| More on ffp on 12:04 - May 5 with 3843 views | terryb |
Anyone else think this will end in disaster & cost far more than The Football League would have settled for?
Come to that, our solicitors fees may cost more than the settlement fee! |  | |  |
| More on ffp on 12:20 - May 5 with 3800 views | danehoop |
| More on ffp on 12:04 - May 5 by terryb |
Anyone else think this will end in disaster & cost far more than The Football League would have settled for?
Come to that, our solicitors fees may cost more than the settlement fee! |
Risk is much higher for the League given the dubious legal nature of the rule, Lex Mitor (spelling) is our friend. And I would back our counsel over the Leagues any day of the week. The league could find themselves facing a lot of expensive retrospective legal challenges if they don't punish us, but know that they have very shaky ground to do so. Whole FFP thing could collapse around their ears and they know it. That was why both parties agreed to current process. |  |
| Never knowingly understood |
| |
| More on ffp on 12:21 - May 5 with 3800 views | RangersDave |
I think rangers have a good case tbh, but what do I know.
Besides the legality of ffp, would be the next court case after I think. |  |
| |
| More on ffp on 12:31 - May 5 with 3762 views | PlanetHonneywood |
Said it for sometime, the equitable nature of laws, means that for QPR to have complied with the FFP, would necessarily have required us to rip up player contracts in the event of their right to refuse reduced terms. All of which, would have resulted in us dealing with indefensible claims before the High Court and/or an Employment Tribunal.
Doesn't excuse the shockingly poor management of the club! |  |
| |
| More on ffp on 13:37 - May 5 with 3606 views | RSoul |
I have a feeling the rules are legally flawed. The fa are panicking about the clubs they have punished.
Has any club been relegated because of ffp? (Indirectly of course) | | | |
| More on ffp on 13:55 - May 5 with 3552 views | Northernr |
I'd be surprised if this didn't come out in our favour, which is a shame in a way because we certainly don't deserve it to but great for those of us who want QPR to remain competitive in the coming years.
Salary caps, FFP, transfer windows - they're all a restraint of trade and would all fail if anybody ever took them up to the European court. Imagine any other business in the world where you can only hire new employees in July, August or January.
The league are very quick to throw their hands up and go 'what can we do?' when people say they should do more about dodgy people buying clubs, because of course the clubs are businesses and it's a capitalist system so the league can't do a lot. If somebody then decides to run that business at a huge loss, as ours have, the league shouldn't then be able to turn around and stop them doing that. |  | | |
| More on ffp on 14:03 - May 5 with 3521 views | enfieldargh |
According to SSN Bournemouth will be fined several millions for breaking FFP in their promotion year.
What would happen if all the remaining 21 clubs that did not gain promotion decided they had i legally been denied premier league riches due to AFCB's disregard of FFP?
Whole thing is total rubbish.
Only problem is if AFCB with their wealthy Russian owners decide to cough up |  |
| |
| More on ffp on 14:05 - May 5 with 3507 views | Antti_Heinola |
I think the difference between us and AFCB is what Dave Mc mentions at the end there - contracts given out while we were in the Prem. That's where the huge flaw is. But you would think that's where compromise would come. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| More on ffp on 15:47 - May 5 with 3408 views | kensalriser |
I think if they could have nailed us they would have done so by now.
Wouldn't be surprised to see FFP completely unravel. |  |
| |
| More on ffp on 15:56 - May 5 with 3391 views | daveB |
| More on ffp on 14:03 - May 5 by enfieldargh |
According to SSN Bournemouth will be fined several millions for breaking FFP in their promotion year.
What would happen if all the remaining 21 clubs that did not gain promotion decided they had i legally been denied premier league riches due to AFCB's disregard of FFP?
Whole thing is total rubbish.
Only problem is if AFCB with their wealthy Russian owners decide to cough up |
That is what the fine is for, if they break the rules and go up the punishment is a fine if they break the rules and stay down it's a transfer embargo. |  | | |
| More on ffp on 16:02 - May 5 with 3377 views | bosh67 |
FFP, known as Financial Fair Play, was introduced by European governing body UEFA to prevent clubs going bankrupt and increase competition in European football. One of the architects was UEFA President Michel Platini .
So, let me get this right, Platini's great plan has been to stop clubs going bankrupt by fining them amounts that could make them go bankrupt? Brilliant. The man is a f*cking genius. Perhaps we should just pay him something, I don't know, like 1.2 million and see if it goes away? Has anyone got a paper bag? |  |
| |
| More on ffp on 16:44 - May 5 with 3306 views | whittocksRs |
| More on ffp on 16:02 - May 5 by bosh67 |
FFP, known as Financial Fair Play, was introduced by European governing body UEFA to prevent clubs going bankrupt and increase competition in European football. One of the architects was UEFA President Michel Platini .
So, let me get this right, Platini's great plan has been to stop clubs going bankrupt by fining them amounts that could make them go bankrupt? Brilliant. The man is a f*cking genius. Perhaps we should just pay him something, I don't know, like 1.2 million and see if it goes away? Has anyone got a paper bag? |
FFP has had two effects: making the richest clubs richer and harder to compete with, and unbalancing lower leagues and the clubs within them. | | | |
| More on ffp on 17:10 - May 5 with 3252 views | daveB |
| More on ffp on 16:44 - May 5 by whittocksRs |
FFP has had two effects: making the richest clubs richer and harder to compete with, and unbalancing lower leagues and the clubs within them. |
The idea was to protect the big clubs and ensure they stay in the Champions league, Leicester have blown that apart this season | | | |
| More on ffp on 17:16 - May 5 with 3232 views | TacticalR |
| More on ffp on 17:10 - May 5 by daveB |
The idea was to protect the big clubs and ensure they stay in the Champions league, Leicester have blown that apart this season |
That's why Leicester should be fined heavily. |  |
| |
| More on ffp on 17:18 - May 5 with 3222 views | terryb |
| More on ffp on 13:55 - May 5 by Northernr |
I'd be surprised if this didn't come out in our favour, which is a shame in a way because we certainly don't deserve it to but great for those of us who want QPR to remain competitive in the coming years.
Salary caps, FFP, transfer windows - they're all a restraint of trade and would all fail if anybody ever took them up to the European court. Imagine any other business in the world where you can only hire new employees in July, August or January.
The league are very quick to throw their hands up and go 'what can we do?' when people say they should do more about dodgy people buying clubs, because of course the clubs are businesses and it's a capitalist system so the league can't do a lot. If somebody then decides to run that business at a huge loss, as ours have, the league shouldn't then be able to turn around and stop them doing that. |
I do hope that it is found in our favour, purely from a selfish point of view. I also don't understand how the Football league could reject creditors writing off debts.
As this was in accordance with company & financial law I would think they would be duty bound to accept the loss was £9ish million rather than £69 million.
Where we did not help our cause was the players that we signed during that season & how much they would have cost in wages. I wouldn't be surprised if that amount comes close to our loss (including agent fees). This was after we had accepted the Football League FFP rules.
If we win, I would also be very surprised that any costs were awarded to us. That could end up costing more than a negoiated settlement . Although, the idea of Rangers sucessfully carrying out the negoiations without legal advice is beyond my comprehension! | | | |
| More on ffp on 18:10 - May 5 with 3097 views | QPRDave |
| More on ffp on 14:05 - May 5 by Antti_Heinola |
I think the difference between us and AFCB is what Dave Mc mentions at the end there - contracts given out while we were in the Prem. That's where the huge flaw is. But you would think that's where compromise would come. |
This is spot on, the crucial point of the whole problem of ffp imo.
Player's contracts must be honored, and the football league need to understand this |  | | |
| More on ffp on 18:35 - May 5 with 3052 views | danehoop |
| More on ffp on 17:18 - May 5 by terryb |
I do hope that it is found in our favour, purely from a selfish point of view. I also don't understand how the Football league could reject creditors writing off debts.
As this was in accordance with company & financial law I would think they would be duty bound to accept the loss was £9ish million rather than £69 million.
Where we did not help our cause was the players that we signed during that season & how much they would have cost in wages. I wouldn't be surprised if that amount comes close to our loss (including agent fees). This was after we had accepted the Football League FFP rules.
If we win, I would also be very surprised that any costs were awarded to us. That could end up costing more than a negoiated settlement . Although, the idea of Rangers sucessfully carrying out the negoiations without legal advice is beyond my comprehension! |
Rangers have hired some of the best and most successful legal counsel going. One thing that Tony and the Mittals have access to is good lawyers. | |
| Never knowingly understood |
| |
| More on ffp on 19:01 - May 5 with 3014 views | DejR_vu |
I suspect the Football League's counsel have advised that they can't win, but they have to save face. They can't be seen to cave in. If they did they would be setting a precedent and the whole thing falls apart. If it is resolved by an independent commission FFP remains. However flawed it may be, most are likely to adhere to the regulations. For those that don't the Football League can still threaten with fines etc. citing QPR's case as unique. Other clubs overspending would then be rolling the dice as to whether they would be successful if they disputed it, on the basis that their circumstances would differ from ours. | |
| |
| More on ffp on 19:18 - May 5 with 2977 views | danehoop |
| More on ffp on 19:01 - May 5 by DejR_vu |
I suspect the Football League's counsel have advised that they can't win, but they have to save face. They can't be seen to cave in. If they did they would be setting a precedent and the whole thing falls apart. If it is resolved by an independent commission FFP remains. However flawed it may be, most are likely to adhere to the regulations. For those that don't the Football League can still threaten with fines etc. citing QPR's case as unique. Other clubs overspending would then be rolling the dice as to whether they would be successful if they disputed it, on the basis that their circumstances would differ from ours. |
You have the right of it that our case is unique. However, if it goes to full legals it will pretty much destroy FFP for the reasons that others have outlined, but effectively the whole system is incompatible with EU law. It only exists because it hasn't been challenged in court. That is now happening in Belgium and it was the reason why Platini coincidently announced that Fair Play had achieved what it set out to do so was no longer a mandatory UEFA requirement.
The Football League have been left high and dry by that, so are now left effectively policing a gentleman's agreement that has no basis in law. As soon it is challenged in court they could find themselves facing large compensation claims. | |
| Never knowingly understood |
| |
| More on ffp on 13:30 - May 6 with 2673 views | TGRRRSSS |
| More on ffp on 18:35 - May 5 by danehoop |
Rangers have hired some of the best and most successful legal counsel going. One thing that Tony and the Mittals have access to is good lawyers. |
They are seriously wealthy people and whilst he's made a mess of things I bet anything you like UNcle Tony knows his way around a court room (well he'll know people who are)
I agree this has dragged on so long if they could have done us they would have.
I imagine the Mittals alone would have the FL bankrupt inside a week if they were minded to. |  | | |
| More on ffp on 13:35 - May 6 with 2660 views | TGRRRSSS |
Why don't QPR, Forest Blackburn and everyone team up in a joint case against the FL Surely that's the obvious thing to do, some have already been punished with embargoes and such like. | | | |
| More on ffp on 13:35 - May 6 with 2659 views | TGRRRSSS |
Where's Nico when you need him?  | | | |
| More on ffp on 14:06 - May 6 with 2594 views | Toast_R |
It does seem that fining a club for spending too much and risking themselves going bust, is a totally counter-productive measure.
A transfer embargo is surely the only sensible punishment?
Either that, or have the chairman and his board, at half time queue up on the halfway line hands above their heads - and have the oppositions best free kick taker, take shots at their nuts. There would be no FFP rule breakages ever. |  | | |
| More on ffp on 14:13 - May 6 with 2570 views | johncharles |
| More on ffp on 15:47 - May 5 by kensalriser |
I think if they could have nailed us they would have done so by now.
Wouldn't be surprised to see FFP completely unravel. |
"If they could nail us they would done so by now"
That sums it up. |  |
| Strong and stable my arse. |
| |
| More on ffp on 15:52 - May 6 with 2496 views | Hayesender |
I see Nottingham Forest have today had their transfer embargo lifted |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
