair to say I won't argue the toss- did enough of that and aggressively at times earlier in the week. Indeed I did, and my posting style was reviewed and has been moderated accordingly.

Agreed yeah- I was getting pretty riled about thinking of the players we sold and how we did it by the book- certainly noted and amended.

Apologies to yourself and others I had a pop at.

PS, your Rovers emoji is of course not a true reflection because I'm obviously not 😆 as I'm sure you know, but once more I won't argue the toss as I've done enough of that.

ON the subject of Bruce, given Mike Ashley's renowned tightness I do wonder if he maybe stuck there- time will tell I guess.

Fair enough Mr P.

We all get a bit OTT at times on here. Won't hold it against you. 👍😉 As for the aloof bit, maybe that was a bit harsh, possibly just your posting style, and/or my interpretation of it?

I do agree though that it's more than a tad frustrating to play by the rules, and see other clubs bending and even breaking them with what seems, more than often, little to no sanction applied.

Your posts, on the whole, I find very informative and I thank you for the effort you put into a lot of your FFP posts.

Keep posting!

 

Edited by Pheasant plucker
Sausage fingers
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...