Financial Fair Play

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score

View: https://x.com/SwissRamble/status/1769642252924596442?s=20


View: https://x.com/SwissRamble/status/1769642257517293943?s=20


View: https://x.com/SwissRamble/status/1769642262424609083?s=20


View: https://x.com/SwissRamble/status/1769642267113910580?s=20

Clearly this will only really work with tighter controls on revenues (connected parties giving inflated sponsorship deals), controls over deals with connected clubs etc

But at least its a start - although probably unwelcome to many, with a linkage between revenues and amount clubs can spend on player wages/transfers etc to stop the constant increases in player costs as clubs try to compete to get the best players.
 
Shadydan said:

View: https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/status/1769722418640167155

Must mean Everton are getting the same punishment

Is 4 points the standard now then or is it proportionate?
Click to expand...



View: https://x.com/KieranMaguire/status/1769745748319510732?s=20

Penalty reduced by 2 points for co-operation

I wonder if ManCity's points deduction can be DOUBLED for total non co-operation over multiple years and flagrant disregard for any rules in the first place.



View: https://x.com/martynziegler/status/1769745706456412636?s=20
 
Last edited:
Spursidol said:

View: https://x.com/SwissRamble/status/1769642252924596442?s=20


View: https://x.com/SwissRamble/status/1769642257517293943?s=20


View: https://x.com/SwissRamble/status/1769642262424609083?s=20


View: https://x.com/SwissRamble/status/1769642267113910580?s=20

Clearly this will only really work with tighter controls on revenues (connected parties giving inflated sponsorship deals), controls over deals with connected clubs etc

But at least its a start - although probably unwelcome to many, with a linkage between revenues and amount clubs can spend on player wages/transfers etc to stop the constant increases in player costs as clubs try to compete to get the best players.
Click to expand...


So we should be spending almost 14% more than we are....
 
The punishments aren't a big enough deterrent.

1. Breach FFP > get promoted > cash in > minor points deducted the season after > Relegated = 2 years of EPL lucre + parachute payments = £X00m WIN.....

(If you're Lester you might even win the league in the meantime!)

2. Breach FFP to survive > avoid the drop > minor points deduction the season after > avoid relegation = 2 (or more) years of EPL lucre = £X00m WIN.

3. Breach FFP to survive > avoid the drop > minor points deduction the season after > get relegated = 1 extra years of EPL lucre + parachute payments = £X00m WIN.

4. If Forest appeal they could potentially avoid relegation for another season = £X00m WIN.

5. At the other end of the table; just look at the dominance they've BOUGHT with their fuckery. (eg. City finishing 2nd for one season is of scant significance if their cheating allowed them to cement themselves at the top table like it has.... Ditto the blue racsists.)

.........There is zero motivation to stay within the rules if the punishment is merely the price of a 1 x win & 1 x draw.

6. Both Everton & Forest have been pontificating about trf fees generated on or after 1st July..... Close that loophole FFS (it's what allows these cases to drag on beyond the offending season(s) in question)...... Each season under FFP should contain the summer window and the subsequent January window.

There's also talk that any further punnishment Everton recieve re: their 2nd charge will be reduced by 66% on the principal that 2/3 years have already been punished in the previous penalty...... Which is BS..... They went 20m over in one season......... They could have easily balanced the books with 20m of the 60m they received for Richarlison but CHOSE not to. (What this proposition implies is that you're better offbreaking the rules for 3 years running to get the most for your punnishment 'buck'...... Especially if we proceed down the path of 'luxury taxes' instead.l)



These newly proposed reforms & the outcomes of the City & Chavs cases could be the last straw for me..... What kind of idiot invests money & tears into a thoroughly rigged game?

The necessary refinements should be simple and obvious:

1. Index link the FFP breach threshold.
2. TOUGHER punisments.
3. Close the 'next summer' loophole (see #6 above).
4. All cases MUST be resolved before the following season starts.
 
Last edited:
Brian Fantana said:
So we should be spending almost 14% more than we are....
Click to expand...

Might be wrong, but I'd expect that % to have decreased over the last 2 seasons considering our increased spending in recent years......

Also: Lets say that 14% of what we are currently spending roughly equates to 20m quid p/a..... If that 20m quid is still going towards projects that are increasing our spendable revenue (eg stadium repayments, go carts and other crap) then it's a circularly funding scenario.
 
paddy spur said:
You need 3 parties to agree a sale. The buying club the selling club and the player.if you're a young multi millionaire living in of the world's most exciting cities. Would you trade that in for a totalitarian sand box. Don't think so.
Click to expand...

Not to mention player agent who wants his fee, player partner who may have other ideas (famous tale of Spurs apparently signing Matt Le Tissier, Spurs put signed contract into safe over night, player phoning in the morning to say his wife refusing to move from Southampton to London ....... so contract was torn up).
 
Anyone else think its dumber than your average gender studies student that they are imposing these points deductions mid season?

How the fuck is anyone supposed to keep track of who is going down or staying up?

Fucks with the integrity of the entire competition when you do it like this, are Forest going to appeal now? is it going to be reduced?

It's just a nonsense, if you are down there you have no clue what your target is or what's going on.

These things should be concluded outside the season, including the appeal process and then docked points at the start of the season so that everyone knows the score and knows it isn't going to change. It's set in stone for that season.
 
Distaste for scouse said:
Anyone else think its dumber than your average gender studies student that they are imposing these points deductions mid season?

How the fuck is anyone supposed to keep track of who is going down or staying up?

Fucks with the integrity of the entire competition when you do it like this, are Forest going to appeal now? is it going to be reduced?

It's just a nonsense, if you are down there you have no clue what your target is or what's going on.

These things should be concluded outside the season, including the appeal process and then docked points at the start of the season so that everyone knows the score and knows it isn't going to change. It's set in stone for that season.
Click to expand...

Totally impractical even if it sounds good.

Reality is that the financial accounts for a club usually take a minimum of 3 months and more like 4/5 months to prepare AFTER the year end..

To give an example, Spurs have a year end of 30 June (overing the previous season running from mid August to mid May), so Spurs audited accounts are available probably end October/start of November, and these days have to be given to PL by end December plus any comments (eg separating out youth football, womens football, stadium costs etc) to enable certain costs to be adjusted in any FFP calculation.

PL in turn, will probably take a minimum of a month to review all 20 sets of PL club accounts, to decide which clubs have over spent and require some form of punishment....... hence we are now into February or so and the FFP discussions with clubs are underway.

Of course if you are ManCity (or certain other clubs) contesting any FFP assessment (especially those employing high priced lawyers checking every comma in the regulations to find a way around them), the assessment can take for ever.

But to take a straightforward example Forest KNEW they were breaking the FFP rules but HOPING they could get leniency by saying 'we sold a player 2 months after the end of the ffp period to get maximum price, but can we alter the facts to include part of his sale last year'

FFP Assessment - No back dating allowed. 6 points penalty but thanks for being straightforward with us, so we'll take 2 points off to make it a 4 point penalty.

The job of all clubs at the start of a season is to get as many points as possible. So FFP or not nothing changes, just try to get as many points as possible.
 
www.nottinghamforest.co.uk

Club statement

The Official Website of Nottingham Forest Football Club: get the latest news, highlights, fixtures and results, tickets and more.
www.nottinghamforest.co.uk www.nottinghamforest.co.uk

Notts Forest appeal. Suggest we take any debate about the appeal to the Notts Forest thread to avoid this thread becoming another Notts Forest thread
 
Starks said:
Just seems like FFP is in place to stop teams outside the "big 6" from challenging tbh.
Click to expand...

TBH I don't think any Spurs fan should have a criticism of FFP because we have been built and run in line with how FFP is meant to operate. On one hand it does stop teams from fast tracking success and put up legitimate challenges for the Big 6, on the other hand it stop clubs from employing Sugar daddies who can pump millions into clubs and it stops them leaving clubs high and dry and going out of business.

We have given everyone the Blueprint on how to grow your revenue, it didn't happen overnight and it took years of pain AND it took two clubs who if FFP was in place at the time would still be well behind us in the pecking order.
 
Shadydan said:
TBH I don't think any Spurs fan should have a criticism of FFP because we have been built and run in line with how FFP is meant to operate. On one hand it does stop teams from fast tracking success and put up legitimate challenges for the Big 6, on the other hand it stop clubs from employing Sugar daddies who can pump millions into clubs and it stops them leaving clubs high and dry and going out of business.

We have given everyone the Blueprint on how to grow your revenue, it didn't happen overnight and it took years of pain AND it took two clubs who if FFP was in place at the time would still be well behind us in the pecking order.
Click to expand...
A blueprint for winning nothing but the moral high ground.

Sport doesn’t give a shit about the moral high ground, it gives a shit about finding a way to win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom