Mr Popodopolous

Jackson may be set to fail his medical at Bournemouth. If that move breaks down might they try and resurrect?? Transfer window moves on quickly- maybe they'll come back in late and offer higher money.

He's 27 so I'd have thought for the here and now. Bo Andersen- don't remember much about him. Maenpaa was good! Age and injury counter against...Marinovic well the less said... Basso was rather good, shame how it ended contract wise!

Last 6 month's of deal, post Covid inevitable tbh. All the best to him at Wolves.

Yeah we can agree to disagree on that. Technically sound CBs? Possibly yes. Interested in the mental aspect though, Atkinson and his error v Swansea was appalling e.g. There is a time to play and a time to hit it longer or take a safety option nor sure I'd advocate the long ball approach either. Hitting it long vs a pair of CBs is quite difficult- we're not a long ball side but it's about finding that balance really.

I would say yes to some extent , mistakes will happen but it is also a bit like with Naismith risk v reward. Vyner's propensity to err has reduced significantly and we know Atkinson is decent technically, can carry it. I also think Naismith in front can also drop back into a 3 in certain phases. Kalas if fit and in form while less expensive than the rest can be conservative technically but sound if that makes sense. (Granted can isn't always the same as will).

Just watched some of that video. I take back some of what I said, umming and aahing about the market. £15m or near as dammit. Great thing too, as the video reaffirms he seems capable as we know of scoring all sorts of goals. Has a combination of skill, pace, power and versatility with experience yet room for growth still there. The Fulham goals were great but a special mention too for the Huddersfield one at the end of August.

This sounds promising, free agent too? Would he be to compete with O'Leary or look to be a medium term No.1. Bajic to consider too of course.

On a wider legal football finance into law note, for those who are interested in the 2nd Birmingham case this offers a bit more detail on implied terms or similar. https://www.burges-salmon.com/news-and-insight/legal-updates/understanding-endeavours-clauses-best-reasonable-and-all-reasonable#:~:text=Best endeavours,-Best endeavours is&text=It is an obligation to,means subordinating its own interests.

Ultimately true, nobody can or will know for sure how a new body will look at the returns of all clubs. Ultimately no issues impacting us this season IMO. A lot counts in our favour though as you say.

As for why clubs leak interest in players as mentioned earlier in the thread. To turn a players head surely. Stories of interest used to and still probably do still appear in Marca ahead of a potential incoming bid e.g. Player may start agitating for a move etc. Maybe it comes from an agent at one end or another too. Tbh Semenyo has been totally professional this January but higher level, higher wage yes heads will be turned certainly.

Is good mitigation certainly..maybe showing willing and in our case no PL loans since summer 2020, no transfer fees paid iirc since summer 2021 that all helps.

Suffice to say though, were it me this is what I would consider doing on a general note for big Covid claims with FFP. 1) Take the £39m adjusted loss after FFP allowances. 2) Then the combined average for 2019-20 and 2020-21 with the £5m and £5m. Plus the £2.5m in 2021-22. 3) In effect adjusted loss to 2021-22 now £46.5m and the same again to 2022-23, that's before the usual FFP exclusions. Next steps: 1) If within £39m in any event to 2019-20 and 2020-21, to 2021-22 or to 2022-23 no further action- higher or lower aside, talking about the Upper Threshold here, usual monitoring still applies to >£15m but <£39m. Whether that's before or after usual FFP allowances. 2) If up to £46.5m before Covid add-backs but the usual £39m or below after the £5m, £5m (average £5m).and £2.5m then no further action save for the monitoring requirements between higher and lower limits. 3) IF a club have say £50m in FFP losses to 2021-22 before the £5m x 2 average 2 and £2.5m in 2021-22 that still leaves them on £3.5m over. Then the onus is on that club to prove their losses and I expect they in a lot of cases can prove they losses ie us and corporate, hospitality, ticket revenue etc will certainly exceed the £5m x 2 and £2.5m. No problem if they can. 4) If however a club are filling the gap with the help of an unusual method and were not selling players, rejecting bids that could help to fill that gap and these bids remaining rejected well I'd look on it less favourably personally. I would also perhaps assess clubs after the January window to see grounds of mitigation or otherwise. If the club cannot prove the unusual method idea in point 4 or the losing greater revenue in general terms than point 3 then yes it would or the principle underpinning the potentially compliant returns would I expect need adjudication. Adjudication not necessarily sanctions but adjudication to determine the issue. Question is, especially on Point 4 what constitutes proof? It's subjective or can be.

In respedt of Sememyo, player valuation is so hard to gauge isn't it. I read Alvarez joined Man City for a fee of £14m last January. How does £15m for Semenyo look in that context! Then again as per one report, Souttar to Leicester £15m, Souttar slightly > Alvarez!

Ashton and the Kelly timing, profit wise vanity wise etc. Surely SL would have been a contributing factor there, he after all spoke of a certain level of pride about finally recording a profit in the 2019 interview. Allegedly benefiting from the transfers is something else entirely. Money spent, I'm a bit jury out on. Some of them had significant injuries for ones one or more medium term- bad luck. More than a few actually. Then there was the question of whether Johnson had a consistent and coherent tactical structure. Jury out again at times! Player such as Nagy, Massengo, when fit Walsh better suited to a CM 3 IMO, Williams in a higher line not a good match, Henriksen also probably a 3, Weimann wise right I could go on really but don't think we got the best out of a range we did sign- mix of questionable strategy, injuries and ability. Hegeler, Djuric and Diedhiou to name 3 all had medium term and perhaps longer injuries in 2017-18. O'Dowda too when he was absolutely flying in November 2017- real strong form albeit a shortish period. Not excusing Ashton, we traded far too many players but aspects of it feel more nuanced than one or two to blame- lots to go around really. Luck. Within 6 weeks of the season Afobe was our for months, DaSilva for half a season, Kalas and Nagy medium term injuries. A host of injuries in 2017-18, Mawson having significant injuries in his loan here, lots.

We do. There seem to be a range of overlapping criteria there though, on one hand x in Player wages but Renhe Sports Management has higher wages than the club e.g., then £13m x 3...how are they getting this down, meeting amortisation targets probably yes, profit on transfer harder to say. Given that their total revenue will probably be not much more than £20m, say £21-22m how quickly they are getting down costs will be interesting to see. On a lower income than us, compliance with FFP and the Business Plan while signing PL loanees seem fairly divergent.

One analysis I have seen is that Reading, have in effect cut their wage bill from £32.2m in 2021, to £21.1m last season to £16m this. Credible given PL loanees?

Tbh us aside I'm quite interested as to how Reading have complied wirh the terms of their Businsss Plan. Would require the Player remuneration to drop to £21.2m last season and £16m this. Plus they lost £39.217m before tax in the Covid behind closed doors season. Seen an estimate of £9-10m in FFP allowances, but this was on an income of £15.634m. Yet they are apparently on course to comply.

Also a fair take, but I suppose it's unknowable (for us anyway) at this stage. Unless the body have in fact signed off existing arrangements before being appointed then there is an unknown factor at play. I wonder if the new body will assess after the January window has shut.

I've raised the issue before but. Supposing that this new body come in, look at the accounts, Projections and methodology of us and a few others and call into question FFP compliance by dint of transfer add-backs or player Impairment excluded from Covid how would a club rectify the situation? What do this new body approve, hold fire on, what powers to change tack or reject do they have- how much have the CFRP already approved for club a?

I was wrong, PL club have signed a Championship player this window. Good luck to him a fee (probably small) plus wages off the books. Always thought he signed for £4m, was it half that? Cover for Max however? All goes towards any notional FFP hole if we're being pessimistic or frees up for maybe 1 or 2 loan signings if optimistic.

Are Championship players being priced out of moved a bit? Or more accurately are PL clubs now looking overseas more often or indeed for PL players who may have run their course as they don't deem Championship sides as valuable as they might have been. Looking to use the obvious financial gaps to leverage players our as cheaply as possible.

All depends on whether the owner can and will top up the excess in cash flow as far as the fees themselves go. FFP another consideration, if it goes wrong stuck at best and perhaps hammered by multiple sanctions at worst. Administration or worse only happens of course if the owner can or will no longer pay.

Sounds like it yes, won't apply with retroactive effect of course. I'm still relatively relaxed about the prospect of at a club's own risk when it comes to this kinda thing but otoh perhaps it'd encourage risky behaviour. Of course a certain club very close to home had long contracts indeed and we almost paid the ultimate price. Whitehead 11 years, Gow and Ritchie 7 years each. Were there any others? Old article about a subject very well known on here but it'd be interesting to know how many got long deals and for how long. https://www.theguardian.com/football/that-1980s-sports-blog/2020/apr/08/eight-bristol-city-players-money-save-club-ashton-gate-eight-coronavirus

Imagine the press potential with Reid and Weimann together! Both as a pair and perhaps one dropping off a bit out of possession. Reid and Weimann are/have been right up there without doubt.

Oh and @PHILINFRANCE https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-11668493/UEFA-close-loophole-wake-Chelseas-record-spending-complaints-rival-clubs.html Just tonight, suspect this will interest you! I still don't see a problem provided terms of contract are fair and not under duress etc- club's own risk.