Upson urges Albion to forget the pressure - and enjoy themselves

Matt Upson

Matt Upson

First published in Sport by

Matt Upson has urged Albion to relax and relish the chance to push for the play-offs.

The former England defender is concerned some of his team mates – notably the younger players – might be feeling the pressure of a race for the top six.

But, as the Seagulls prepare to face rock-bottom Yeovil, he has encouraged them to forget the tension and put on a show at the Amex.

The vastly-experienced centre-back reckons Albion can take the heat off themselves with a relaxed mental approach.

He has urged colleagues to remember some of their better performances on home turf.

Upson told The Argus: “We can’t put too much pressure on ourselves. We have got a few young players in key areas of the team.

“They are tasting their first real experience of senior football at this level and the possibility of a play-off push.

“We have just got to take a little step back, take a breather.

“Pressure is something that is created within. You put pressure on yourself.

“People have just got to be in the frame of mind where they go out and play and enjoy themselves.

“When we do that at home, we play good football and we beat teams because we are a good side.”

Upson has urged players to do what works for them in a bid to be relaxed for the televised visit of a Glovers side on the brink of relegation.

And that could mean ignoring all the build-up to arguably the Seagulls’ biggest league fixture yet at the Amex.

He added: “I think it's a personal thing. Some players go through all the coverage, some players don’t read it and don’t care.

“For me, you create the pressure, not anyone else, and we need to ease that on ourselves.”

Upson has played down the significance of Albion playing their 45th game of the season before their rivals.

He said: “I don’t think about it too much.

“If we have a bad result it will give the other teams a gee up but if we have a good result it works the other way.

“I don’t know if there is an advantage either way.”

Comments (41)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:10am Thu 24 Apr 14

mark by the sea says...

Think we need to give march a rest and play Buckley or CMS , solly looked a bag of nerves against Blackpool, and while a play off is desired , we must not ruin his confidence with this pressure game.
On another note I read various comments regarding FFP , sorry guys buy accounts never show the true picture of a business , I have three businesses and only one made a profit! And that's been the case for two years!
The accounts will never make a profit the same way as big companies pay very little tax when they make massive profits!
I have to comment on Vegas talking about breaking even! I can't see how this is going to happen at all with clubs completion ing with other clubs getting parachute payments, the clubs who know they are bottom 10 in premier league now tie contracts to the league they play in, so they don't have massive wage bills in a lower league, however they do nicely from 60 odd million over 3 years, ( or has that gone up again)
Second thing about FFP is the actual punishments which will be handed out are not clear, the idea monies collected would be shared between those obeying the rules has been dropped , and I can see clubs going to court to over through a rule that breaks the basis of companies and the individual right to invest your own money in a company .
Example is Leeds United the league decided the prospective owner was not of the type they wanted, however the guy has every right to buy a business with his own
With regards to friday , we should be 27000 plus but I expect to see many empty seats again, please can the club issue a idea of how many are not turning up? Even on a bank holiday game nice weather , there were many seats empty?
Think we need to give march a rest and play Buckley or CMS , solly looked a bag of nerves against Blackpool, and while a play off is desired , we must not ruin his confidence with this pressure game. On another note I read various comments regarding FFP , sorry guys buy accounts never show the true picture of a business , I have three businesses and only one made a profit! And that's been the case for two years! The accounts will never make a profit the same way as big companies pay very little tax when they make massive profits! I have to comment on Vegas talking about breaking even! I can't see how this is going to happen at all with clubs completion ing with other clubs getting parachute payments, the clubs who know they are bottom 10 in premier league now tie contracts to the league they play in, so they don't have massive wage bills in a lower league, however they do nicely from 60 odd million over 3 years, ( or has that gone up again) Second thing about FFP is the actual punishments which will be handed out are not clear, the idea monies collected would be shared between those obeying the rules has been dropped , and I can see clubs going to court to over through a rule that breaks the basis of companies and the individual right to invest your own money in a company . Example is Leeds United the league decided the prospective owner was not of the type they wanted, however the guy has every right to buy a business with his own With regards to friday , we should be 27000 plus but I expect to see many empty seats again, please can the club issue a idea of how many are not turning up? Even on a bank holiday game nice weather , there were many seats empty? mark by the sea
  • Score: 1

6:36am Thu 24 Apr 14

Eddy B says...

Being out of our hands and no longer favourites may free up their nerves. Actually I'd chuck in the youngsters, may play with more freedom than some of the old hands. Ince for Andrews is the obvious one. March was anonymous on Monday but maybe isn't in his best position - could come in for Kazenga on the left wing? What about this....
TK
Bruno, Greer, Upson, Ward
Ince
Stephens Buckley March
Ulloa Lingard
Being out of our hands and no longer favourites may free up their nerves. Actually I'd chuck in the youngsters, may play with more freedom than some of the old hands. Ince for Andrews is the obvious one. March was anonymous on Monday but maybe isn't in his best position - could come in for Kazenga on the left wing? What about this.... TK Bruno, Greer, Upson, Ward Ince Stephens Buckley March Ulloa Lingard Eddy B
  • Score: -2

7:12am Thu 24 Apr 14

bbb1969 says...

Eddy B wrote:
Being out of our hands and no longer favourites may free up their nerves. Actually I'd chuck in the youngsters, may play with more freedom than some of the old hands. Ince for Andrews is the obvious one. March was anonymous on Monday but maybe isn't in his best position - could come in for Kazenga on the left wing? What about this....
TK
Bruno, Greer, Upson, Ward
Ince
Stephens Buckley March
Ulloa Lingard
Similar team to what I suggested yesreday but with Stephes and Ince in the CM roles. Both can drop off and defend but push up when we attack. 4-4-2 when attacking, 4-2-2-2 when defending; looks so easy when my son plays it on his console; the Fifa footy game is where I get all my ideas - (I am joking btw)
[quote][p][bold]Eddy B[/bold] wrote: Being out of our hands and no longer favourites may free up their nerves. Actually I'd chuck in the youngsters, may play with more freedom than some of the old hands. Ince for Andrews is the obvious one. March was anonymous on Monday but maybe isn't in his best position - could come in for Kazenga on the left wing? What about this.... TK Bruno, Greer, Upson, Ward Ince Stephens Buckley March Ulloa Lingard[/p][/quote]Similar team to what I suggested yesreday but with Stephes and Ince in the CM roles. Both can drop off and defend but push up when we attack. 4-4-2 when attacking, 4-2-2-2 when defending; looks so easy when my son plays it on his console; the Fifa footy game is where I get all my ideas - (I am joking btw) bbb1969
  • Score: 1

7:13am Thu 24 Apr 14

fansunited says...

Would like to hear 26,000 make some noise as well, it was like a library on Monday!
Would like to hear 26,000 make some noise as well, it was like a library on Monday! fansunited
  • Score: -1

7:51am Thu 24 Apr 14

mark by the sea says...

fansunited wrote:
Would like to hear 26,000 make some noise as well, it was like a library on Monday!
Yes part of last few seasons has been the experience at the Amex,
So has the reason for our home form been the shocking performances over 20 odd games, lack of goals ? Or the sheer boredom of watching the ball go back and sideways for 20 passes without actually anything happening?
As for the "fans" most are JKL and are there as something to do.. Very little passion from most of the people sitting through the most boring football I have seen..
Yes we are in with chance of a play off, but how many times have we been in top 6? In real terms we have failed in the basic premise which is to score more than the other side, not concede less than anyone else in the league.
And that's where next season has to change, OG talked about attacking football.. In reality if he was Italian we would be saying he is a typical 70s Italian manager. Something needs to change next season.
[quote][p][bold]fansunited[/bold] wrote: Would like to hear 26,000 make some noise as well, it was like a library on Monday![/p][/quote]Yes part of last few seasons has been the experience at the Amex, So has the reason for our home form been the shocking performances over 20 odd games, lack of goals ? Or the sheer boredom of watching the ball go back and sideways for 20 passes without actually anything happening? As for the "fans" most are JKL and are there as something to do.. Very little passion from most of the people sitting through the most boring football I have seen.. Yes we are in with chance of a play off, but how many times have we been in top 6? In real terms we have failed in the basic premise which is to score more than the other side, not concede less than anyone else in the league. And that's where next season has to change, OG talked about attacking football.. In reality if he was Italian we would be saying he is a typical 70s Italian manager. Something needs to change next season. mark by the sea
  • Score: 2

8:00am Thu 24 Apr 14

Neville says...

For info there is an excellent article on finances of Bhafc,if you go to any search and type in 'two hundred million reasons to love tony bloom' very factual and an eye opener.Be glad to hear other views on this.
For info there is an excellent article on finances of Bhafc,if you go to any search and type in 'two hundred million reasons to love tony bloom' very factual and an eye opener.Be glad to hear other views on this. Neville
  • Score: 4

8:05am Thu 24 Apr 14

mark by the sea says...

mark by the sea wrote:
fansunited wrote:
Would like to hear 26,000 make some noise as well, it was like a library on Monday!
Yes part of last few seasons has been the experience at the Amex,
So has the reason for our home form been the shocking performances over 20 odd games, lack of goals ? Or the sheer boredom of watching the ball go back and sideways for 20 passes without actually anything happening?
As for the "fans" most are JKL and are there as something to do.. Very little passion from most of the people sitting through the most boring football I have seen..
Yes we are in with chance of a play off, but how many times have we been in top 6? In real terms we have failed in the basic premise which is to score more than the other side, not concede less than anyone else in the league.
And that's where next season has to change, OG talked about attacking football.. In reality if he was Italian we would be saying he is a typical 70s Italian manager. Something needs to change next season.
And before anyone says anything, Wigan and Leicester were excellent performances, we know tea like Barnsley will park the bus, so do Leicester and Burnley but they set up to attack and score .
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fansunited[/bold] wrote: Would like to hear 26,000 make some noise as well, it was like a library on Monday![/p][/quote]Yes part of last few seasons has been the experience at the Amex, So has the reason for our home form been the shocking performances over 20 odd games, lack of goals ? Or the sheer boredom of watching the ball go back and sideways for 20 passes without actually anything happening? As for the "fans" most are JKL and are there as something to do.. Very little passion from most of the people sitting through the most boring football I have seen.. Yes we are in with chance of a play off, but how many times have we been in top 6? In real terms we have failed in the basic premise which is to score more than the other side, not concede less than anyone else in the league. And that's where next season has to change, OG talked about attacking football.. In reality if he was Italian we would be saying he is a typical 70s Italian manager. Something needs to change next season.[/p][/quote]And before anyone says anything, Wigan and Leicester were excellent performances, we know tea like Barnsley will park the bus, so do Leicester and Burnley but they set up to attack and score . mark by the sea
  • Score: 1

8:51am Thu 24 Apr 14

pablobrowno says...

mark by the sea wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
fansunited wrote:
Would like to hear 26,000 make some noise as well, it was like a library on Monday!
Yes part of last few seasons has been the experience at the Amex,
So has the reason for our home form been the shocking performances over 20 odd games, lack of goals ? Or the sheer boredom of watching the ball go back and sideways for 20 passes without actually anything happening?
As for the "fans" most are JKL and are there as something to do.. Very little passion from most of the people sitting through the most boring football I have seen..
Yes we are in with chance of a play off, but how many times have we been in top 6? In real terms we have failed in the basic premise which is to score more than the other side, not concede less than anyone else in the league.
And that's where next season has to change, OG talked about attacking football.. In reality if he was Italian we would be saying he is a typical 70s Italian manager. Something needs to change next season.
And before anyone says anything, Wigan and Leicester were excellent performances, we know tea like Barnsley will park the bus, so do Leicester and Burnley but they set up to attack and score .
But also the players only seem to turn up against the bigger teams in the division. On Monday yet again we came out thinking we only had to turn up and we'd win the game. The players believe their own hype too much when we've had a decent few results and suddenly think they are invincible. They forget the good honest work rate that needs to be put in, the same honest work rate and togetherness that has seen Burnley fly up this season.

Remember our team that won league one? That total togetherness and team spirit, you could tell the team were genuinely all close. We have lost that somewhat I feel. Does Oscar promote that side of the game enough?
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fansunited[/bold] wrote: Would like to hear 26,000 make some noise as well, it was like a library on Monday![/p][/quote]Yes part of last few seasons has been the experience at the Amex, So has the reason for our home form been the shocking performances over 20 odd games, lack of goals ? Or the sheer boredom of watching the ball go back and sideways for 20 passes without actually anything happening? As for the "fans" most are JKL and are there as something to do.. Very little passion from most of the people sitting through the most boring football I have seen.. Yes we are in with chance of a play off, but how many times have we been in top 6? In real terms we have failed in the basic premise which is to score more than the other side, not concede less than anyone else in the league. And that's where next season has to change, OG talked about attacking football.. In reality if he was Italian we would be saying he is a typical 70s Italian manager. Something needs to change next season.[/p][/quote]And before anyone says anything, Wigan and Leicester were excellent performances, we know tea like Barnsley will park the bus, so do Leicester and Burnley but they set up to attack and score .[/p][/quote]But also the players only seem to turn up against the bigger teams in the division. On Monday yet again we came out thinking we only had to turn up and we'd win the game. The players believe their own hype too much when we've had a decent few results and suddenly think they are invincible. They forget the good honest work rate that needs to be put in, the same honest work rate and togetherness that has seen Burnley fly up this season. Remember our team that won league one? That total togetherness and team spirit, you could tell the team were genuinely all close. We have lost that somewhat I feel. Does Oscar promote that side of the game enough? pablobrowno
  • Score: 0

8:54am Thu 24 Apr 14

pablobrowno says...

mark by the sea wrote:
Think we need to give march a rest and play Buckley or CMS , solly looked a bag of nerves against Blackpool, and while a play off is desired , we must not ruin his confidence with this pressure game.
On another note I read various comments regarding FFP , sorry guys buy accounts never show the true picture of a business , I have three businesses and only one made a profit! And that's been the case for two years!
The accounts will never make a profit the same way as big companies pay very little tax when they make massive profits!
I have to comment on Vegas talking about breaking even! I can't see how this is going to happen at all with clubs completion ing with other clubs getting parachute payments, the clubs who know they are bottom 10 in premier league now tie contracts to the league they play in, so they don't have massive wage bills in a lower league, however they do nicely from 60 odd million over 3 years, ( or has that gone up again)
Second thing about FFP is the actual punishments which will be handed out are not clear, the idea monies collected would be shared between those obeying the rules has been dropped , and I can see clubs going to court to over through a rule that breaks the basis of companies and the individual right to invest your own money in a company .
Example is Leeds United the league decided the prospective owner was not of the type they wanted, however the guy has every right to buy a business with his own
With regards to friday , we should be 27000 plus but I expect to see many empty seats again, please can the club issue a idea of how many are not turning up? Even on a bank holiday game nice weather , there were many seats empty?
Easy on the doom-mongering mate. It was Easter weekend, many people probably returning from their hols!

Those seats, whilst empty, are actually sold, and I don't believe there has been a reduction in season ticket sales/renewals for next season?

Agree about the lack of atmosphere though, and I do think that is brought about by the more defensive boring approach this season. I long to see Nooney and Buckers tearing defences apart as they used to (albeit missing the final ball!)
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: Think we need to give march a rest and play Buckley or CMS , solly looked a bag of nerves against Blackpool, and while a play off is desired , we must not ruin his confidence with this pressure game. On another note I read various comments regarding FFP , sorry guys buy accounts never show the true picture of a business , I have three businesses and only one made a profit! And that's been the case for two years! The accounts will never make a profit the same way as big companies pay very little tax when they make massive profits! I have to comment on Vegas talking about breaking even! I can't see how this is going to happen at all with clubs completion ing with other clubs getting parachute payments, the clubs who know they are bottom 10 in premier league now tie contracts to the league they play in, so they don't have massive wage bills in a lower league, however they do nicely from 60 odd million over 3 years, ( or has that gone up again) Second thing about FFP is the actual punishments which will be handed out are not clear, the idea monies collected would be shared between those obeying the rules has been dropped , and I can see clubs going to court to over through a rule that breaks the basis of companies and the individual right to invest your own money in a company . Example is Leeds United the league decided the prospective owner was not of the type they wanted, however the guy has every right to buy a business with his own With regards to friday , we should be 27000 plus but I expect to see many empty seats again, please can the club issue a idea of how many are not turning up? Even on a bank holiday game nice weather , there were many seats empty?[/p][/quote]Easy on the doom-mongering mate. It was Easter weekend, many people probably returning from their hols! Those seats, whilst empty, are actually sold, and I don't believe there has been a reduction in season ticket sales/renewals for next season? Agree about the lack of atmosphere though, and I do think that is brought about by the more defensive boring approach this season. I long to see Nooney and Buckers tearing defences apart as they used to (albeit missing the final ball!) pablobrowno
  • Score: 1

8:58am Thu 24 Apr 14

To baldly go says...

fansunited wrote:
Would like to hear 26,000 make some noise as well, it was like a library on Monday!
About as entertaining as a library, hence the silence!
Football is an entertainment industry like it or not! yes we take pride in our team and will follow through thick and thin but the result isn't everything, it's how you get that result that counts! Conceding less than the opposition does not encourage supporter involvement, attacking football and out scoring the opponent does, lose like we did to Wigan and most will go home content that we tried, go down like a damp squib like we have done to often this season will only p*** fans off.
Some go on about supporters leaving early and booing, are you surprised! it's hardly been a riveting watch most games, would you stay at a cinema if the film was crap, I wouldn't, and if you get crap service at a restaurant do you go back and give them another chance, no you complain and try elsewhere? Leaving early and booing is the fans only way of expressing their feelings, you can hardly go and knock on Tony Blooms door to complain like you could at a restaurant!
Let's go out all guns blazing Friday, in front of the cameras and show what we can do, it might encourage more tv coverage next season if it's entertaining enough, that's why we get little coverage on tv, not entertaining enough!
The Amex experience should be the one of the best in the land, and it is, apart from the football at the moment and the new fans will not stay loyal for long if they are not entertained.
Mbts and others quote what it costs to watch the Albion, and it's quite a commitment, for me it's 3 season tickets, 1 adult 2 under 18s, shirts all round, home and away, scarves, hats, hoodies all promoting the Albion, factor in food and drink each game and it's a couple of grand every season! Could pay for a nice holiday somewhere the Mrs keeps reminding me, but I will be back next season, new shirts again, and hope to be entertained, result tomorrow night and fingers crossed for Saturday and on to Forest and who knows where from there! UTA
[quote][p][bold]fansunited[/bold] wrote: Would like to hear 26,000 make some noise as well, it was like a library on Monday![/p][/quote]About as entertaining as a library, hence the silence! Football is an entertainment industry like it or not! yes we take pride in our team and will follow through thick and thin but the result isn't everything, it's how you get that result that counts! Conceding less than the opposition does not encourage supporter involvement, attacking football and out scoring the opponent does, lose like we did to Wigan and most will go home content that we tried, go down like a damp squib like we have done to often this season will only p*** fans off. Some go on about supporters leaving early and booing, are you surprised! it's hardly been a riveting watch most games, would you stay at a cinema if the film was crap, I wouldn't, and if you get crap service at a restaurant do you go back and give them another chance, no you complain and try elsewhere? Leaving early and booing is the fans only way of expressing their feelings, you can hardly go and knock on Tony Blooms door to complain like you could at a restaurant! Let's go out all guns blazing Friday, in front of the cameras and show what we can do, it might encourage more tv coverage next season if it's entertaining enough, that's why we get little coverage on tv, not entertaining enough! The Amex experience should be the one of the best in the land, and it is, apart from the football at the moment and the new fans will not stay loyal for long if they are not entertained. Mbts and others quote what it costs to watch the Albion, and it's quite a commitment, for me it's 3 season tickets, 1 adult 2 under 18s, shirts all round, home and away, scarves, hats, hoodies all promoting the Albion, factor in food and drink each game and it's a couple of grand every season! Could pay for a nice holiday somewhere the Mrs keeps reminding me, but I will be back next season, new shirts again, and hope to be entertained, result tomorrow night and fingers crossed for Saturday and on to Forest and who knows where from there! UTA To baldly go
  • Score: 12

9:45am Thu 24 Apr 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

mark by the sea wrote:
Think we need to give march a rest and play Buckley or CMS , solly looked a bag of nerves against Blackpool, and while a play off is desired , we must not ruin his confidence with this pressure game.
On another note I read various comments regarding FFP , sorry guys buy accounts never show the true picture of a business , I have three businesses and only one made a profit! And that's been the case for two years!
The accounts will never make a profit the same way as big companies pay very little tax when they make massive profits!
I have to comment on Vegas talking about breaking even! I can't see how this is going to happen at all with clubs completion ing with other clubs getting parachute payments, the clubs who know they are bottom 10 in premier league now tie contracts to the league they play in, so they don't have massive wage bills in a lower league, however they do nicely from 60 odd million over 3 years, ( or has that gone up again)
Second thing about FFP is the actual punishments which will be handed out are not clear, the idea monies collected would be shared between those obeying the rules has been dropped , and I can see clubs going to court to over through a rule that breaks the basis of companies and the individual right to invest your own money in a company .
Example is Leeds United the league decided the prospective owner was not of the type they wanted, however the guy has every right to buy a business with his own
With regards to friday , we should be 27000 plus but I expect to see many empty seats again, please can the club issue a idea of how many are not turning up? Even on a bank holiday game nice weather , there were many seats empty?
The Leeds fella failed the test because of a recent conviction for fraud. He won the appeal on a technicality because there is uncertainty over whether the fraud was deliberate or accidental. Once that has been sorted out he can still be banned, although that would appear to be unlikely.

However, I'm not sure any of that is relevant to the FFP rules that the clubs signed in full knowledge of their contents.
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: Think we need to give march a rest and play Buckley or CMS , solly looked a bag of nerves against Blackpool, and while a play off is desired , we must not ruin his confidence with this pressure game. On another note I read various comments regarding FFP , sorry guys buy accounts never show the true picture of a business , I have three businesses and only one made a profit! And that's been the case for two years! The accounts will never make a profit the same way as big companies pay very little tax when they make massive profits! I have to comment on Vegas talking about breaking even! I can't see how this is going to happen at all with clubs completion ing with other clubs getting parachute payments, the clubs who know they are bottom 10 in premier league now tie contracts to the league they play in, so they don't have massive wage bills in a lower league, however they do nicely from 60 odd million over 3 years, ( or has that gone up again) Second thing about FFP is the actual punishments which will be handed out are not clear, the idea monies collected would be shared between those obeying the rules has been dropped , and I can see clubs going to court to over through a rule that breaks the basis of companies and the individual right to invest your own money in a company . Example is Leeds United the league decided the prospective owner was not of the type they wanted, however the guy has every right to buy a business with his own With regards to friday , we should be 27000 plus but I expect to see many empty seats again, please can the club issue a idea of how many are not turning up? Even on a bank holiday game nice weather , there were many seats empty?[/p][/quote]The Leeds fella failed the test because of a recent conviction for fraud. He won the appeal on a technicality because there is uncertainty over whether the fraud was deliberate or accidental. Once that has been sorted out he can still be banned, although that would appear to be unlikely. However, I'm not sure any of that is relevant to the FFP rules that the clubs signed in full knowledge of their contents. Ex-pat Arnie
  • Score: 1

9:48am Thu 24 Apr 14

SMF20 says...

Fantastic comments again from Mr Upson... A true professional in everyway and imho player of the season.

Id love to him both Matt and Inigo at the Amex long term. I truly believe that Matt is a manager in waiting and Inigo as his number 2 would in my mind be the dream team.

Not saying it should happen yet but certainly a team id like to see leading us at some point in the future.

Uta
Fantastic comments again from Mr Upson... A true professional in everyway and imho player of the season. Id love to him both Matt and Inigo at the Amex long term. I truly believe that Matt is a manager in waiting and Inigo as his number 2 would in my mind be the dream team. Not saying it should happen yet but certainly a team id like to see leading us at some point in the future. Uta SMF20
  • Score: 4

9:53am Thu 24 Apr 14

Max Ripple says...

mark by the sea wrote:
Think we need to give march a rest and play Buckley or CMS , solly looked a bag of nerves against Blackpool, and while a play off is desired , we must not ruin his confidence with this pressure game.
On another note I read various comments regarding FFP , sorry guys buy accounts never show the true picture of a business , I have three businesses and only one made a profit! And that's been the case for two years!
The accounts will never make a profit the same way as big companies pay very little tax when they make massive profits!
I have to comment on Vegas talking about breaking even! I can't see how this is going to happen at all with clubs completion ing with other clubs getting parachute payments, the clubs who know they are bottom 10 in premier league now tie contracts to the league they play in, so they don't have massive wage bills in a lower league, however they do nicely from 60 odd million over 3 years, ( or has that gone up again)
Second thing about FFP is the actual punishments which will be handed out are not clear, the idea monies collected would be shared between those obeying the rules has been dropped , and I can see clubs going to court to over through a rule that breaks the basis of companies and the individual right to invest your own money in a company .
Example is Leeds United the league decided the prospective owner was not of the type they wanted, however the guy has every right to buy a business with his own
With regards to friday , we should be 27000 plus but I expect to see many empty seats again, please can the club issue a idea of how many are not turning up? Even on a bank holiday game nice weather , there were many seats empty?
No wonder two of your three businesses are not making a profit with your use of grammar. And don't blame it on the iPad or phone or whatever. I can write properly so other folks can understand what I am saying.
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: Think we need to give march a rest and play Buckley or CMS , solly looked a bag of nerves against Blackpool, and while a play off is desired , we must not ruin his confidence with this pressure game. On another note I read various comments regarding FFP , sorry guys buy accounts never show the true picture of a business , I have three businesses and only one made a profit! And that's been the case for two years! The accounts will never make a profit the same way as big companies pay very little tax when they make massive profits! I have to comment on Vegas talking about breaking even! I can't see how this is going to happen at all with clubs completion ing with other clubs getting parachute payments, the clubs who know they are bottom 10 in premier league now tie contracts to the league they play in, so they don't have massive wage bills in a lower league, however they do nicely from 60 odd million over 3 years, ( or has that gone up again) Second thing about FFP is the actual punishments which will be handed out are not clear, the idea monies collected would be shared between those obeying the rules has been dropped , and I can see clubs going to court to over through a rule that breaks the basis of companies and the individual right to invest your own money in a company . Example is Leeds United the league decided the prospective owner was not of the type they wanted, however the guy has every right to buy a business with his own With regards to friday , we should be 27000 plus but I expect to see many empty seats again, please can the club issue a idea of how many are not turning up? Even on a bank holiday game nice weather , there were many seats empty?[/p][/quote]No wonder two of your three businesses are not making a profit with your use of grammar. And don't blame it on the iPad or phone or whatever. I can write properly so other folks can understand what I am saying. Max Ripple
  • Score: 6

9:56am Thu 24 Apr 14

Hugothepug says...

bbb1969 wrote:
Eddy B wrote:
Being out of our hands and no longer favourites may free up their nerves. Actually I'd chuck in the youngsters, may play with more freedom than some of the old hands. Ince for Andrews is the obvious one. March was anonymous on Monday but maybe isn't in his best position - could come in for Kazenga on the left wing? What about this....
TK
Bruno, Greer, Upson, Ward
Ince
Stephens Buckley March
Ulloa Lingard
Similar team to what I suggested yesreday but with Stephes and Ince in the CM roles. Both can drop off and defend but push up when we attack. 4-4-2 when attacking, 4-2-2-2 when defending; looks so easy when my son plays it on his console; the Fifa footy game is where I get all my ideas - (I am joking btw)
In my opinion the system is too narrow, we would get smashed by their full backs down the wings. Our full backs would be over run and wouldn't be able to get forward. Or if the systems is playing the two nearest the attackers out wide - i.e. Buckers and March then we would be over run in midfield. To solve this, supposedly, One of the front two would drop out wide and then push one of the original two wide men inside creating a fluid 4-2-3-1 which is basically what OG has been playing most of the season. Ours failings for me are down to lack of quality (in key areas). This is dues to financial constraints and bad buys IMO.

I say failings, but I think OG has done well in his first season. We've had mental injuries, not much of a pre-season, FFP etc. Also OG didn't know the league at all. We have all put our trust in Bloom - long term - so if he employs someone like OG and then we get subsequent issues arise (the minute crofts hit the deck we were screwed) then we have to accept it's going to take a little longer. I do believe, for the record, that as the seasons progressed we haven't taken advantage of other teams failings and should be in the play offs comfortably by now! (Home form not good).

In GPs first season most were happy with 10th. We didn't flirt with playoffs and we knew we could grow. Since then expectations have grown and we went close(ish) last year so it's natural we all feel we should have prem footy along with our spanking new stadium and training facility - but it's not as easy as that. Yes there's been a few f*** ups along the way but let's just get behind the boys for the next two games. I still think we can do it.

I would prefer (for the last two games anyway) to play a simple 442 with CMS running around pressing high with Lingaurd and Buckers on wings. Stevens and Ince in middle and usual back 5. Really go for it - nothing to lose. Make some noise under the lights Friday, let's face it we enjoy it more when we have cheer and shout and go home with a dry throat and I'm sure the lads would appreciate it!!
[quote][p][bold]bbb1969[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eddy B[/bold] wrote: Being out of our hands and no longer favourites may free up their nerves. Actually I'd chuck in the youngsters, may play with more freedom than some of the old hands. Ince for Andrews is the obvious one. March was anonymous on Monday but maybe isn't in his best position - could come in for Kazenga on the left wing? What about this.... TK Bruno, Greer, Upson, Ward Ince Stephens Buckley March Ulloa Lingard[/p][/quote]Similar team to what I suggested yesreday but with Stephes and Ince in the CM roles. Both can drop off and defend but push up when we attack. 4-4-2 when attacking, 4-2-2-2 when defending; looks so easy when my son plays it on his console; the Fifa footy game is where I get all my ideas - (I am joking btw)[/p][/quote]In my opinion the system is too narrow, we would get smashed by their full backs down the wings. Our full backs would be over run and wouldn't be able to get forward. Or if the systems is playing the two nearest the attackers out wide - i.e. Buckers and March then we would be over run in midfield. To solve this, supposedly, One of the front two would drop out wide and then push one of the original two wide men inside creating a fluid 4-2-3-1 which is basically what OG has been playing most of the season. Ours failings for me are down to lack of quality (in key areas). This is dues to financial constraints and bad buys IMO. I say failings, but I think OG has done well in his first season. We've had mental injuries, not much of a pre-season, FFP etc. Also OG didn't know the league at all. We have all put our trust in Bloom - long term - so if he employs someone like OG and then we get subsequent issues arise (the minute crofts hit the deck we were screwed) then we have to accept it's going to take a little longer. I do believe, for the record, that as the seasons progressed we haven't taken advantage of other teams failings and should be in the play offs comfortably by now! (Home form not good). In GPs first season most were happy with 10th. We didn't flirt with playoffs and we knew we could grow. Since then expectations have grown and we went close(ish) last year so it's natural we all feel we should have prem footy along with our spanking new stadium and training facility - but it's not as easy as that. Yes there's been a few f*** ups along the way but let's just get behind the boys for the next two games. I still think we can do it. I would prefer (for the last two games anyway) to play a simple 442 with CMS running around pressing high with Lingaurd and Buckers on wings. Stevens and Ince in middle and usual back 5. Really go for it - nothing to lose. Make some noise under the lights Friday, let's face it we enjoy it more when we have cheer and shout and go home with a dry throat and I'm sure the lads would appreciate it!! Hugothepug
  • Score: 4

9:58am Thu 24 Apr 14

Max Ripple says...

mark by the sea wrote:
fansunited wrote:
Would like to hear 26,000 make some noise as well, it was like a library on Monday!
Yes part of last few seasons has been the experience at the Amex,
So has the reason for our home form been the shocking performances over 20 odd games, lack of goals ? Or the sheer boredom of watching the ball go back and sideways for 20 passes without actually anything happening?
As for the "fans" most are JKL and are there as something to do.. Very little passion from most of the people sitting through the most boring football I have seen..
Yes we are in with chance of a play off, but how many times have we been in top 6? In real terms we have failed in the basic premise which is to score more than the other side, not concede less than anyone else in the league.
And that's where next season has to change, OG talked about attacking football.. In reality if he was Italian we would be saying he is a typical 70s Italian manager. Something needs to change next season.
Sorry Mark - I'm not having a go at you, but what exactly is a JKL? If you mean a "Johnny Come Lately" then it's JCL. It's getting harder than ever trying to plough through some of these posts. Trying to work out what some people are trying to say.
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fansunited[/bold] wrote: Would like to hear 26,000 make some noise as well, it was like a library on Monday![/p][/quote]Yes part of last few seasons has been the experience at the Amex, So has the reason for our home form been the shocking performances over 20 odd games, lack of goals ? Or the sheer boredom of watching the ball go back and sideways for 20 passes without actually anything happening? As for the "fans" most are JKL and are there as something to do.. Very little passion from most of the people sitting through the most boring football I have seen.. Yes we are in with chance of a play off, but how many times have we been in top 6? In real terms we have failed in the basic premise which is to score more than the other side, not concede less than anyone else in the league. And that's where next season has to change, OG talked about attacking football.. In reality if he was Italian we would be saying he is a typical 70s Italian manager. Something needs to change next season.[/p][/quote]Sorry Mark - I'm not having a go at you, but what exactly is a JKL? If you mean a "Johnny Come Lately" then it's JCL. It's getting harder than ever trying to plough through some of these posts. Trying to work out what some people are trying to say. Max Ripple
  • Score: 12

10:04am Thu 24 Apr 14

Max Ripple says...

mark by the sea wrote:
Think we need to give march a rest and play Buckley or CMS , solly looked a bag of nerves against Blackpool, and while a play off is desired , we must not ruin his confidence with this pressure game.
On another note I read various comments regarding FFP , sorry guys buy accounts never show the true picture of a business , I have three businesses and only one made a profit! And that's been the case for two years!
The accounts will never make a profit the same way as big companies pay very little tax when they make massive profits!
I have to comment on Vegas talking about breaking even! I can't see how this is going to happen at all with clubs completion ing with other clubs getting parachute payments, the clubs who know they are bottom 10 in premier league now tie contracts to the league they play in, so they don't have massive wage bills in a lower league, however they do nicely from 60 odd million over 3 years, ( or has that gone up again)
Second thing about FFP is the actual punishments which will be handed out are not clear, the idea monies collected would be shared between those obeying the rules has been dropped , and I can see clubs going to court to over through a rule that breaks the basis of companies and the individual right to invest your own money in a company .
Example is Leeds United the league decided the prospective owner was not of the type they wanted, however the guy has every right to buy a business with his own
With regards to friday , we should be 27000 plus but I expect to see many empty seats again, please can the club issue a idea of how many are not turning up? Even on a bank holiday game nice weather , there were many seats empty?
By the way Mark. I agree with you about FFP. I believe that the League will totally back down or lose cases in court as they won't be able to impose any punishments or fines even though clubs signed up to the deal. Clubs like us will look total mugs for trying to adhere to the conditions. Or maybe we will stay in business whilst others eventually go down the pan. I'd rather not go back to the bad old days of nearly going bust.
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: Think we need to give march a rest and play Buckley or CMS , solly looked a bag of nerves against Blackpool, and while a play off is desired , we must not ruin his confidence with this pressure game. On another note I read various comments regarding FFP , sorry guys buy accounts never show the true picture of a business , I have three businesses and only one made a profit! And that's been the case for two years! The accounts will never make a profit the same way as big companies pay very little tax when they make massive profits! I have to comment on Vegas talking about breaking even! I can't see how this is going to happen at all with clubs completion ing with other clubs getting parachute payments, the clubs who know they are bottom 10 in premier league now tie contracts to the league they play in, so they don't have massive wage bills in a lower league, however they do nicely from 60 odd million over 3 years, ( or has that gone up again) Second thing about FFP is the actual punishments which will be handed out are not clear, the idea monies collected would be shared between those obeying the rules has been dropped , and I can see clubs going to court to over through a rule that breaks the basis of companies and the individual right to invest your own money in a company . Example is Leeds United the league decided the prospective owner was not of the type they wanted, however the guy has every right to buy a business with his own With regards to friday , we should be 27000 plus but I expect to see many empty seats again, please can the club issue a idea of how many are not turning up? Even on a bank holiday game nice weather , there were many seats empty?[/p][/quote]By the way Mark. I agree with you about FFP. I believe that the League will totally back down or lose cases in court as they won't be able to impose any punishments or fines even though clubs signed up to the deal. Clubs like us will look total mugs for trying to adhere to the conditions. Or maybe we will stay in business whilst others eventually go down the pan. I'd rather not go back to the bad old days of nearly going bust. Max Ripple
  • Score: 7

10:32am Thu 24 Apr 14

Max Ripple says...

Neville wrote:
For info there is an excellent article on finances of Bhafc,if you go to any search and type in 'two hundred million reasons to love tony bloom' very factual and an eye opener.Be glad to hear other views on this.
Yes. Brilliant article. I found it on seagull love review blog. Tony has ploughed a HUGE amount into our club and the finances of running a championship club are unreal. Personally, I'd just love us to stay solvent and be here in ten years time.
[quote][p][bold]Neville[/bold] wrote: For info there is an excellent article on finances of Bhafc,if you go to any search and type in 'two hundred million reasons to love tony bloom' very factual and an eye opener.Be glad to hear other views on this.[/p][/quote]Yes. Brilliant article. I found it on seagull love review blog. Tony has ploughed a HUGE amount into our club and the finances of running a championship club are unreal. Personally, I'd just love us to stay solvent and be here in ten years time. Max Ripple
  • Score: 4

10:43am Thu 24 Apr 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

Neville wrote:
For info there is an excellent article on finances of Bhafc,if you go to any search and type in 'two hundred million reasons to love tony bloom' very factual and an eye opener.Be glad to hear other views on this.
A fantastic article - thanks for the link.
[quote][p][bold]Neville[/bold] wrote: For info there is an excellent article on finances of Bhafc,if you go to any search and type in 'two hundred million reasons to love tony bloom' very factual and an eye opener.Be glad to hear other views on this.[/p][/quote]A fantastic article - thanks for the link. Ex-pat Arnie
  • Score: 2

11:31am Thu 24 Apr 14

Gee Jay says...

Friday........we need GG, MU, TK and SW to all be calm and confident and spread this out from the back to the rest of the players. They have the maturity and experience to enspire the younger ones.
UTA
Friday........we need GG, MU, TK and SW to all be calm and confident and spread this out from the back to the rest of the players. They have the maturity and experience to enspire the younger ones. UTA Gee Jay
  • Score: 2

11:39am Thu 24 Apr 14

pte says...

mark by the sea wrote:
Think we need to give march a rest and play Buckley or CMS , solly looked a bag of nerves against Blackpool, and while a play off is desired , we must not ruin his confidence with this pressure game.
On another note I read various comments regarding FFP , sorry guys buy accounts never show the true picture of a business , I have three businesses and only one made a profit! And that's been the case for two years!
The accounts will never make a profit the same way as big companies pay very little tax when they make massive profits!
I have to comment on Vegas talking about breaking even! I can't see how this is going to happen at all with clubs completion ing with other clubs getting parachute payments, the clubs who know they are bottom 10 in premier league now tie contracts to the league they play in, so they don't have massive wage bills in a lower league, however they do nicely from 60 odd million over 3 years, ( or has that gone up again)
Second thing about FFP is the actual punishments which will be handed out are not clear, the idea monies collected would be shared between those obeying the rules has been dropped , and I can see clubs going to court to over through a rule that breaks the basis of companies and the individual right to invest your own money in a company .
Example is Leeds United the league decided the prospective owner was not of the type they wanted, however the guy has every right to buy a business with his own
With regards to friday , we should be 27000 plus but I expect to see many empty seats again, please can the club issue a idea of how many are not turning up? Even on a bank holiday game nice weather , there were many seats empty?
Of course the accounts don't show everything. Some of the "losses" are down to expenses that could be eliminated overnight without affecting the footballing side. For example the directors could be taking money out of the club in inflated director's renumeration (that's bosses wages for the numptys that don't understand). Then there are loans from directors with high levels of interest. Then there are paper losses you can create by undervaluing assets such as players and inflating the losses on them.

I agree FFP is legally unenforceable. If I'm a shareholder in Marks and Spencer is it legal or fair for a third party to take money from a company I partly own and give it to a competitor say Debenhams? Of course not. Also, how does it help the league to take money from a club already in debt? All you do is push them into liquidation!! The footballing authorities aren't in a position to impose it on clubs against their wishes or they will get kicked out. It's not a dictatorship.

The club is using FFP rules as a smokescreen to hide behind. Why you don't hear from Tony is because he wants Barber et al to take the flak. If Tony doesn't want to spend huge amounts of money which he may not have fair enough, but don't insult our intelligence.

I'm not intentionally being a troll but there are so many numptys on this site that believe everything they are fed by the club that it gets tedious listening to them bleat: FFP all the time.

Regarding OG he won't be here next season. He sounds like he's over the moon just getting within spitting distance of the play offs. He's tried British football and even if we are not promoted he hasn't damaged his career prospects. He may have wondered earlier in the season if he'd made a mistake joining us but despite the odds got us close. So now because he had us in the play offs with 3 games to go he is in a good position to get a job elsewhere. If a club comes in for him it will be a case of stick or bust.

We could go out with a whimper which is what people fear, or equally others could stumble and leave the door open for us to go through. Anything could happen
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: Think we need to give march a rest and play Buckley or CMS , solly looked a bag of nerves against Blackpool, and while a play off is desired , we must not ruin his confidence with this pressure game. On another note I read various comments regarding FFP , sorry guys buy accounts never show the true picture of a business , I have three businesses and only one made a profit! And that's been the case for two years! The accounts will never make a profit the same way as big companies pay very little tax when they make massive profits! I have to comment on Vegas talking about breaking even! I can't see how this is going to happen at all with clubs completion ing with other clubs getting parachute payments, the clubs who know they are bottom 10 in premier league now tie contracts to the league they play in, so they don't have massive wage bills in a lower league, however they do nicely from 60 odd million over 3 years, ( or has that gone up again) Second thing about FFP is the actual punishments which will be handed out are not clear, the idea monies collected would be shared between those obeying the rules has been dropped , and I can see clubs going to court to over through a rule that breaks the basis of companies and the individual right to invest your own money in a company . Example is Leeds United the league decided the prospective owner was not of the type they wanted, however the guy has every right to buy a business with his own With regards to friday , we should be 27000 plus but I expect to see many empty seats again, please can the club issue a idea of how many are not turning up? Even on a bank holiday game nice weather , there were many seats empty?[/p][/quote]Of course the accounts don't show everything. Some of the "losses" are down to expenses that could be eliminated overnight without affecting the footballing side. For example the directors could be taking money out of the club in inflated director's renumeration (that's bosses wages for the numptys that don't understand). Then there are loans from directors with high levels of interest. Then there are paper losses you can create by undervaluing assets such as players and inflating the losses on them. I agree FFP is legally unenforceable. If I'm a shareholder in Marks and Spencer is it legal or fair for a third party to take money from a company I partly own and give it to a competitor say Debenhams? Of course not. Also, how does it help the league to take money from a club already in debt? All you do is push them into liquidation!! The footballing authorities aren't in a position to impose it on clubs against their wishes or they will get kicked out. It's not a dictatorship. The club is using FFP rules as a smokescreen to hide behind. Why you don't hear from Tony is because he wants Barber et al to take the flak. If Tony doesn't want to spend huge amounts of money which he may not have fair enough, but don't insult our intelligence. I'm not intentionally being a troll but there are so many numptys on this site that believe everything they are fed by the club that it gets tedious listening to them bleat: FFP all the time. Regarding OG he won't be here next season. He sounds like he's over the moon just getting within spitting distance of the play offs. He's tried British football and even if we are not promoted he hasn't damaged his career prospects. He may have wondered earlier in the season if he'd made a mistake joining us but despite the odds got us close. So now because he had us in the play offs with 3 games to go he is in a good position to get a job elsewhere. If a club comes in for him it will be a case of stick or bust. We could go out with a whimper which is what people fear, or equally others could stumble and leave the door open for us to go through. Anything could happen pte
  • Score: -10

12:39pm Thu 24 Apr 14

VegasSeagull says...

mark by the sea wrote:
Think we need to give march a rest and play Buckley or CMS , solly looked a bag of nerves against Blackpool, and while a play off is desired , we must not ruin his confidence with this pressure game.
On another note I read various comments regarding FFP , sorry guys buy accounts never show the true picture of a business , I have three businesses and only one made a profit! And that's been the case for two years!
The accounts will never make a profit the same way as big companies pay very little tax when they make massive profits!
I have to comment on Vegas talking about breaking even! I can't see how this is going to happen at all with clubs completion ing with other clubs getting parachute payments, the clubs who know they are bottom 10 in premier league now tie contracts to the league they play in, so they don't have massive wage bills in a lower league, however they do nicely from 60 odd million over 3 years, ( or has that gone up again)
Second thing about FFP is the actual punishments which will be handed out are not clear, the idea monies collected would be shared between those obeying the rules has been dropped , and I can see clubs going to court to over through a rule that breaks the basis of companies and the individual right to invest your own money in a company .
Example is Leeds United the league decided the prospective owner was not of the type they wanted, however the guy has every right to buy a business with his own
With regards to friday , we should be 27000 plus but I expect to see many empty seats again, please can the club issue a idea of how many are not turning up? Even on a bank holiday game nice weather , there were many seats empty?
Mark you question whether Brighton can achieve break even status, well they can if they reduce out goings and increase income.

Pay out less money in tansfer fees and less in wages, the FFP will/should have an effect. Produce home grown talent rather than buying talent, the new facility is intended to do this, sell a player when we know we can for profit, Bridcutt went Ince stepped up. Pull in new sponsors, Barber has done well in this quest and will do more. Increase non football income, the hotel, parking lot and the student accomodation block will all provide new money. Host more activities at the stadium, Rod Stewart, Rugby World Cup, England youth soccer matches ect will or have all made money for the club.

The club, thru various methods, will make the required cuts in our costs this year, Barber has assured us of that, and the lower we get our loss figure then the required year on year cuts become smaller.
Think on this Mark, we know we have to cut last year's losses by some 3 millions this year, and we know we will, but we were still able to offer a reported 1.2 million for Grabban, plus his wages. To me that suggests that we did not spend our transfer budget this year, the money left over could be rolled ont next year's budget or we could use it to reduce our debt even more.
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: Think we need to give march a rest and play Buckley or CMS , solly looked a bag of nerves against Blackpool, and while a play off is desired , we must not ruin his confidence with this pressure game. On another note I read various comments regarding FFP , sorry guys buy accounts never show the true picture of a business , I have three businesses and only one made a profit! And that's been the case for two years! The accounts will never make a profit the same way as big companies pay very little tax when they make massive profits! I have to comment on Vegas talking about breaking even! I can't see how this is going to happen at all with clubs completion ing with other clubs getting parachute payments, the clubs who know they are bottom 10 in premier league now tie contracts to the league they play in, so they don't have massive wage bills in a lower league, however they do nicely from 60 odd million over 3 years, ( or has that gone up again) Second thing about FFP is the actual punishments which will be handed out are not clear, the idea monies collected would be shared between those obeying the rules has been dropped , and I can see clubs going to court to over through a rule that breaks the basis of companies and the individual right to invest your own money in a company . Example is Leeds United the league decided the prospective owner was not of the type they wanted, however the guy has every right to buy a business with his own With regards to friday , we should be 27000 plus but I expect to see many empty seats again, please can the club issue a idea of how many are not turning up? Even on a bank holiday game nice weather , there were many seats empty?[/p][/quote]Mark you question whether Brighton can achieve break even status, well they can if they reduce out goings and increase income. Pay out less money in tansfer fees and less in wages, the FFP will/should have an effect. Produce home grown talent rather than buying talent, the new facility is intended to do this, sell a player when we know we can for profit, Bridcutt went Ince stepped up. Pull in new sponsors, Barber has done well in this quest and will do more. Increase non football income, the hotel, parking lot and the student accomodation block will all provide new money. Host more activities at the stadium, Rod Stewart, Rugby World Cup, England youth soccer matches ect will or have all made money for the club. The club, thru various methods, will make the required cuts in our costs this year, Barber has assured us of that, and the lower we get our loss figure then the required year on year cuts become smaller. Think on this Mark, we know we have to cut last year's losses by some 3 millions this year, and we know we will, but we were still able to offer a reported 1.2 million for Grabban, plus his wages. To me that suggests that we did not spend our transfer budget this year, the money left over could be rolled ont next year's budget or we could use it to reduce our debt even more. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 2

1:10pm Thu 24 Apr 14

VegasSeagull says...

Any club can go to court to fight against the FFP and all it entails, but if the judge has any sense of right and wrong the first questions he will ask is, 'did you sign up to these rules' all bar three clubs did. 'Did you have a part in formulating these rules,' consultations were entered into and are ongoing.' Did you read the rule book before signing up,' of course they did. 'Were you aware of the punishments that could be handed down,' yes they were.

How can a judge find in favor of the plaintiff based on nothing more than a newly found realization of what they signed up to. All was known, there are zero surprises.
If the claim is, 'our ability to carry out unrestricted business practicies is being infringed upon,' well what about when the governing body says, 'you will play your next match behind closed doors,' isn't that restricting business practicies, the club loses a lot of money,' but you don't see the clubs going to court, do you. When a club makes what is considered an, 'illegal approach,' for a player they get punished, they don't run to the courts. All clubs have signed up to a set of rules that govern the game, but those same rules in the general business world would not apply, who ever heard of a company getting punished for making a secret approach to poach an employee away from a bread shop.
If you sign up to a set of rules then you have to abide by them, and that is my point, and I don't see why a judge would think differently.
Any club can go to court to fight against the FFP and all it entails, but if the judge has any sense of right and wrong the first questions he will ask is, 'did you sign up to these rules' all bar three clubs did. 'Did you have a part in formulating these rules,' consultations were entered into and are ongoing.' Did you read the rule book before signing up,' of course they did. 'Were you aware of the punishments that could be handed down,' yes they were. How can a judge find in favor of the plaintiff based on nothing more than a newly found realization of what they signed up to. All was known, there are zero surprises. If the claim is, 'our ability to carry out unrestricted business practicies is being infringed upon,' well what about when the governing body says, 'you will play your next match behind closed doors,' isn't that restricting business practicies, the club loses a lot of money,' but you don't see the clubs going to court, do you. When a club makes what is considered an, 'illegal approach,' for a player they get punished, they don't run to the courts. All clubs have signed up to a set of rules that govern the game, but those same rules in the general business world would not apply, who ever heard of a company getting punished for making a secret approach to poach an employee away from a bread shop. If you sign up to a set of rules then you have to abide by them, and that is my point, and I don't see why a judge would think differently. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 6

1:39pm Thu 24 Apr 14

VegasSeagull says...

Judge to the plaintiff, 'what is your understanding of why these rules came about?'
Plaintiff replies, 'well the idea is to stop us from going broke by over spending, as in the case of Portsmouth and others.'
Judge to the plaintiff, 'so what you are asking of me is that I grant you the right to go broke even tho you signed up to these rules.'
Plaintiff replies, 'yes sir.'

Case dismissed, next.........
Judge to the plaintiff, 'what is your understanding of why these rules came about?' Plaintiff replies, 'well the idea is to stop us from going broke by over spending, as in the case of Portsmouth and others.' Judge to the plaintiff, 'so what you are asking of me is that I grant you the right to go broke even tho you signed up to these rules.' Plaintiff replies, 'yes sir.' Case dismissed, next......... VegasSeagull
  • Score: 3

1:47pm Thu 24 Apr 14

VegasSeagull says...

I see that it is being reported that we are after a young striker from Yoevil, if he scores a couple of great goals against us won't that be a bummer.
I see that it is being reported that we are after a young striker from Yoevil, if he scores a couple of great goals against us won't that be a bummer. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 3

2:16pm Thu 24 Apr 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

"If I'm a shareholder in Marks and Spencer is it legal or fair for a third party to take money from a company I partly own and give it to a competitor say Debenhams? Of course not."

It is if both parties signed up to such a scheme voluntarily.

"The footballing authorities aren't in a position to impose it on clubs against their wishes or they will get kicked out. It's not a dictatorship."

See my answer above.
"If I'm a shareholder in Marks and Spencer is it legal or fair for a third party to take money from a company I partly own and give it to a competitor say Debenhams? Of course not." It is if both parties signed up to such a scheme voluntarily. "The footballing authorities aren't in a position to impose it on clubs against their wishes or they will get kicked out. It's not a dictatorship." See my answer above. Ex-pat Arnie
  • Score: 1

2:23pm Thu 24 Apr 14

VegasSeagull says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
"If I'm a shareholder in Marks and Spencer is it legal or fair for a third party to take money from a company I partly own and give it to a competitor say Debenhams? Of course not."

It is if both parties signed up to such a scheme voluntarily.

"The footballing authorities aren't in a position to impose it on clubs against their wishes or they will get kicked out. It's not a dictatorship."

See my answer above.
The money now goes to charity so the MS scenario no longer exists as a possibility.

As you say the clubs knew what they were getting into.
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: "If I'm a shareholder in Marks and Spencer is it legal or fair for a third party to take money from a company I partly own and give it to a competitor say Debenhams? Of course not." It is if both parties signed up to such a scheme voluntarily. "The footballing authorities aren't in a position to impose it on clubs against their wishes or they will get kicked out. It's not a dictatorship." See my answer above.[/p][/quote]The money now goes to charity so the MS scenario no longer exists as a possibility. As you say the clubs knew what they were getting into. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 2

2:27pm Thu 24 Apr 14

pte says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
Judge to the plaintiff, 'what is your understanding of why these rules came about?'
Plaintiff replies, 'well the idea is to stop us from going broke by over spending, as in the case of Portsmouth and others.'
Judge to the plaintiff, 'so what you are asking of me is that I grant you the right to go broke even tho you signed up to these rules.'
Plaintiff replies, 'yes sir.'

Case dismissed, next.........
I don't know what law school you went to but you certainly have a creative imagination. Otherwise spend 3 years in law school and come back to us

If FFP was imposed on the clubs then they can successfully appeal to the courts. If on the other hand it was agreed by consent and a majority of clubs are now saying they don't want it then by law the league have no choice but to back down. Either they get overturned in the courts or the clubs vote out the idiots that dreamed up the scheme and put it to the members. It's not what the majority wanted then that counts, it's what they want now if in the unlikely event it went to court.

Brighton racked up a supposed loss of £14m but that's not the end of it. If it were they would be insolvent and required by law to file for bankruptcy. Same with QPR Blackburn, Bolton et al. A lot of these losses are paper losses for tax avoidance, they are solvent and it's up to them how they run what is in effect just another business. The judge isn't a football fan and doesn't care who goes up and who goes down FFS


I really don't understand why some people don't get it.
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: Judge to the plaintiff, 'what is your understanding of why these rules came about?' Plaintiff replies, 'well the idea is to stop us from going broke by over spending, as in the case of Portsmouth and others.' Judge to the plaintiff, 'so what you are asking of me is that I grant you the right to go broke even tho you signed up to these rules.' Plaintiff replies, 'yes sir.' Case dismissed, next.........[/p][/quote]I don't know what law school you went to but you certainly have a creative imagination. Otherwise spend 3 years in law school and come back to us If FFP was imposed on the clubs then they can successfully appeal to the courts. If on the other hand it was agreed by consent and a majority of clubs are now saying they don't want it then by law the league have no choice but to back down. Either they get overturned in the courts or the clubs vote out the idiots that dreamed up the scheme and put it to the members. It's not what the majority wanted then that counts, it's what they want now if in the unlikely event it went to court. Brighton racked up a supposed loss of £14m but that's not the end of it. If it were they would be insolvent and required by law to file for bankruptcy. Same with QPR Blackburn, Bolton et al. A lot of these losses are paper losses for tax avoidance, they are solvent and it's up to them how they run what is in effect just another business. The judge isn't a football fan and doesn't care who goes up and who goes down FFS I really don't understand why some people don't get it. pte
  • Score: -3

2:44pm Thu 24 Apr 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

pte wrote:
VegasSeagull wrote:
Judge to the plaintiff, 'what is your understanding of why these rules came about?'
Plaintiff replies, 'well the idea is to stop us from going broke by over spending, as in the case of Portsmouth and others.'
Judge to the plaintiff, 'so what you are asking of me is that I grant you the right to go broke even tho you signed up to these rules.'
Plaintiff replies, 'yes sir.'

Case dismissed, next.........
I don't know what law school you went to but you certainly have a creative imagination. Otherwise spend 3 years in law school and come back to us

If FFP was imposed on the clubs then they can successfully appeal to the courts. If on the other hand it was agreed by consent and a majority of clubs are now saying they don't want it then by law the league have no choice but to back down. Either they get overturned in the courts or the clubs vote out the idiots that dreamed up the scheme and put it to the members. It's not what the majority wanted then that counts, it's what they want now if in the unlikely event it went to court.

Brighton racked up a supposed loss of £14m but that's not the end of it. If it were they would be insolvent and required by law to file for bankruptcy. Same with QPR Blackburn, Bolton et al. A lot of these losses are paper losses for tax avoidance, they are solvent and it's up to them how they run what is in effect just another business. The judge isn't a football fan and doesn't care who goes up and who goes down FFS


I really don't understand why some people don't get it.
"If on the other hand it was agreed by consent and a majority of clubs are now saying they don't want it then by law the league have no choice but to back down."

Really? You can sign up to something legally binding and then use the law to force its dissolution if you later change your mind? Hmm... I would guess a contract is a contract and both sides would have to voluntarily agree for it to be annulled.

Only a very few clubs are threatening legal action... most of the rest would probably sue if the former group were allowed to get away with flouting rules the rest have had to abide by.
[quote][p][bold]pte[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: Judge to the plaintiff, 'what is your understanding of why these rules came about?' Plaintiff replies, 'well the idea is to stop us from going broke by over spending, as in the case of Portsmouth and others.' Judge to the plaintiff, 'so what you are asking of me is that I grant you the right to go broke even tho you signed up to these rules.' Plaintiff replies, 'yes sir.' Case dismissed, next.........[/p][/quote]I don't know what law school you went to but you certainly have a creative imagination. Otherwise spend 3 years in law school and come back to us If FFP was imposed on the clubs then they can successfully appeal to the courts. If on the other hand it was agreed by consent and a majority of clubs are now saying they don't want it then by law the league have no choice but to back down. Either they get overturned in the courts or the clubs vote out the idiots that dreamed up the scheme and put it to the members. It's not what the majority wanted then that counts, it's what they want now if in the unlikely event it went to court. Brighton racked up a supposed loss of £14m but that's not the end of it. If it were they would be insolvent and required by law to file for bankruptcy. Same with QPR Blackburn, Bolton et al. A lot of these losses are paper losses for tax avoidance, they are solvent and it's up to them how they run what is in effect just another business. The judge isn't a football fan and doesn't care who goes up and who goes down FFS I really don't understand why some people don't get it.[/p][/quote]"If on the other hand it was agreed by consent and a majority of clubs are now saying they don't want it then by law the league have no choice but to back down." Really? You can sign up to something legally binding and then use the law to force its dissolution if you later change your mind? Hmm... I would guess a contract is a contract and both sides would have to voluntarily agree for it to be annulled. Only a very few clubs are threatening legal action... most of the rest would probably sue if the former group were allowed to get away with flouting rules the rest have had to abide by. Ex-pat Arnie
  • Score: 5

2:47pm Thu 24 Apr 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

They also signed up to league rules which allow them to play only 11 players on the pitch at a time. Should they be allowed to flout that rule too, if it becomes inconvenient?

"But I want 13! You can't stop me or I'll sue! Kaz, Dave, get warmed up... you're both going in goal with Koosh."
They also signed up to league rules which allow them to play only 11 players on the pitch at a time. Should they be allowed to flout that rule too, if it becomes inconvenient? "But I want 13! You can't stop me or I'll sue! Kaz, Dave, get warmed up... you're both going in goal with Koosh." Ex-pat Arnie
  • Score: 1

3:09pm Thu 24 Apr 14

VegasSeagull says...

pte wrote:
VegasSeagull wrote:
Judge to the plaintiff, 'what is your understanding of why these rules came about?'
Plaintiff replies, 'well the idea is to stop us from going broke by over spending, as in the case of Portsmouth and others.'
Judge to the plaintiff, 'so what you are asking of me is that I grant you the right to go broke even tho you signed up to these rules.'
Plaintiff replies, 'yes sir.'

Case dismissed, next.........
I don't know what law school you went to but you certainly have a creative imagination. Otherwise spend 3 years in law school and come back to us

If FFP was imposed on the clubs then they can successfully appeal to the courts. If on the other hand it was agreed by consent and a majority of clubs are now saying they don't want it then by law the league have no choice but to back down. Either they get overturned in the courts or the clubs vote out the idiots that dreamed up the scheme and put it to the members. It's not what the majority wanted then that counts, it's what they want now if in the unlikely event it went to court.

Brighton racked up a supposed loss of £14m but that's not the end of it. If it were they would be insolvent and required by law to file for bankruptcy. Same with QPR Blackburn, Bolton et al. A lot of these losses are paper losses for tax avoidance, they are solvent and it's up to them how they run what is in effect just another business. The judge isn't a football fan and doesn't care who goes up and who goes down FFS


I really don't understand why some people don't get it.
So what you are saying is, if the majority of the clubs signed up for it, but now don't want it, then they can just go to court and get it overturned, or vote out the members that make up the governing authority, try telling that to the world governing body of football, FIFA.

The whole football world would be in chaos if clubs were alowed to, 'try out,' new rules, you either have rules or you don't. It is right that rules should evolve over time, change what needs changing because of unforseen outcomes, but to simply do away with the whole package because you, 'now,' don't like what you agreed to, well that's just not on.

I don't know if you would agree, but my guess is that the clubs making the most noise are those that have flouted the rules in the biggest way. It's a simple question, 'is it right for clubs to risk their very existence by spending money they don't have.' The FFP has different components for different divisions, if the Champ Div were to pull out of what they signed up to, would that have a knock on effect on the other divisions.
How about other parts of Europe, where the FFP has existed for a longer period that here, will those countries be affected. How many clubs outside of our division are contesting the FFP rules, indeed how many clubs right across Europe are.
This issue right now is a champ div issue, so far it has always been something that, 'will,' take effect, but now it, 'is,' taking effect and some clubs have not done the work needed to be ready, and that's why they don't like it. The basic principles behind the rules is are good ones, and the clubs should know that, but some have stuck their heads in the sand and hoped for the best, and for some that hope has evaporated.
[quote][p][bold]pte[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: Judge to the plaintiff, 'what is your understanding of why these rules came about?' Plaintiff replies, 'well the idea is to stop us from going broke by over spending, as in the case of Portsmouth and others.' Judge to the plaintiff, 'so what you are asking of me is that I grant you the right to go broke even tho you signed up to these rules.' Plaintiff replies, 'yes sir.' Case dismissed, next.........[/p][/quote]I don't know what law school you went to but you certainly have a creative imagination. Otherwise spend 3 years in law school and come back to us If FFP was imposed on the clubs then they can successfully appeal to the courts. If on the other hand it was agreed by consent and a majority of clubs are now saying they don't want it then by law the league have no choice but to back down. Either they get overturned in the courts or the clubs vote out the idiots that dreamed up the scheme and put it to the members. It's not what the majority wanted then that counts, it's what they want now if in the unlikely event it went to court. Brighton racked up a supposed loss of £14m but that's not the end of it. If it were they would be insolvent and required by law to file for bankruptcy. Same with QPR Blackburn, Bolton et al. A lot of these losses are paper losses for tax avoidance, they are solvent and it's up to them how they run what is in effect just another business. The judge isn't a football fan and doesn't care who goes up and who goes down FFS I really don't understand why some people don't get it.[/p][/quote]So what you are saying is, if the majority of the clubs signed up for it, but now don't want it, then they can just go to court and get it overturned, or vote out the members that make up the governing authority, try telling that to the world governing body of football, FIFA. The whole football world would be in chaos if clubs were alowed to, 'try out,' new rules, you either have rules or you don't. It is right that rules should evolve over time, change what needs changing because of unforseen outcomes, but to simply do away with the whole package because you, 'now,' don't like what you agreed to, well that's just not on. I don't know if you would agree, but my guess is that the clubs making the most noise are those that have flouted the rules in the biggest way. It's a simple question, 'is it right for clubs to risk their very existence by spending money they don't have.' The FFP has different components for different divisions, if the Champ Div were to pull out of what they signed up to, would that have a knock on effect on the other divisions. How about other parts of Europe, where the FFP has existed for a longer period that here, will those countries be affected. How many clubs outside of our division are contesting the FFP rules, indeed how many clubs right across Europe are. This issue right now is a champ div issue, so far it has always been something that, 'will,' take effect, but now it, 'is,' taking effect and some clubs have not done the work needed to be ready, and that's why they don't like it. The basic principles behind the rules is are good ones, and the clubs should know that, but some have stuck their heads in the sand and hoped for the best, and for some that hope has evaporated. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 1

3:31pm Thu 24 Apr 14

VegasSeagull says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
They also signed up to league rules which allow them to play only 11 players on the pitch at a time. Should they be allowed to flout that rule too, if it becomes inconvenient?

"But I want 13! You can't stop me or I'll sue! Kaz, Dave, get warmed up... you're both going in goal with Koosh."
Red cards yellow cards, they all affect a clubs ability to go about the business of playing football, why not change those rules. You can't talk to my player without my consent, that is a rule and not a law, so that can go too. The authorities have the power to punish clubs for breaking their rules, rules agreed to by the majority, but the majority are the club's Chairman, twenty people, isn't the majority of interested and affected parties the players, shouldn't they be voting on the rules and not the Chairman. Ask a player if he wants rules that ensure that his wage cheque will arrive on time, the FFP is designed to see that it is.

The main point I am trying to make is, you can'ty have a rule for today and then just dump it tomorrow simply because you chose to ignore the rule from day one.
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: They also signed up to league rules which allow them to play only 11 players on the pitch at a time. Should they be allowed to flout that rule too, if it becomes inconvenient? "But I want 13! You can't stop me or I'll sue! Kaz, Dave, get warmed up... you're both going in goal with Koosh."[/p][/quote]Red cards yellow cards, they all affect a clubs ability to go about the business of playing football, why not change those rules. You can't talk to my player without my consent, that is a rule and not a law, so that can go too. The authorities have the power to punish clubs for breaking their rules, rules agreed to by the majority, but the majority are the club's Chairman, twenty people, isn't the majority of interested and affected parties the players, shouldn't they be voting on the rules and not the Chairman. Ask a player if he wants rules that ensure that his wage cheque will arrive on time, the FFP is designed to see that it is. The main point I am trying to make is, you can'ty have a rule for today and then just dump it tomorrow simply because you chose to ignore the rule from day one. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 1

4:57pm Thu 24 Apr 14

pte says...

Vegas says:
"So what you are saying is, if the majority of the clubs signed up for it, but now don't want it, then they can just go to court and get it overturned, or vote out the members that make up the governing authority,"

Yes exactly, it's called democracy and there's no need to go to court if the majority want to ditch FFP as the governing executive has no choice but to either back down or find a face saving compromise that will satisfy it's members.

The courts will not back a body that seeks to impose it's will on a majority that wishes otherwise. How do you think the Premiership was created FFS?

By the length of your posts I know you think you are the font of all wisdom but you are not. I guess you were one of those that idolised Gus right up till when he was in talks with Reading during our last promotion push.

When FFP gets dropped I will remind you although it will probably happen discretely so you will not accept it's happened
Vegas says: "So what you are saying is, if the majority of the clubs signed up for it, but now don't want it, then they can just go to court and get it overturned, or vote out the members that make up the governing authority," Yes exactly, it's called democracy and there's no need to go to court if the majority want to ditch FFP as the governing executive has no choice but to either back down or find a face saving compromise that will satisfy it's members. The courts will not back a body that seeks to impose it's will on a majority that wishes otherwise. How do you think the Premiership was created FFS? By the length of your posts I know you think you are the font of all wisdom but you are not. I guess you were one of those that idolised Gus right up till when he was in talks with Reading during our last promotion push. When FFP gets dropped I will remind you although it will probably happen discretely so you will not accept it's happened pte
  • Score: -3

5:07pm Thu 24 Apr 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

But FFP isn't just a whim of the FA, the Football League or the Premier league, it is a directive from UEFA.

And the courts will surely back the legality of contract that was signed by all parties in full knowledge of its contents. Just because some (NOT all!) of the signatories have changed their minds doesn't mean it becomes invalid.
But FFP isn't just a whim of the FA, the Football League or the Premier league, it is a directive from UEFA. And the courts will surely back the legality of contract that was signed by all parties in full knowledge of its contents. Just because some (NOT all!) of the signatories have changed their minds doesn't mean it becomes invalid. Ex-pat Arnie
  • Score: 1

6:06pm Thu 24 Apr 14

mark by the sea says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
But FFP isn't just a whim of the FA, the Football League or the Premier league, it is a directive from UEFA.

And the courts will surely back the legality of contract that was signed by all parties in full knowledge of its contents. Just because some (NOT all!) of the signatories have changed their minds doesn't mean it becomes invalid.
Remember the Bosman ruling? The whole world treated players like slaves till Bosman changed it all, what ever the FA or uefa wanted same as the government lose out to europe
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: But FFP isn't just a whim of the FA, the Football League or the Premier league, it is a directive from UEFA. And the courts will surely back the legality of contract that was signed by all parties in full knowledge of its contents. Just because some (NOT all!) of the signatories have changed their minds doesn't mean it becomes invalid.[/p][/quote]Remember the Bosman ruling? The whole world treated players like slaves till Bosman changed it all, what ever the FA or uefa wanted same as the government lose out to europe mark by the sea
  • Score: 0

7:10pm Thu 24 Apr 14

gordongull says...

The Championship clubs originally agreed they would share fines equally among themselves, but the Premier League disapproved, and now any fines will be paid to charity. These fines which will be meted out to non-complying promoted clubs could be substantial, and any legal challenge will take issue with this diversion from what was originally agreed.
The Championship clubs originally agreed they would share fines equally among themselves, but the Premier League disapproved, and now any fines will be paid to charity. These fines which will be meted out to non-complying promoted clubs could be substantial, and any legal challenge will take issue with this diversion from what was originally agreed. gordongull
  • Score: 0

8:53pm Thu 24 Apr 14

VegasSeagull says...

gordongull wrote:
The Championship clubs originally agreed they would share fines equally among themselves, but the Premier League disapproved, and now any fines will be paid to charity. These fines which will be meted out to non-complying promoted clubs could be substantial, and any legal challenge will take issue with this diversion from what was originally agreed.
Those who get fined don't really have a leg to stand on when it comes ot where the money goes, the fine is the fine. Do those that get fined really want extra money going to their competitors, I don't think so.
I doubt those that have complied will complain where the money goes for the same reason as those paying the fines.
Would a complainer really go ito court stating, 'I don't want my fine going to charity,' that would be a nice bit of PR, wouldn't it.
[quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: The Championship clubs originally agreed they would share fines equally among themselves, but the Premier League disapproved, and now any fines will be paid to charity. These fines which will be meted out to non-complying promoted clubs could be substantial, and any legal challenge will take issue with this diversion from what was originally agreed.[/p][/quote]Those who get fined don't really have a leg to stand on when it comes ot where the money goes, the fine is the fine. Do those that get fined really want extra money going to their competitors, I don't think so. I doubt those that have complied will complain where the money goes for the same reason as those paying the fines. Would a complainer really go ito court stating, 'I don't want my fine going to charity,' that would be a nice bit of PR, wouldn't it. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 0

9:26pm Thu 24 Apr 14

gordongull says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
gordongull wrote:
The Championship clubs originally agreed they would share fines equally among themselves, but the Premier League disapproved, and now any fines will be paid to charity. These fines which will be meted out to non-complying promoted clubs could be substantial, and any legal challenge will take issue with this diversion from what was originally agreed.
Those who get fined don't really have a leg to stand on when it comes ot where the money goes, the fine is the fine. Do those that get fined really want extra money going to their competitors, I don't think so.
I doubt those that have complied will complain where the money goes for the same reason as those paying the fines.
Would a complainer really go ito court stating, 'I don't want my fine going to charity,' that would be a nice bit of PR, wouldn't it.
All good points, but if the question is 'could a majority of Championship clubs successfully challenge the rules' then any changes to what was agreed would be a good place to start. Also it could be argued that it is inappropriate for the money to be lost from the game altogether at the same time that everyone is feeling the financial squeeze. Nobody signed up for the money to go to charity so I don't see PR being an issue.
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: The Championship clubs originally agreed they would share fines equally among themselves, but the Premier League disapproved, and now any fines will be paid to charity. These fines which will be meted out to non-complying promoted clubs could be substantial, and any legal challenge will take issue with this diversion from what was originally agreed.[/p][/quote]Those who get fined don't really have a leg to stand on when it comes ot where the money goes, the fine is the fine. Do those that get fined really want extra money going to their competitors, I don't think so. I doubt those that have complied will complain where the money goes for the same reason as those paying the fines. Would a complainer really go ito court stating, 'I don't want my fine going to charity,' that would be a nice bit of PR, wouldn't it.[/p][/quote]All good points, but if the question is 'could a majority of Championship clubs successfully challenge the rules' then any changes to what was agreed would be a good place to start. Also it could be argued that it is inappropriate for the money to be lost from the game altogether at the same time that everyone is feeling the financial squeeze. Nobody signed up for the money to go to charity so I don't see PR being an issue. gordongull
  • Score: 1

10:46pm Thu 24 Apr 14

OldGull says...

pte wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Think we need to give march a rest and play Buckley or CMS , solly looked a bag of nerves against Blackpool, and while a play off is desired , we must not ruin his confidence with this pressure game.
On another note I read various comments regarding FFP , sorry guys buy accounts never show the true picture of a business , I have three businesses and only one made a profit! And that's been the case for two years!
The accounts will never make a profit the same way as big companies pay very little tax when they make massive profits!
I have to comment on Vegas talking about breaking even! I can't see how this is going to happen at all with clubs completion ing with other clubs getting parachute payments, the clubs who know they are bottom 10 in premier league now tie contracts to the league they play in, so they don't have massive wage bills in a lower league, however they do nicely from 60 odd million over 3 years, ( or has that gone up again)
Second thing about FFP is the actual punishments which will be handed out are not clear, the idea monies collected would be shared between those obeying the rules has been dropped , and I can see clubs going to court to over through a rule that breaks the basis of companies and the individual right to invest your own money in a company .
Example is Leeds United the league decided the prospective owner was not of the type they wanted, however the guy has every right to buy a business with his own
With regards to friday , we should be 27000 plus but I expect to see many empty seats again, please can the club issue a idea of how many are not turning up? Even on a bank holiday game nice weather , there were many seats empty?
Of course the accounts don't show everything. Some of the "losses" are down to expenses that could be eliminated overnight without affecting the footballing side. For example the directors could be taking money out of the club in inflated director's renumeration (that's bosses wages for the numptys that don't understand). Then there are loans from directors with high levels of interest. Then there are paper losses you can create by undervaluing assets such as players and inflating the losses on them.

I agree FFP is legally unenforceable. If I'm a shareholder in Marks and Spencer is it legal or fair for a third party to take money from a company I partly own and give it to a competitor say Debenhams? Of course not. Also, how does it help the league to take money from a club already in debt? All you do is push them into liquidation!! The footballing authorities aren't in a position to impose it on clubs against their wishes or they will get kicked out. It's not a dictatorship.

The club is using FFP rules as a smokescreen to hide behind. Why you don't hear from Tony is because he wants Barber et al to take the flak. If Tony doesn't want to spend huge amounts of money which he may not have fair enough, but don't insult our intelligence.

I'm not intentionally being a troll but there are so many numptys on this site that believe everything they are fed by the club that it gets tedious listening to them bleat: FFP all the time.

Regarding OG he won't be here next season. He sounds like he's over the moon just getting within spitting distance of the play offs. He's tried British football and even if we are not promoted he hasn't damaged his career prospects. He may have wondered earlier in the season if he'd made a mistake joining us but despite the odds got us close. So now because he had us in the play offs with 3 games to go he is in a good position to get a job elsewhere. If a club comes in for him it will be a case of stick or bust.

We could go out with a whimper which is what people fear, or equally others could stumble and leave the door open for us to go through. Anything could happen
TB has pumped £200m into the club is that not a HUGE amount?
[quote][p][bold]pte[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: Think we need to give march a rest and play Buckley or CMS , solly looked a bag of nerves against Blackpool, and while a play off is desired , we must not ruin his confidence with this pressure game. On another note I read various comments regarding FFP , sorry guys buy accounts never show the true picture of a business , I have three businesses and only one made a profit! And that's been the case for two years! The accounts will never make a profit the same way as big companies pay very little tax when they make massive profits! I have to comment on Vegas talking about breaking even! I can't see how this is going to happen at all with clubs completion ing with other clubs getting parachute payments, the clubs who know they are bottom 10 in premier league now tie contracts to the league they play in, so they don't have massive wage bills in a lower league, however they do nicely from 60 odd million over 3 years, ( or has that gone up again) Second thing about FFP is the actual punishments which will be handed out are not clear, the idea monies collected would be shared between those obeying the rules has been dropped , and I can see clubs going to court to over through a rule that breaks the basis of companies and the individual right to invest your own money in a company . Example is Leeds United the league decided the prospective owner was not of the type they wanted, however the guy has every right to buy a business with his own With regards to friday , we should be 27000 plus but I expect to see many empty seats again, please can the club issue a idea of how many are not turning up? Even on a bank holiday game nice weather , there were many seats empty?[/p][/quote]Of course the accounts don't show everything. Some of the "losses" are down to expenses that could be eliminated overnight without affecting the footballing side. For example the directors could be taking money out of the club in inflated director's renumeration (that's bosses wages for the numptys that don't understand). Then there are loans from directors with high levels of interest. Then there are paper losses you can create by undervaluing assets such as players and inflating the losses on them. I agree FFP is legally unenforceable. If I'm a shareholder in Marks and Spencer is it legal or fair for a third party to take money from a company I partly own and give it to a competitor say Debenhams? Of course not. Also, how does it help the league to take money from a club already in debt? All you do is push them into liquidation!! The footballing authorities aren't in a position to impose it on clubs against their wishes or they will get kicked out. It's not a dictatorship. The club is using FFP rules as a smokescreen to hide behind. Why you don't hear from Tony is because he wants Barber et al to take the flak. If Tony doesn't want to spend huge amounts of money which he may not have fair enough, but don't insult our intelligence. I'm not intentionally being a troll but there are so many numptys on this site that believe everything they are fed by the club that it gets tedious listening to them bleat: FFP all the time. Regarding OG he won't be here next season. He sounds like he's over the moon just getting within spitting distance of the play offs. He's tried British football and even if we are not promoted he hasn't damaged his career prospects. He may have wondered earlier in the season if he'd made a mistake joining us but despite the odds got us close. So now because he had us in the play offs with 3 games to go he is in a good position to get a job elsewhere. If a club comes in for him it will be a case of stick or bust. We could go out with a whimper which is what people fear, or equally others could stumble and leave the door open for us to go through. Anything could happen[/p][/quote]TB has pumped £200m into the club is that not a HUGE amount? OldGull
  • Score: 1

10:55pm Thu 24 Apr 14

OldGull says...

Too many people are getting hung up on FFP
Many of them complaining that Albion are trying to adhere to it.

TB has pumped £200m into the club.
He intends to run the club so that it is sustainable.
This strikes me as very sensible, it may take longer to get to the prem.
But I would rather build slowiy knowing the club is not going down the pan when the bubble bursts.
We have already been through that.

For all of you complaining that the club is not spending enough.
It's time for you to put your own millions where your mouth is

UTA
Too many people are getting hung up on FFP Many of them complaining that Albion are trying to adhere to it. TB has pumped £200m into the club. He intends to run the club so that it is sustainable. This strikes me as very sensible, it may take longer to get to the prem. But I would rather build slowiy knowing the club is not going down the pan when the bubble bursts. We have already been through that. For all of you complaining that the club is not spending enough. It's time for you to put your own millions where your mouth is UTA OldGull
  • Score: 4

11:00pm Thu 24 Apr 14

VegasSeagull says...

gordongull wrote:
VegasSeagull wrote:
gordongull wrote:
The Championship clubs originally agreed they would share fines equally among themselves, but the Premier League disapproved, and now any fines will be paid to charity. These fines which will be meted out to non-complying promoted clubs could be substantial, and any legal challenge will take issue with this diversion from what was originally agreed.
Those who get fined don't really have a leg to stand on when it comes ot where the money goes, the fine is the fine. Do those that get fined really want extra money going to their competitors, I don't think so.
I doubt those that have complied will complain where the money goes for the same reason as those paying the fines.
Would a complainer really go ito court stating, 'I don't want my fine going to charity,' that would be a nice bit of PR, wouldn't it.
All good points, but if the question is 'could a majority of Championship clubs successfully challenge the rules' then any changes to what was agreed would be a good place to start. Also it could be argued that it is inappropriate for the money to be lost from the game altogether at the same time that everyone is feeling the financial squeeze. Nobody signed up for the money to go to charity so I don't see PR being an issue.
If the majority did go to court to make a challenge, the thrust of their complaint would be two fold.
First prong, shoulf the footballing authorities be able to dictate what level of debt the clubs can operate under, would not the court ask, why did you sign up for them to have the authority, (only 3 didn't.)
Second prong, the rules have been changed in so much that the fine money now goes to charity, would not the court say, you are being fined, how the money is used is no longer your perogative.

The real argument is the fact that some clubs have come to realize that the punishments will hurt, to hide their real agenda, do away with the punishmens, should not be hidden behind false outrage as to where the fine money goes.
If you get a speeding fine, are you going to challenge the fine simply on the grounds that you don't agree with how that money is then used once you have paid the fine, or because you thought the money would be used to hire extra police, but now you learn, that the money is going to be to refurbish the courtroom.
These rules are being looked at and discussed on a regular basis. Just a few weeks ago there was a meeting held, with the clubs, to see if the rules can be improved. One of the items on the agenda was to have the clubs report their figures earlier and more frequently, so that those flouting the rules would be picked up earlier.
The rules might be tweaked, with the majority of clubs approving, but they won't go away.
[quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: The Championship clubs originally agreed they would share fines equally among themselves, but the Premier League disapproved, and now any fines will be paid to charity. These fines which will be meted out to non-complying promoted clubs could be substantial, and any legal challenge will take issue with this diversion from what was originally agreed.[/p][/quote]Those who get fined don't really have a leg to stand on when it comes ot where the money goes, the fine is the fine. Do those that get fined really want extra money going to their competitors, I don't think so. I doubt those that have complied will complain where the money goes for the same reason as those paying the fines. Would a complainer really go ito court stating, 'I don't want my fine going to charity,' that would be a nice bit of PR, wouldn't it.[/p][/quote]All good points, but if the question is 'could a majority of Championship clubs successfully challenge the rules' then any changes to what was agreed would be a good place to start. Also it could be argued that it is inappropriate for the money to be lost from the game altogether at the same time that everyone is feeling the financial squeeze. Nobody signed up for the money to go to charity so I don't see PR being an issue.[/p][/quote]If the majority did go to court to make a challenge, the thrust of their complaint would be two fold. First prong, shoulf the footballing authorities be able to dictate what level of debt the clubs can operate under, would not the court ask, why did you sign up for them to have the authority, (only 3 didn't.) Second prong, the rules have been changed in so much that the fine money now goes to charity, would not the court say, you are being fined, how the money is used is no longer your perogative. The real argument is the fact that some clubs have come to realize that the punishments will hurt, to hide their real agenda, do away with the punishmens, should not be hidden behind false outrage as to where the fine money goes. If you get a speeding fine, are you going to challenge the fine simply on the grounds that you don't agree with how that money is then used once you have paid the fine, or because you thought the money would be used to hire extra police, but now you learn, that the money is going to be to refurbish the courtroom. These rules are being looked at and discussed on a regular basis. Just a few weeks ago there was a meeting held, with the clubs, to see if the rules can be improved. One of the items on the agenda was to have the clubs report their figures earlier and more frequently, so that those flouting the rules would be picked up earlier. The rules might be tweaked, with the majority of clubs approving, but they won't go away. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 2

12:23am Fri 25 Apr 14

gordongull says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
gordongull wrote:
VegasSeagull wrote:
gordongull wrote:
The Championship clubs originally agreed they would share fines equally among themselves, but the Premier League disapproved, and now any fines will be paid to charity. These fines which will be meted out to non-complying promoted clubs could be substantial, and any legal challenge will take issue with this diversion from what was originally agreed.
Those who get fined don't really have a leg to stand on when it comes ot where the money goes, the fine is the fine. Do those that get fined really want extra money going to their competitors, I don't think so.
I doubt those that have complied will complain where the money goes for the same reason as those paying the fines.
Would a complainer really go ito court stating, 'I don't want my fine going to charity,' that would be a nice bit of PR, wouldn't it.
All good points, but if the question is 'could a majority of Championship clubs successfully challenge the rules' then any changes to what was agreed would be a good place to start. Also it could be argued that it is inappropriate for the money to be lost from the game altogether at the same time that everyone is feeling the financial squeeze. Nobody signed up for the money to go to charity so I don't see PR being an issue.
If the majority did go to court to make a challenge, the thrust of their complaint would be two fold.
First prong, shoulf the footballing authorities be able to dictate what level of debt the clubs can operate under, would not the court ask, why did you sign up for them to have the authority, (only 3 didn't.)
Second prong, the rules have been changed in so much that the fine money now goes to charity, would not the court say, you are being fined, how the money is used is no longer your perogative.

The real argument is the fact that some clubs have come to realize that the punishments will hurt, to hide their real agenda, do away with the punishmens, should not be hidden behind false outrage as to where the fine money goes.
If you get a speeding fine, are you going to challenge the fine simply on the grounds that you don't agree with how that money is then used once you have paid the fine, or because you thought the money would be used to hire extra police, but now you learn, that the money is going to be to refurbish the courtroom.
These rules are being looked at and discussed on a regular basis. Just a few weeks ago there was a meeting held, with the clubs, to see if the rules can be improved. One of the items on the agenda was to have the clubs report their figures earlier and more frequently, so that those flouting the rules would be picked up earlier.
The rules might be tweaked, with the majority of clubs approving, but they won't go away.
They wouldn't have a strong case, case Vegas, but I would be surprised if the rules are not contested at some point. Personally I am all for the rules as long as they result in forcing all clubs to operate in a sustainable manner, and there is no weakening of resolve on the part of the football authorities.
Ideally the figures would be reported 8 months earlier so that a points deduction could be applied in the season when non-compliance occurred. Then the highest finishing teams which did comply would have a fair chance of promotion, unlike the present system.
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: The Championship clubs originally agreed they would share fines equally among themselves, but the Premier League disapproved, and now any fines will be paid to charity. These fines which will be meted out to non-complying promoted clubs could be substantial, and any legal challenge will take issue with this diversion from what was originally agreed.[/p][/quote]Those who get fined don't really have a leg to stand on when it comes ot where the money goes, the fine is the fine. Do those that get fined really want extra money going to their competitors, I don't think so. I doubt those that have complied will complain where the money goes for the same reason as those paying the fines. Would a complainer really go ito court stating, 'I don't want my fine going to charity,' that would be a nice bit of PR, wouldn't it.[/p][/quote]All good points, but if the question is 'could a majority of Championship clubs successfully challenge the rules' then any changes to what was agreed would be a good place to start. Also it could be argued that it is inappropriate for the money to be lost from the game altogether at the same time that everyone is feeling the financial squeeze. Nobody signed up for the money to go to charity so I don't see PR being an issue.[/p][/quote]If the majority did go to court to make a challenge, the thrust of their complaint would be two fold. First prong, shoulf the footballing authorities be able to dictate what level of debt the clubs can operate under, would not the court ask, why did you sign up for them to have the authority, (only 3 didn't.) Second prong, the rules have been changed in so much that the fine money now goes to charity, would not the court say, you are being fined, how the money is used is no longer your perogative. The real argument is the fact that some clubs have come to realize that the punishments will hurt, to hide their real agenda, do away with the punishmens, should not be hidden behind false outrage as to where the fine money goes. If you get a speeding fine, are you going to challenge the fine simply on the grounds that you don't agree with how that money is then used once you have paid the fine, or because you thought the money would be used to hire extra police, but now you learn, that the money is going to be to refurbish the courtroom. These rules are being looked at and discussed on a regular basis. Just a few weeks ago there was a meeting held, with the clubs, to see if the rules can be improved. One of the items on the agenda was to have the clubs report their figures earlier and more frequently, so that those flouting the rules would be picked up earlier. The rules might be tweaked, with the majority of clubs approving, but they won't go away.[/p][/quote]They wouldn't have a strong case, case Vegas, but I would be surprised if the rules are not contested at some point. Personally I am all for the rules as long as they result in forcing all clubs to operate in a sustainable manner, and there is no weakening of resolve on the part of the football authorities. Ideally the figures would be reported 8 months earlier so that a points deduction could be applied in the season when non-compliance occurred. Then the highest finishing teams which did comply would have a fair chance of promotion, unlike the present system. gordongull
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree