FFP- How to give it Proper teeth

[ScottishRed]

1 hour ago, JamesBCFC said:

Personally I'd go stricter, 8m a year over 5 years or 10m a year over 4 years if using the 40m example.

The fine should make a big impact on the team recieving it for it to be a true deterrant.

I do agree they should be done on a case by case ruling though.

 

There was orignally talk of QPR being sent down to non-league.

If they were really serious about FFP they would have followed up on that.

You are absolutely correct, that was very widely reported - clearly it didn't and won't happen.

If the authorities are going to get serious about it then significant points deductions or direct relegations would be a huge deterrent.

But, somehow I can't see Man City playing in the national league north anytime soon.

The whole concept is flawed unless it is enforced with rigour and, as I said in a previous post, that simply won't happen as the big boys would simply go and play in their own competition.

UEFA know that and they play around the edges of compliance, but given they and FIFA remain hugely corrupt not much is going to change.

[downendcity]

1 hour ago, JamesBCFC said:

I still think the Football League should have followed up with their threat of relegating QPR to the Conference.

That was the threat if QPR refused to pay the fine- 4 years ago.

QPR have since refused and challenged the fine (more than once?) only accepting they have to pay it now.

 

Back in 1990 Swindon won promotion to the top flight ( pre premier league) but were denied their promotion and relegated 2 divisions due to having made irregular payments to players.

While not exactly the same, breaching financial rules is effectively making "illegal"payments i.e. over and above the level of expenditure the football rules allow, so why not consider the same penalty - that would certainly make clubs think twice about going outside the financial rules.

 

[Maesknoll Red]

The one issue of having draconian punishments, like those suggesting fines levied over 10 years, is that those in charge will be long gone and the fans putting their money through the turnstiles every week will be the long time losers, if the fines cause their club hardship - punishing the innocent and the real heart of the club.

Make the CEO/ Finance director liable, might see reluctance to break the rules then......

[Mr Popodopolous]

39 minutes ago, ScottishRed said:

You are absolutely correct, that was very widely reported - clearly it didn't and won't happen.

If the authorities are going to get serious about it then significant points deductions or direct relegations would be a huge deterrent.

But, somehow I can't see Man City playing in the national league north anytime soon.

The whole concept is flawed unless it is enforced with rigour and, as I said in a previous post, that simply won't happen as the big boys would simply go and play in their own competition.

UEFA know that and they play around the edges of compliance, but given they and FIFA remain hugely corrupt not much is going to change.

Man City could renew acquaintances and rivalry with Stockport if put there!

This PSG case will be very interesting to see- quite a lot of big clubs in Europe were actually pushing for FFP by all accounts- talking the established giants- so maybe they will come under pressure to apply their own sanctions. As I say, the PSG case will provide a good precedent. 

(They have no issue banning teams from Turkey, Russia- mid-ranking Leagues like that though, UEFA that is. Offers weight to that view tbh).

@Maesknoll Red That's a good point tbh. My view on 10 x 4 was also partly motivated by my view that a 40 million fine in one whack would bankrupt them, and over 10 years was like a least bad solution. You're right though- CEO/Chairman/Directors at the time, they signed the cheques why not make them liable.

[Mr Popodopolous]

47 minutes ago, downendcity said:

Back in 1990 Swindon won promotion to the top flight ( pre premier league) but were denied their promotion and relegated 2 divisions due to having made irregular payments to players.

While not exactly the same, breaching financial rules is effectively making "illegal"payments i.e. over and above the level of expenditure the football rules allow, so why not consider the same penalty - that would certainly make clubs think twice about going outside the financial rules.

 

It would.

I think they do have something similar in Germany- can't remember an exact precedent.

FFP does ultimately allow removal of promotion, but could open a huge can of worms if a club gets kicked from top to 3rd, or 3rd to 7th- or even 1st to 7th at our level, based on projected accounts by the club...

Could you imagine if their actual accounts proved healthier than their projected accounts and denied promotion in Year 3 of the monitoring period based on the projected ones??

[DaveInSA]

From a financial perspective football is sick.

It isn't like a normal business. Your employees (players) are prima donnas, paid vast sums of money for being, let's face it, very good at a hobby.

These prima donnas earn more than the CEOs of some leading FTSE 100 companies, which gives some perspective. The company I work for posted $8.8bn EBITDA, paid $1.4bn in tax and the CEO earnt about £8m.

Until the financial football bubble bursts (because clearly this is unsustainable) then this is the reality. I don't like the Premier league, because of everything that it stands for: greed, selfishness, bowing to Sky, players who don't have an allegiance to the fans & teams they play for....I could go on.

And until the "parachute" payments are abolished you won't have anything like a competitive and level Championship laying field. I mean, getting £50m for being shit, sort of beggars belief. 

In my lifetime there will be a European super league set up. Top 4 of the Prem will go. The rest will fight over the crumbs. That's when shit will hit fans and ten PL clubs will go bust.

Rant over.

[JamesBCFC]

12 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Man City could renew acquaintances and rivalry with Stockport if put there!

This PSG case will be very interesting to see- quite a lot of big clubs in Europe were actually pushing for FFP by all accounts- talking the established giants- so maybe they will come under pressure to apply their own sanctions. As I say, the PSG case will provide a good precedent. 

(They have no issue banning teams from Turkey, Russia- mid-ranking Leagues like that though, UEFA that is. Offers weight to that view tbh).

@Maesknoll Red That's a good point tbh. My view on 10 x 4 was also partly motivated by my view that a 40 million fine in one whack would bankrupt them, and over 10 years was like a least bad solution. You're right though- CEO/Chairman/Directors at the time, they signed the cheques why not make them liable.

But the possibility of a fine that could potentially bankrupt them is a much better deterrent.

Is the risk really worth taking if there is no club to benefit from it?

 

Of course it would be terrible if even one club went bust, but it would be entirely self inflicted (they knew what they were doing when they showed total disregard for the rules) and would show to other clubs how big a risk they are taking by doing the same.

[CHIPLEY RED]

Isn't the problem the championship and premiership are governed by 2 different bodies so you can fail FFP in the championship but is you get promoted the Premiership won't do anything.

The way to sort it out is to have punishments which mean something. Fines are a waste of time because if you fall foul of FFP its usually because the owner can afford to - a £10m fine is not enough.

Relegation is the only way. Look at Swindon when they broke the rules.

Will it ever happen - no because money talks and the fear of legal action will stop the authorities taking proper action - you can't even ban a drugs cheat anymore.

[Mr Popodopolous]

@CHIPLEY RED

FFP seems pretty well approved in EU Courts tbh, so I wonder about legal action and whether it would work but fully take your points.

We're still technically part of the EU so it would hold for as long as we are- after that, unsure but to enter UEFA Competitions you have to subscribe to FFP. Because Turkey and Russia aren't in EU, but their clubs have still been clobbered by it- it's a lot of a legal grey area.

Unclear if Owners can just pay the fines either- if they could, what's the point? Under traditional company rules though, the club are likely to be obliged to pay the fine and not the owner however- in fact the owner might not be able to.

However I think points deductions and removal of promotion or demotion from top 2 to playoffs, playoffs to out the playoffs is the way forward ultimately. The way that can happen is through submission of projected accounts for the existing season.

It's all here...I've underlined the bits I think are key.

Quote

 

Championship rules 2016/17

This season (2016/17), new ‘Profitability and Sustainability’ rules operate in the Championship; for the first time, clubs will be assessed over 3 seasons (rather than just a single season). This change brings the Championship clubs into alignment with the Premier League – both have ‘Profit and Sustainability’ rules that are now fully aligned. Crucially, this harmonisation of the rules comes with the blessing of the Premier League - so we shouldn’t see any repeat of the stand-offs that arose (and are still ongoing) with QPR and Leicester. Previously, the Premier League bosses refused to help the Football League collect the ‘Fair Play Tax’ fines for clubs that overspent but won promotion – this lack of support significantly undermined the Football League and severely impacted on the effectiveness of the Football League punishments.

There are a number key changes:

• The assessment is carried out in March (rather than December)
• The maximum loss limit is now £13m per Championship season (or £5m a season of the owner does not inject equity to cover losses).
•  Losses are assessed over three seasons (rather than just over the single, previous season)
• The assessment of each club’s finances is a combination of a historic assessment (looking at figures for the two previous completed season) and an assessment over the season currently taking place

The last point is particularly significant; in addition to historic account information about past seasons, clubs now have to submit a financial projection for the season that is still taking place. All the information has to be with the Football League by the 1 March. The Football League have confirmed that they are aiming to have any punishments announced before the end of the season.

Rule confirmation text supplied by Football League:

 

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

I have a fair formula with points deductions too- relevant again with Cardiff and their potential transgressions.

Maximum deduction of 20- highly unlikely in most seasons that wouldn't knock a team out of top 2 or playoffs say- and the reason for a formula would be to give everyone a proper framework and reduce it for wriggle room. It's a bit clunky but a rough calculation- Transgressions measured as per the 3 year rule:

• 0-5% Transgression- Either a fine or a transfer embargo.
• 5% Transgression=1 point
• So on up to the maximum of 100%=20 points.

If SOMEHOW it goes over that limit, slap on points deductions at the max and a transfer embargo or fine (I favour transfer embargoes in most instances).

[EnderMB]

I don't think the problem is FFP not working. I think it works as intended, and that is for money beyond a clubs means to be put into the club, rather than spent externally. Instead of a sugar daddy bankrolling everything, he bankrolls a club and doesn't saddle it with irrecoverable debt.

FFP is only "broken" to those that don't want to spend money. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

I think the rules are excellent- the enforcement of them is the issue, so far...

Cardiff- if they have breached for example, they should be docked say 3 points and be put down into 3rd. Projected accounts would enable this to happen.

[milo1111]

Utter farce that the PL and FL are governed separately. Should be one body and heavy points deductions .

i know it will never happen though.

[Mr Popodopolous]

The way the rules have changed give the possibility for points deductions, demotions from top 2 to playoffs, or playoffs to outside top 6 or even top 2 to outside the playoffs- and before the end of the season owing to submission of projected accounts.

Whether it will be actually followed through though...

Make you right about Governance of PL and FL being separate- surely it should be FA who administer overarching rules such as this? Because if the FA had the final say, then neither body could refuse to enforce, to pass on punishments as can happen now.

[JamesBCFC]

3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I think the rules are excellent- the enforcement of them is the issue, so far...

Cardiff- if they have breached for example, they should be docked say 3 points and be put down into 3rd. Projected accounts would enable this to happen.

It says the punishment is announced/applied at the seasons end.

The season doesnt technically end until the playoff final is over. So if Cardiff were docked points after that it makes a farce of it all.

Alternatively you can rush it through before the playoffs start and risk having mistake in there.

You also have the risk of the actual accounts not matching the projected ones, and in reality no breach made (in Cardiffs case this has to be a significant mismatch in numbers)

Finally, when has any football authority in England actually sorted out something like this with any pace that doesnt resemble a snail dragging its heels?

[downendcity]

You want teeth - these should scare the bejeezus out of the clubs.

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, JamesBCFC said:

It says the punishment is announced/applied at the seasons end.

The season doesnt technically end until the playoff final is over. So if Cardiff were docked points after that it makes a farce of it all.

Alternatively you can rush it through before the playoffs start and risk having mistake in there.

You also have the risk of the actual accounts not matching the projected ones, and in reality no breach made (in Cardiffs case this has to be a significant mismatch in numbers)

Finally, when has any football authority in England actually sorted out something like this with any pace that doesnt resemble a snail dragging its heels?

Possible Cardiff haven't breached given different figures which are out there. H

Wouldn't dock yet, in event of a breach?

Watch this space then!

The projected accounts model... Certainly brave! Take it up to 10 months maybe, or until the closest point as the 'final' figure...Maybe.

Think it's overall the best model when it comes to doing something about teams who flout it, who for want of a better term, take the piss.

History shows you to be correct, however this might just be different.

[chinapig]

Excellent piece by David Conn on football finance on the Guardian website.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/may/11/gold-keepers-why-premier-league-will-only-get-richer