22 thoughts on “Premier League clubs agree rules on financial restraint

  1. Good info prem. It is a great idea for the game as a whole, but I just can’t see the sugar daddies ever letting it work.

      (Quote)

  2. Interesting that Reading abstained-and the other clubs as well. Chelsea in favour but Fulham and West Brom against 😯

      (Quote)

  3. The other new boy is obviously off to a good start.

    Lee Ryder
    “Haidara communicating well here and he’s just hammered home the opening goal with a low leftfooted effort after overlapping run #nufc 1 0 up”

      (Quote)

  4. I see this as good news for Ashley and bad news for every dream of every Toon fan.

    Basically, do the clubs with the highest wage bill get to keep it that way – and for us middle-of-the-roaders, will it kill the dream of a Sheikh owner ever coming in??

      (Quote)

  5. Think I read West Brom against these proposals as they wanted no club can make a loss instead of £105 million , where City are against it as they want an unlimited amount of losses or atleast more than £105 million

      (Quote)

  6. This will change nothing at the top and unless we get there . . . it may stop the Leeds/ Pompey scenario though.
    I’m much more interested in what happens on the field tomorrow and that’s what drives fans not FFP.

      (Quote)

  7. Very good infor Prem.

    I support this but don’t think it goes quite far enough. Still, a good first step towards fiscal sanity IMO

      (Quote)

  8. Johno-Aye that makes sense. I thought maybe their idea was that big clubs wont spend ridiculous money on young english players any more-or even players in general-which may upset some sides. But then we dont really have many feeder sides anymore, Arsenal and Southampton are the closest 😀

      (Quote)

  9. mixed opinions, can’t really see how it would stop clubs going into administration, ie if a small club with 100m debt and a 50m a year wage bill gets relegated they will still be in trouble, how would point 2 work with a plc?

      (Quote)

  10. retrospective points deductions often hammer the final nail in the coffin of the club rather than those individuals that took risks

      (Quote)

  11. i think the best solution would be to set a wage limit to clubs on an individual basis at around 60% revenue, and look at extending parachute payments to cover length of contracts, think it’s 2 years at the moment, maybe change it to 4-5 years, these clubs can then push for promotion on a stable footing, forgo the rest of payment if promoted, if not then it doesn’t trigger a firesale to try and stay alive

    of course this would mean the premier league having to work more with the fa as it’s after the clubs drop from the prem that they are in trouble

      (Quote)

  12. Al – Paeachute payments are already four years long. You get two decent wedges and it reduces for the following two allowing a period of transition. If you get promoted again in thst time the payments stop, like we only got one parachute payment for our first season. Can’t remember what it is exactly but think it’s something 11m a season for the first two after relegation dropping to 8m a season for years three and four.

    Which is fair enough really. You cant have relegated clubs having it all their own way as theyll just end up coming straight back up which is unfair when they are already getting a huge helping hand anyway.

      (Quote)

  13. parachute payments havn’t meant wolves brum blackburn blackpool or bolton
    are going to go straight back up, all relegated in last two seasons, all in bottom half of the league

    cardiff at the top has never been in the prem

      (Quote)

  14. Problem with the new rules is that the top 4-5 clubs have already spent a fortune and built up their squads so what chance does anyone now have of catching them up?
    I read that the new rules are tailor made for Man U ( shocker ) as they have the biggest revenue, but what about the fact they have the biggest debt, £700 million, yet they are still spending 28m on Van Persie, of course that will be conveniently ignored along with the fact that their owners had to borrow the cash to buy the club so how the hell could they cover that debt?
    I can just see it widening the gap and making the so called bigger clubs positions more unassailable.

      (Quote)

  15. i think the emphasis needs to be on support rather than punishment

    fans get punished not those in charge, maybe a set up where the fa can buy clubs in add min, underwite and re sell them, but the premier league has the money not the fa

      (Quote)

  16. at the same time, 4-5 clubs are probably the reason half the other teams get so much, wigan and reading don’t draw in the fans to pay sky subscribtions

      (Quote)

  17. Prem good read 😉 but I wonder if owt will come from it as I wouldn’t be surprised to see it just becoming a talking point with no real bite.
    I just can’t see owt happening that will make it more fair for all clubs, as IMO the big boys will get bigger and continue feeding of the smaller clubs

      (Quote)

  18. You’ll get answer about your loan without delay and the cash from temporary loans is generally deposited in your checking account within 24 hours. When your paycheck will come in, you are able to repay the money, along with your son didn’t must hold off until payday to feel better.

      (Quote)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green