FFP sorted

[OldR]

We are who we are means we should be jumping between the Premier League and Championship. No need to be too modest.

We can become a yo-yo club and, eventually, an established lower top flight team with a bit of patience. We won't need to bankrupt ourselves in the process either.

However, it is important to remember that we have only spent 23 top flight seasons in our entire history and 5 of those ended up with us being relegated. No one has a devine right to to play in the top division but we have no claim to regard it as our 'natural station' either.

[Timmy the Doc]

We can become a yo-yo club and, eventually, an established lower top flight team with a bit of patience. We won't need to bankrupt ourselves in the process either.

However, it is important to remember that we have only spent 23 top flight seasons in our entire history and 5 of those ended up with us being relegated. No one has a devine right to to play in the top division but we have no claim to regard it as our 'natural station' either.

We are 21st most successful club in England. We should have some ambitious and not be waving a white flag all the time.

[OldR]

We are 21st most successful club in England. We should have some ambitious and not be waving a white flag all the time.

How did you come to that conclusion? We have won one League Cup and played 23 seasons in the top flight.. Stoke City can be considered more successful.

Based on success alone:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ve_honours_won

Based on top flight participation:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/datablog/2013/apr/17/football-league-125-years

[Timmy the Doc]

How did you come to that conclusion? We have won one League Cup and played 23 seasons in the top flight.. Stoke City can be considered more successful.

Based on success alone:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ve_honours_won

Based on top flight participation:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/datablog/2013/apr/17/football-league-125-years

Average league position over the last 50 years.

[OldR]

Average league position over the last 50 years.

We have spent 3 seasons in the top flight in th last last 22 and got relegated in 2 of those 3.

I'm not saying we can't do better than that but we have a blueprint handed down to us from the Gregory years and it requires patience.

[Timmy the Doc]

We have spent 3 seasons in the top flight in th last last 22 and got relegated in 2 of those 3.

I'm not saying we can't do better than that but we have a blueprint handed down to us from the Gregory years and it requires patience.

We need both patience and ambition.

[OldR]

We need both patience and ambition.

Agreed but our ambition must come in a long term plan and based upon the reality of our circumstances. Anything that puts us at risk of financial ruin is not ambitious but suicidal.

We may be smaller than some clubs and a lot less successful than others, but we have a proud history which stretches back 14 years shy of 150 and must do everything to preserve it.

[hal9thou]

On the contrary, it protects small clubs - at least in spirit - by making it less enticing for money men to take over a club, make it reliant on that money and risk going out of business when the owner pulls their money out.

So.... the people it inadvertently protects are the big boys. It re-inforces the status quo by keeping small clubs small. I think FFP has too many inherent contradictions to be sound policy.

It's also very difficult to sanction owners without sanctioning the club, directly or indirectly.

I have heard it argued that FFP constitutes a possible restraint of trade and that a legal argument on those grounds might have been successful if brought before a court in the UK. The fact that the EFL is ' a private members club' would not have constituted any sort of defence in itself.

[OldR]

So.... the people it inadvertently protects are the big boys. It re-inforces the status quo by keeping small clubs small. I think FFP has too many inherent contradictions to be sound policy.

It's also very difficult to sanction owners without sanctioning the club, directly or indirectly.

I have heard it argued that FFP constitutes a possible restraint of trade and that a legal argument on those grounds might have been successful if brought before a court in the UK. The fact that the EFL is ' a private members club' would not have constituted any sort of defence in itself.

It's a flawed system but those saying that it is designed to protect the bigger and successful clubs are wide of the mark. The spirit it was conceived in was to protect smaller clubs regardless of how successful or otherwise it is.

There are no courts in the land that would take the side of any club saying that its a restraint of trade. Absolutely none. Whether people agree with it or not, once the Football League members had a democratic vote to introduce the ruling all clubs were forced to adhere to it. The league could have kicked us out of their system if they hadn't agreed a settlement and we could have done nothing about it.

The club owners have access to billions of pounds and could afford to take the Football League to court for years to pursue a 'restraint of business' but they knew not to and the appeal they did lodge was laughed out.

[vespa]

Wasn't that Bulstrude?

It was Jim Gregory who sold us out to be merged mate , it completely tainted all the good he did for Rangers ,in my opinion.

[OldR]

It was Jim Gregory who sold us out to be merged mate , it completely tainted all the good he did for Rangers ,in my opinion.

Ah, my mistake and memory!

[hal9thou]

There are no courts in the land that would take the side of any club saying that its a restraint of trade. Absolutely none. Whether people agree with it or not, once the Football League members had a democratic vote to introduce the ruling all clubs were forced to adhere to it. The league could have kicked us out of their system if they hadn't agreed a settlement and we could have done nothing about it.

The UEFA / ECJ Striani case is key here since the ECJ ruling and evidence would be precedent in a case before the English courts (at least for the next few months......) That ruling did not specifically address the anti competition argument; rather in finding for UEFA the ECJ (Supreme Court) ruled on a technicality regarding the original hearing.

My feeling - and I'm not a lawyer - is that the judgement swayed council in the QPR case and as a result the owners / club decided against testing the competition argument in court. The relationship between FFP and restraint (in the EU) remains deeply confusing and ambiguous, since as we all know a free (common|) market is the corner stone of EU priciples. There is a welter of legal argument on FFP / UEFA / EU law online.

It doesn't matter what the EFL and its members agreed between themselves. The practices (ie FFP) were either legal or illegal under European law. The club presumably took the view (which I supported, incidentally) that at the time a court challenge was deeply problematic. It will be really interesting to see what happens if in future FFP is challenged in a post Brexit UK.

[stanistheman]

Can't see many people would take that role unless paid an absolute mint! The average CFO's worth would probably be dwarfed by any unreasonable spend, so what would holding them personally responsible achieve? Why would anyone take a job on those terms, and lose all when they could defo get an equally well rewarded job elsewhere without the risk of personal ruin? How many would stand up to a charismatic bully of an owner, or even keep his job if they did?

'Fraid that plan is dead in the water.

Nope, its the owners that must somehow carry the can

I totally agree that the owners should be responsible for any losses and not the clubs. Bankrupt the owners if it goes belly up as it did at Portsmouth and Leeds.

If a rich owner wants to buy success (like Walker and Blackburn) then let him.

QPR got into this mess because Phil Beard was crap at his job and Fernandes at his.

Had they paid responsible wages, with relegation clauses and had a better buying strategy, QPR would probably not have been relegated nor saddled with big losses.

[klonk]

Redknapps legacy

speaking of whom.... https://www.bcfc.com/news/articles/2...n=SocialSignIn

[OldR]

speaking of whom.... https://www.bcfc.com/news/articles/2...n=SocialSignIn

Villa are by far the bigger team but there's absolutely no reason why City should be in such financial disarray.

This is purely down to the incompetent owners stanistheman refers to above.