Mr Popodopolous

Saw this online- good piece. https://www.wsc.co.uk/stories/14196-editorial-championship-s-financial-chasm-driving-clubs-to-desperate-measures

The rules seem to keep changing Dave! I can't be certain on this, but so far as I've kept up to date with, those relegated after 1 season get the 2 years i.e. those who come straight down only get one and that would be from 2015/16- local Norwich media seemed to suggest last season was end of parachute payments for them i.e. final season when I looked into it. Also their site suggests they are zero this year. https://www.canaries.co.uk/News/2018/october/norwich-city-annual-accounts/

Looking in from the outside. My take is that on the pitch their decline began with Laudrup sacking- Monk tough he did well for a time, was tactically a significant break from latter stage Jackett but for the most part it began with Martinez, through to Laudrup, via a slightly more pragmatic/tactical (but still technically good) Sousa and between Sousa and Laudrup of course Rodgers. They had a brilliant model on and off the pitch. Off the pitch, getting in the American investors did for them in that sense and investors as opposed to benefactors appears to be the key word. Throw in instability and it is quite the collapse.

Middlesbrough lost around £6.8m last season- that was after player sales though. In FFP terms, they're surely fine for this and next season. Their big departures summer 2018 were a preparation for the ending of parachute payments.

Aston Villa, Hull and QPR are in the final year. Norwich have run out of theirs and this is also Middlesbrough's last year- but both of these are club who look to do the right thing and they took tough decisions when they had parachute payments- I don't have the figures to hand but I think Norwich did a player write down last season as well as the player sales from Jan 2017 and especially summer 2018. Middlesbrough sold Gibson, Traore, Bamford and loaned out Braithwaite- not playing Downing either as to do so would trigger a wage rise. I don't think Gibson and Smith at Middlesbrough or Norwich would recklessly gamble against FFP regs personally. Swansea is an interesting one and last years accounts will be instructive- when they finally release them! Surely they are in quite a smaller hole than say Stoke, but again the Coates will fund any Stoke losses from a solvency/going concern POV- Kaplan and the other American investors at Swansea, much less clear cut.

I appreciate the sentiment, but the problem with that is given that the Championship is a financial shitstorm, you may well end up having to set a precedent which means a bottom 6 as well as a top 6 or even relegating half the division. 12 points this season and 9 next season of the other aggravated breach is proven will do for now I reckon...as well as however long their transfer embargo will be. They need to sell Adams and either loan or sell Jota- in the case of the latter wages in full plus loan fee- for a start.

The worst scenario would be something like this- punished but not meaningfully... Here goes. This season, found in 3 year breach but complied with EFL business plan so docked 6 points thereby killing off any remaining playoff places but not enough for the drop. Maybe a fine of some sort. Then as per something I read on the Birmingham site who writes about FFP in general (only read it for the FFP), once you are punished you are measured and punished on one year totals so you are not punished twice for the past overspend- if that's true then... High earners out of contract, their losses £12m next season and their huge losses of this and last season ignored because of the punishment this year and they go up- that's an appalling loophole if true. In Aston Villa's case, not so sure it would be applicable because of the drop of parachute payments at same time as high earners out so may well have to sell anyway, but for a fair to middling Championship club then maybe.

Fair point- I think it's possible but not cut and dried. My view on it is that Championship clubs who have complied and those who have been punished seriously should look at legal routes if they bottle it on Aston Villa- EFL should be wary of this.

Given they seem to be planning to hit Birmingham hard, I wouldn't bank on it...

I agree with you- assuming though that it's linked to some sort of sliding scale i.e. small but still notcieable breach top 2 to playoffs, or perhaps smaller but notable top 6 to outside playoffs but bigger and it is top 2 to outside playoffs.

Yeah, agree- it hopefully will set a precedent in that the bigger the loss/flouting, the bigger the advantage gained- the bigger the penalty. Fully agree, they knew the rules and therefore have to take their medicine. EFL have to get this right, it sets a precedent moving forward... The good news on that is their own rules or interpretations on websites of these, say that the EFL say nothing is off the table and they can set punishments as they deem fit- in theory at least it means the idea of demotion from top 2 to playoffs or if a bigger breach still. top 2 to 7th say can still happen and indeed top 6 to outside playoffs. Would say that 12 points would be fairer and a bigger deterrent but The grey area here though- and in legal terms it perhaps makes sense- is the switching from 3 year to 1 year assessment periods once a side has been punished for the duration i.e. Birmingham's increased losses in 16/17 won't count against them this year and their huge losses last year won't count against them this or next season...if it's true I don't know but Al Majir who writes about Birmingham finances seems pretty clued up so who knows. Their 6 month results from their parent company in Hong Kong will be instructive as to whether they will be breaching it this season as well, even on the one year ruling- I'll keep an eye out for BSH Holdings.

QPR- the first big offenders who received a punishment under the old rules have released their financial results for last season... The £20m exceptional item I assume is one aspect of their fine you can strip from the losses but- and even this is with parachute payments...they'll need to cut deep and fast next year unless they fluke a promotion to PL via playoffs this season. They have been offloading high earners this summer though which will help and the sacking of Holloway will have created a non-recurring cost.

Forgot to add in that post @Davefevs, @chinapig and @downendcity you may all be interested in the above.

That is decent, workaround of the swear filter that!

Birmingham believe they are being singled out...to which I say don't through incompetence or arrogance, breach the rules by this much in such a short space of time. https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11694/11636412/birmingham-unhappy-at-being-singled-out-by-efl-with-potential-12-point-deduction Another piece of FFP news I read relating to Birmingham- and whether it will prove to be true time will tell, but this is something along the lines of what I said about enforcement and rolling punishments or otherwise. The interesting twist in the tail is that once they have been punished for their 3 year breach, from here on in well the next couple of seasons i.e. this and next, they will only be assessed on single season results- i.e. £13m loss limits, so they are not punished again for their 2016/17 figures and especially these ones. Unsure what to make of that... My reading of that basically is that instead of looking at £37m loss and loss in 16/17 and adding it to 18/19 say, then it'll be struck from the record and only in 2018/19 if they broke the rules of £13m will they be punished again and even more so for the cycle from 2017/18-2018/19, that huge loss last season and any this year provided they are compliant of £13m or less won't be counted.

Perhaps strong a bit premature but improving definitely. Stronger in home conditions maybe.

Looks like a consolation win on the cards, unless weather intervenes. Putting aside undoubted disappointment about the defeat- a strong WI side good for Test cricket. Wonder if this is start of a revival for them there- I remember when we collapsed at Sabina Park in 2009, there were some very flat pitches after that one- this time? There were not. Seemed a bit braver in their approach. On a tactical note, we finally got it right- first day we saw off the new ball, we dropped anchor for a while and went back to basics. Test cricket- to take nothing away from WI, we were quite flashy and well overly attacking at times in the first 2 games, can't do that out here on their pitches that seem livelier than a few years ago.

Sheffield United results are in. Lost £1,894,507 last season...they could have gone nuts this season in the transfer market if they wanted- could have hit Birmingham (well, Redknapp) levels of profligacy. Given Brooks was sold for big cash and Leonard and Evans both yielded a profit then their losses this season shouldn't be huge either despite high profile signings.

So long as he channels it right, don't want him giving away sloppy fouls or trying too hard and say giving the ball away in dangerous positions- or worse still needless bookings/red cards!

Would be typical! Oh I forgot about that...let us hope Messrs Dean and Davis get the welcome and subsequently through the game, the reception (i.e. booing every time they touch the ball) that kinda thing!

It could be referencing the Mark Clemmit points deduction scoop but then again this guy seems pretty clued up on FFP and especially with Birmingham- it forms a thread but the first post the key one.

Still turned down a legitimate bid for a saleable asset when breaching FFP that could have helped resolve it- perhaps classed as an aggravated breach. Where it may diverge is that Birmingham were IIRC working under an EFL business plan- maybe still are- and so far as I can see, Aston Villa are not at this time and perhaps were not then, so harder to enforce in that instance.

That'd be the aggravated breach- 9 points if proven according to that Times piece. In addition to any deduction this season. I doubl Birmingham will be free of FFP issues in fact until 2020/21 at the earliest, so it's never been tested fully but in theory I suppose they would be open to rolling punishments until it is cleared. Whether that happens in practice is a different matter.

A 12-15 point deduction could see them slide into the mire tbh. @chinapig @Davefevs Punishment would fit the crime well and truly- great news eh!

Yeah, that figures- they can always sell Adams in the summer I suppose, and goals of Adams get them over the line. In terms of a points deduction, 12-15 points I believe is the most quoted figure. If it came to pass, that would definitely put them in amongst the relegation scrap- I think they would have enough to survive but they would be down there at the very least on the edges of it. Aston Villa...it's an interesting one. From 2015/16 i.e. their last season in the PL to last season, I don't believe they breached. Narrow margins probably but still alright. However the crunch of £22m knocked off allowable losses (in PL you can lose £35m per season, in Championship it's £13m- total falls from £61m to £39m max losses plus academy expenditure etc) combined with their parachute payments dropping from £33m to £15m this year- that's £40m minus any surplus they had in 3 year FFP- say they still had £5m left to play with, then it's a shortfall of £35m additional income they needed to find from last season to this. However they can spend because they aren't technically in breach until March. That said come March, their breach will surely be very large and they need to be made an example of. Definitely interesting times.