By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Arbitration found in favour of the league, basically protecting its role as a lawmaker that can set the rules for its competition as it sees fit. It leaves QPR liable to paying the fine in full, £40m-£60m
The club will be launching an appeal against this which will basically drag the whole thing on for another two years or so. They've a good chance in that, on the grounds of proptionality - you can fine HSBC £1.4bn but you can't fine the local Spar Shop the same amount for the same offence. Basically leaves the whole club, everybody that works there, the training ground development and us supporters in limbo for another two years. But yeh, at least Harry won us a promotion right?
Hopefully critics of Ferdinand, Hoos, Holloway, even Hasselbaink, and basically everybody that's been left to clear up the mess left by Hughes, Redknapp, Beard and most of all Fernandes previously now appreciate what a fcking tight spot they're all in.
This post has been edited by an administrator
2
FFP decision in - not good on 03:42 - Oct 26 with 3557 views
It really exposes the ludicrous governance arrangements for Football in this country. The object of FFP is to protect the long term stability of community assets and this ridiculously disproportionate fine achieves the complete opposite.
The solution is a points deduction, but, the differing governing bodies of the premier league and championship makes this impossible.
The game is calling out for a professional unified governing body. I’d argue that a quango of some sort would be appropriate, but, this obviously would go against our slavish worship of the market in this country.
FFP decision in - not good on 23:14 - Oct 25 by johncharles
This is all nonsense. Just some private company picking and choosing an "independent" tribunal to rubber stamp it's own arbitrary decisions. Doesn't mean jack sh1t. The FL is way out of its depth. Football governing bodies are rotten to the core.
I have wondered about how independent the Tribunal was and how it would stack up legally, especially when you see that the EFL chairman Shaun Harvey spouting off, actually tags himself Shaun HarveyLUFC. The FL or EFL have made some serious blunders over FFP and it wouldn’t surprise me if their latest statement does not stack up in a Court of Law.
RIP: Sniffer, Doug and Pat
0
FFP decision in - not good on 08:34 - Oct 26 with 3371 views
Not sure if anyone has mentioned it yet - there's a lot to read on this thread - but that lex mitior legal loophole whereby the less strict version of a law applies if said law has been changed could help us enormously.
Man, I hope so!
RFA
"Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1."
1
FFP decision in - not good on 08:39 - Oct 26 with 3364 views
FFP decision in - not good on 18:23 - Oct 25 by PinnerPaul
Agree - Lee Hoos very impressive - the questions less so IMHO.
They were clearly restricted in what they could get out of him. I didn't like the Ollie question much but I guess people had asked for that question to be asked.
[Post edited 26 Oct 2017 8:49]
0
FFP decision in - not good on 09:18 - Oct 26 with 3305 views
FFP decision in - not good on 08:39 - Oct 26 by CroydonCaptJack
They were clearly restricted in what they could get out of him. I didn't like the Ollie question much but I guess people had asked for that question to be asked.
[Post edited 26 Oct 2017 8:49]
I thought it was a good considering how limited Lee Hoos could be in his answers. It was always going to be tricky for both sides with regards to Q&A. I thought LH was as open as could be expected and I for one am very glad we have this guy running things.It is an ongoing legal situation and you don't want to upset the opposition with remarks attacking them when you are desperately trying to get out of the situation with as little damage as possible. The interview was never going to answer all the questions we had and this going to rumble on for a long time yet.
FFP decision in - not good on 08:34 - Oct 26 by R_from_afar
Not sure if anyone has mentioned it yet - there's a lot to read on this thread - but that lex mitior legal loophole whereby the less strict version of a law applies if said law has been changed could help us enormously.
Man, I hope so!
RFA
This is a very good point.
If someone committed a capital offence and between the time of the crime and the conviction capital punishment was abolished then the death penalty wouldn't apply retrospectively.
On the face of it - very grim. But let's see how this giant ball of jizz unravels. It feels like we're being used as a test case for a rule that everyone, including its creators, know is a farce.
0
FFP decision in - not good on 11:09 - Oct 26 with 3101 views
FFP decision in - not good on 10:24 - Oct 26 by EastR
This is a very good point.
If someone committed a capital offence and between the time of the crime and the conviction capital punishment was abolished then the death penalty wouldn't apply retrospectively.
The counter argument will be that we have been fighting this since the original offence and that although the rule has since been changed that we are liable because we should have, in their minds, settled at the time, under the previous rules. They'll argue that we have stretched this out to avoid paying and that the change in the rule is irrelevant. Right now that is what they are doing.
I suspect it will go to the high court eventually and it will be decided if the level of the fine is fair. We can't be docked points or demoted. There is the chance of a transfer embargo but that can't be applied until we have a conclusion. In the meantime I suspect that for all the FL bravado over the last few days that they will want to negotiate a way out over the months/years ahead.
Remember if it goes to the high court and the FL for some reason lose, then it could open up an absolute horror show of actions against them from several teams.
I am no expert but putting my finger in the air the FL will possibly settle for something like £20m, perhaps less than that, and stick us with a 2 year transfer embargo on top of that, to avoid any subsequent retrospective actions from other teams.
In the meantime, which probably will be 2+ years we will ramp up the academy program to make sure we have a stable of young players to see us through that period, which at this rate will be around the 2020/2021 season. If we are clever, which is rare, we will be well prepared for that.
Whichever way it goes it's a huge listen in spunking money on the whim of managers and not keeping it clever and tight. We are a much more stable club now and although it is frustrating not to be scoring the goals our play deserves it is up to the coaching staff to find and bring through the players. Remember Allen and Goddard, both 17/18 when they started in the first team. It can be done.
If the FL has any sense they will negotiate the fine into pay a percentage and have the rest (the majority of the fine) suspended against future compliance.
They can simultaneously do the same with Leicester (and if there is anyone else non complying under the old rules)
Then these old unworkable rules can, hopefully, be put to bed and we can all get on with the new ones.
0
FFP decision in - not good on 11:54 - Oct 26 with 3002 views
FFP decision in - not good on 09:18 - Oct 26 by blacky200
I thought it was a good considering how limited Lee Hoos could be in his answers. It was always going to be tricky for both sides with regards to Q&A. I thought LH was as open as could be expected and I for one am very glad we have this guy running things.It is an ongoing legal situation and you don't want to upset the opposition with remarks attacking them when you are desperately trying to get out of the situation with as little damage as possible. The interview was never going to answer all the questions we had and this going to rumble on for a long time yet.
Yes I agree. I would be gutted if we lost LH. It certainly sounds like they are all in it for the long run though.
0
FFP decision in - not good on 12:11 - Oct 26 with 2958 views
I suspect this will be the final outcome, the FL have put themselves in a position whereby the fine is so large that if enforced it will put QPR out of business. But having fought our argument that the size of the fine is disproportionate they cannot now settle for a smaller amount. They have blindly pushed for such a large sum, in order to make a point, that is now totally unenforceable. If the club goes to the wall over this owing HMRC etc. Questions would be asked in Parliament. Eventually they are going to have to concede that they must compromise. I suspect it will be a much smaller realistic fine maybe paid over a number of seasons with the balance suspended against future breaches.
0
FFP decision in - not good on 12:31 - Oct 26 with 2913 views
FFP decision in - not good on 12:11 - Oct 26 by philc
I suspect this will be the final outcome, the FL have put themselves in a position whereby the fine is so large that if enforced it will put QPR out of business. But having fought our argument that the size of the fine is disproportionate they cannot now settle for a smaller amount. They have blindly pushed for such a large sum, in order to make a point, that is now totally unenforceable. If the club goes to the wall over this owing HMRC etc. Questions would be asked in Parliament. Eventually they are going to have to concede that they must compromise. I suspect it will be a much smaller realistic fine maybe paid over a number of seasons with the balance suspended against future breaches.
No expert so open to being wrong but if we did go to the wall I assume payment of the fine would be way down the line below any genuine debts to third parties with HMRC top of list. The FL would be left with nothing and be in the position of destroying one ot its own members. Maybe they do not mind as far as I know we are not getting much reporting in the media over this. FFP was never devised one would hope to force clubs out of business.
[Post edited 26 Oct 2017 12:38]
0
FFP decision in - not good on 13:14 - Oct 26 with 2861 views
FFP decision in - not good on 12:31 - Oct 26 by QPR_John
No expert so open to being wrong but if we did go to the wall I assume payment of the fine would be way down the line below any genuine debts to third parties with HMRC top of list. The FL would be left with nothing and be in the position of destroying one ot its own members. Maybe they do not mind as far as I know we are not getting much reporting in the media over this. FFP was never devised one would hope to force clubs out of business.
[Post edited 26 Oct 2017 12:38]
Well if the club properly got liquidated then nobody gets anything. If it goes into administration then football creditors have to be settled first and in full. So if you go into admin you can fob St John Ambulance off with 10p in the £1 or whatever, but if you still owe Portsmouth £100k for some dodgy goalkeeper you bought from them they have to be paid in full.
0
FFP decision in - not good on 14:13 - Oct 26 with 2759 views
FFP decision in - not good on 13:14 - Oct 26 by Northernr
Well if the club properly got liquidated then nobody gets anything. If it goes into administration then football creditors have to be settled first and in full. So if you go into admin you can fob St John Ambulance off with 10p in the £1 or whatever, but if you still owe Portsmouth £100k for some dodgy goalkeeper you bought from them they have to be paid in full.
Thanks for that. You just wonder what happened to common sense. The FL can impose a fine and then be classed as a football creditor. Administration is a legal procedure but the FL can impose their own rules.
0
FFP decision in - not good on 14:48 - Oct 26 with 2693 views
Lee Hoos came up to the upper loft last season or one before to chat to someone a few rows in front of us (complimentary tickets or something) and on his way back got loads of back pats handshakes and well dones, and just before he slipped down the stairs, someone behind me gave him a load of mouth about JFH and shite football.
Never been so embarrassed in my life. He just looked up and have the same smile you give the street preacher outside Shepherds Bush Station. The whole block didn’t know where to look.
0
FFP decision in - not good on 17:16 - Oct 26 with 2496 views
FFP decision in - not good on 17:50 - Oct 25 by PinnerPaul
Well that's nonsense as until we actually pay it, it doesn't have to go in P & L.
As we are appealing then clearly it won't be going in this year's accounts.
Even FL acknowledge we're not at the end game yet.
We could enter the fine as a liability now, I guess, but that would go on balance sheet, not P & L.
That's not the way accounting standards work.
As soon as an expense is probable it needs to be put through the P&L and a liability created in the balance sheet. When it's paid all that happens is the cash in the balance sheet goes down and the liability is extinguished. So the comment "until we actually pay it, it doesn't have to go in P & L." isn't correct.
What we have here is known as a contingent liability. Meaning essentially a liability that is dependent on future events. In this case the arbitration and following appeals. I'm a bit rusty on this but the rules used to be that if crystallisation of the liability was possible you just needed to disclose in the accounts but not include in the P&L and B/S, however, if it was probable you needed to account for it.
1
FFP decision in - not good on 17:21 - Oct 26 with 2483 views
FFP decision in - not good on 13:14 - Oct 26 by Northernr
Well if the club properly got liquidated then nobody gets anything. If it goes into administration then football creditors have to be settled first and in full. So if you go into admin you can fob St John Ambulance off with 10p in the £1 or whatever, but if you still owe Portsmouth £100k for some dodgy goalkeeper you bought from them they have to be paid in full.
Not quite true.
If the club is liquidated it ceases trading and the assets are sold and used to pay liabilities in priority order. Any secured debtor would receive cash first and equity holders last.
With administration, the club continues to trade and essentially is given time to come to a compromise agreement with its creditors. The compromises can include write-downs of the owed amounts or often conversion into equity. If the creditors don't agree to a compromise you end up being liquidated.
0
FFP decision in - not good on 17:35 - Oct 26 with 2464 views
FFP decision in - not good on 17:21 - Oct 26 by Trom
Not quite true.
If the club is liquidated it ceases trading and the assets are sold and used to pay liabilities in priority order. Any secured debtor would receive cash first and equity holders last.
With administration, the club continues to trade and essentially is given time to come to a compromise agreement with its creditors. The compromises can include write-downs of the owed amounts or often conversion into equity. If the creditors don't agree to a compromise you end up being liquidated.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.