| QPR get fair play ruling warning 14:24 - Sep 9 with 13896 views | bosh67 |
http://www1.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/football/9462258/harvey-issues-fair
Football League Chief Executive Shaun Harvey has warned QPR they will take action if they have broken the Financial Fair Play rules.
Obviously as Shaun Harvey says, if this does happen, Tony will defend it. It does seem amazing though. Man Utd spend £60m on one player and spend £350k a week on another player's 'tax free' wages and we are in the firing line for getting done.
It is easy to have a go at Shaun Harvey, the guy is just doing his job, but his statement at the end that the league have to have integrity seems to be absolutely laughable. The Premiership is simply about the top 4 teams and their welfare, the rest don't have an even playing field. That is why the Championship for me is much better. Teams like us can actually win it. |  |
| |  |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 16:42 - Sep 10 with 1777 views | QPR_John |
Will the fine count towards any debt for FFP purposes for the next accounts. Know it sounds stupid but would not trust the FL to have thought that one through |  | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 17:39 - Sep 10 with 1723 views | Northernr |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 15:58 - Sep 10 by daveB |
would make sense to give relegated clubs 2 years and give them a chance to reduce losses over time rather than need to do it one year which is close to impossible without a fire sale.
If clubs till lose money after 2 years then give sporting sanctions like points deduction, transfer embargo or squad reductions. Fining a club for losing money is daft and just means they will fail again the following year as they had to pay a big fine |
It's my understanding that the fine is only levied if you're promoted. So you can go down, overspend, stay down, and not be fined. The argument being that the consequences are punishment enough, as we've seen. |  | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 17:41 - Sep 10 with 1723 views | ak68 |
As I understand it we received £23m as the first tranche of our parachute payments. We were due £18m in the second year and £9m in each of years three and four. IIRC teams that got promoted 'left' their remaining parachute payments to the remaining Championship clubs meaning that we were leaving behind £36m by getting promoted at the first attempt. Is this still the case? | | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 18:46 - Sep 10 with 1650 views | bosh67 |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 17:41 - Sep 10 by ak68 |
As I understand it we received £23m as the first tranche of our parachute payments. We were due £18m in the second year and £9m in each of years three and four. IIRC teams that got promoted 'left' their remaining parachute payments to the remaining Championship clubs meaning that we were leaving behind £36m by getting promoted at the first attempt. Is this still the case? |
Surely if that is the case it should be taken into account against any further or outstanding 'fine'? That would leave us with £4m to clear on the fine and that 'should' be it if logic and not stupidity reigns. | |
| |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 18:53 - Sep 10 with 1639 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 18:46 - Sep 10 by bosh67 |
Surely if that is the case it should be taken into account against any further or outstanding 'fine'? That would leave us with £4m to clear on the fine and that 'should' be it if logic and not stupidity reigns. |
Many people on here saying it's illegal.
Who cares if it's illegal, it's wether it's ethical that matters
I say yes it is (ethical and legal).
Just a shame it could be happening to us. |  | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 19:02 - Sep 10 with 1646 views | BasingstokeR |
I think the parachute payments that we would've got had we not been promoted get split across the whole Football league as a "solidarity" payment or something? |  | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 19:15 - Sep 10 with 1635 views | QPR_John |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 18:53 - Sep 10 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Many people on here saying it's illegal.
Who cares if it's illegal, it's wether it's ethical that matters
I say yes it is (ethical and legal).
Just a shame it could be happening to us. |
What is ethical about it | | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 20:24 - Sep 10 with 1570 views | daveB |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 17:39 - Sep 10 by Northernr |
It's my understanding that the fine is only levied if you're promoted. So you can go down, overspend, stay down, and not be fined. The argument being that the consequences are punishment enough, as we've seen. |
That's right, if we had lost at Wembley we would have had a transfer embargo instead |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 20:58 - Sep 10 with 1518 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 19:15 - Sep 10 by QPR_John |
What is ethical about it |
Everything.
It is an attempt at a deterrent against financial clout (which is not a sporting attribute) dictating sporting success over ability.
However much we underachieved last year, we still attempted to buy success through player wages which in mine, and most of 2012/13 Football League teams opinion is unethical.
Consider me a selfhating R. | | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 21:26 - Sep 10 with 1477 views | AgedR |
Really good read, thanks Bosh. |  |
| |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 21:33 - Sep 10 with 1459 views | LoftusRdW12 |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 20:58 - Sep 10 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Everything.
It is an attempt at a deterrent against financial clout (which is not a sporting attribute) dictating sporting success over ability.
However much we underachieved last year, we still attempted to buy success through player wages which in mine, and most of 2012/13 Football League teams opinion is unethical.
Consider me a selfhating R. |
Yes but QPR clearly are not the problem. The amount of money in football is the problem.
Really. What would relegating QPR to the conference actually achieve? Nothing. We're just an easy target for them. |  |
| "I still don't know who scored our first and third goals. I'll have a look tonight." Neil Warnock |
| |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 21:38 - Sep 10 with 1448 views | AgedR |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 20:58 - Sep 10 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Everything.
It is an attempt at a deterrent against financial clout (which is not a sporting attribute) dictating sporting success over ability.
However much we underachieved last year, we still attempted to buy success through player wages which in mine, and most of 2012/13 Football League teams opinion is unethical.
Consider me a selfhating R. |
We all want sporting prowess to prevail (but, that's a long old philosophical debate you've opened there).
What FFP should attempt to stop is millionaires taking over clubs while still insulating themselves from personal debt; i.e. using the club assets as collatorol (which I believe we've done)
However, it's no bloody use if it punishes the club rather than those who mortgaged the club.
TF walks away Scott free and we go tits up if FFP hits the fan, unless I've completely misread our current financial structure.
And despite having a pint with him in the Adelaide | |
| |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 21:43 - Sep 10 with 1435 views | QPR_John |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 20:58 - Sep 10 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Everything.
It is an attempt at a deterrent against financial clout (which is not a sporting attribute) dictating sporting success over ability.
However much we underachieved last year, we still attempted to buy success through player wages which in mine, and most of 2012/13 Football League teams opinion is unethical.
Consider me a selfhating R. |
It what other area is success not bought. It is naive to believe without financial clout there can be a sporting success. Ability costs like it or not. To believe that most of the 2012/13 FL teams believe buying success is wrong is somewhat of a pipe dream. Ask anyone of them if they would not use financial clout if they could find a rich owner. If it is unethical to buy footballing success all I can say is that ethical teams are only that until they can afford to be unethical. | | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 21:47 - Sep 10 with 1430 views | CanadaRanger |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 14:43 - Sep 9 by Northernr |
That will rumble on through the courts for ages. QPR will argue that they were forced to honour contracts given out to people like SWP without relegation clauses at a time when the FFP laws didn't exist and therefore it's unfair that we should be punished. |
Grandfathering...
Regs cannot be retroactive. |  | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 21:48 - Sep 10 with 1426 views | CiderwithRsie |
That's a really good article cited by Bosh. All along I've felt that the principles behind FPP were sound, but there's something crazy going on when it bites on QPR but not on Chelsea or Man Utd. That article finally gets my head clear. | | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 21:55 - Sep 10 with 1413 views | CanadaRanger |
So here's the plan...
40 million pounds fine to charity.
We specify the charity.
QPR In The Community Trust
Money spent starting with a new community sports facility at Warren Farm
- which can be leased by our First XI for a couple of hours a day (leaving 22 free) for the price of getting the grass cut...
OK? | | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 22:04 - Sep 10 with 1398 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 21:43 - Sep 10 by QPR_John |
It what other area is success not bought. It is naive to believe without financial clout there can be a sporting success. Ability costs like it or not. To believe that most of the 2012/13 FL teams believe buying success is wrong is somewhat of a pipe dream. Ask anyone of them if they would not use financial clout if they could find a rich owner. If it is unethical to buy footballing success all I can say is that ethical teams are only that until they can afford to be unethical. |
So because it happens in other areas that makes it ethical?
No naivety here at all. Players will still be good players if clubs were financially regulated properly. They just might join clubs for reasons other than financial gain. Doubt Cisse / Park / SWP etc were secret Rs fans before they joined us. I doubt Sergio Aguero was ballboy at Maine Rd either.
Maybe some of the younger players we've been mugging off for the last decade would be getting their testimonials for us now if it wasn't for this ridiculous transfer circus we've been sucked into since Paliadini called Briatore in. That was all based on 'spending for success'.
For whatever reason the FL voted this policy in because they knew the status quo was unsustainanble and unfair. It's a nod in the right direction at the very least.
The 'but they did it sir' attitude is really childish. You are right by saying clubs will choose the pound note first but that wasn't my point. [Post edited 10 Sep 2014 22:05]
| | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 22:28 - Sep 10 with 1353 views | QPR_John |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 22:04 - Sep 10 by BazzaInTheLoft |
So because it happens in other areas that makes it ethical?
No naivety here at all. Players will still be good players if clubs were financially regulated properly. They just might join clubs for reasons other than financial gain. Doubt Cisse / Park / SWP etc were secret Rs fans before they joined us. I doubt Sergio Aguero was ballboy at Maine Rd either.
Maybe some of the younger players we've been mugging off for the last decade would be getting their testimonials for us now if it wasn't for this ridiculous transfer circus we've been sucked into since Paliadini called Briatore in. That was all based on 'spending for success'.
For whatever reason the FL voted this policy in because they knew the status quo was unsustainanble and unfair. It's a nod in the right direction at the very least.
The 'but they did it sir' attitude is really childish. You are right by saying clubs will choose the pound note first but that wasn't my point. [Post edited 10 Sep 2014 22:05]
|
"You are right by saying clubs will choose the pound note first but that wasn't my point."
That is exactly what you said
"However much we underachieved last year, we still attempted to buy success through player wages which in mine, and most of 2012/13 Football League teams opinion is unethical" [Post edited 10 Sep 2014 22:34]
| | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 22:49 - Sep 10 with 1316 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 22:28 - Sep 10 by QPR_John |
"You are right by saying clubs will choose the pound note first but that wasn't my point."
That is exactly what you said
"However much we underachieved last year, we still attempted to buy success through player wages which in mine, and most of 2012/13 Football League teams opinion is unethical" [Post edited 10 Sep 2014 22:34]
|
My point was that overspending to gain a sporting advantage is unethical, which it is.
Saying that most clubs will take the pound note given the opportunity doesn't mean that they won't sign up to regulations against it. Now in theory they can't.
If we don't pay this fine we'll fvck things up for everyone. | | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 22:52 - Sep 10 with 1312 views | dsr_burnley |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 21:47 - Sep 10 by CanadaRanger |
Grandfathering...
Regs cannot be retroactive. |
At risk of stirring the pot, didn't QPR sign 19 players last season? Unless your management can prove that every one of those 19 players was necessary because you couldn't have got a team out without them, I'd suggest that the League will not look on the argument about pre-existing contracts with any favour. | | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 23:16 - Sep 10 with 1282 views | BasingstokeR |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 22:52 - Sep 10 by dsr_burnley |
At risk of stirring the pot, didn't QPR sign 19 players last season? Unless your management can prove that every one of those 19 players was necessary because you couldn't have got a team out without them, I'd suggest that the League will not look on the argument about pre-existing contracts with any favour. |
I don't think 19 no...(even including short term free transfers)
Danny Simpson, Free
Richard Dunne, Free
Karl Henry, Undisclosed
Charlie Austin, £4m
Gary O'Neill, Free
Matt Phillips, Undisclosed
Javier Chevanton, Free (short term contract)
Oguchi Onyewu, Free (short term contract)
Yossi Benayoun, Free (short term contract)
Coll Donaldson, £150k
Aaron Hughes, Free | | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 23:18 - Sep 10 with 1276 views | QPR_John |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 22:49 - Sep 10 by BazzaInTheLoft |
My point was that overspending to gain a sporting advantage is unethical, which it is.
Saying that most clubs will take the pound note given the opportunity doesn't mean that they won't sign up to regulations against it. Now in theory they can't.
If we don't pay this fine we'll fvck things up for everyone. |
But while you think overspending to gain a sporting advantage is unethical you go on to say so do most of the FL teams who signed up to the regulations. But then you accept these same teams would happily spend to gain a sporting advantage thus implying you can be ethical and hypocritical at one and the same time.
I disagree with you but that does not make you wrong however to imply others have taken an ethical stance when they voted for FFP is stretching credibility too far | | | |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 23:29 - Sep 10 with 1258 views | dsr_burnley |
| QPR get fair play ruling warning on 23:16 - Sep 10 by BasingstokeR |
I don't think 19 no...(even including short term free transfers)
Danny Simpson, Free
Richard Dunne, Free
Karl Henry, Undisclosed
Charlie Austin, £4m
Gary O'Neill, Free
Matt Phillips, Undisclosed
Javier Chevanton, Free (short term contract)
Oguchi Onyewu, Free (short term contract)
Yossi Benayoun, Free (short term contract)
Coll Donaldson, £150k
Aaron Hughes, Free |
I was counting loans as well. Doyle, Maiga, Morrison, etc., with some very high wages in and amongst. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
