Before I go on I love BFC and have done since I was about 5 or 6 years old (I’m now 48) we’ve always been a club that never quite makes the mark except on the odd occasions such as our brief Flurry in the premiership. Never the less and my actual point is that why is there a variance in points deductions for breaching FFP rules no one actually except for BFC seem to care. There should only be one punishment and that’s relegation at the end of the season nothing else really makes any difference and there should be no right of appeal. Perhaps then things might change ..... I do not profess to ant expertises in these matters just a bit fed up with losing out to blatant cheating
I would add to relegation a censorship on transfers, where every one for a period of say 3 years has to be accepted by the league after proving they can afford it.
I assume it’s judged independent for each case based on the severity of the breaches and that means different deductions can be applied as opposed to say if you enter administration - then it would be a standard 12 points
The thing that gets me if i understand correctly, FFP rules are based on clubs not being able to spend more than their 'income'. Generally,I know a time period etc fits in. The term is Financial Fair Play. So when clubs get parachute payments and in turn get a huge financial advantage over others in the league for essentially failing how the hell is that fair play? They won't let owners throwing cash in but the premier league does it with 3 clubs every season. The whole FFP is firstly flawed and secondly governed with leniency and often a blind eye
It should just be punishable by relegation. Every club would do whatever they can to avoid it whilst knowing the consequences.
Sooner the club goes out of business n' realises it's potential in the National League the better. It's a total cluster fooook. It needs putting out of it's misery.
I agree that surely there has to be a better way to police this. The league ratifying transfers based on affordability may be extreme but it would likely have stopped Wigan paying £4m for Moore.
The EFL is essentially a boys club, with the club chairmen protecting their own interests. FFP punishments might be handed out by an 'independent' body but at the end of the day the EFL will look after their own if they don't like the judgement. A league run with clubs allowed to lose £39 million over 3 years and some to get £60+ million in parachute payments over 3 years is a joke anyway. They call that financial fair play???
Man City decision reversed they can now play in European Football Competitions . However they’ve fined them an extra ten million so at least the FIFA Headquarters Christmas share outwill be looked forward to this year .
£60million over three years? It’s north of £90mil (unless you were only in the premier league for one season, you only get about £75mil over two years then...) It is a joke - but a separate argument to the ffp one. You might argue, if you were a club like sheffield Wednesday with an owner wanting to, but not permitted to, spend his money on the club, that parachute payments make it impossible to meet ffp regulations and be competitive. A club like ours will argue clubs not meeting ffp when we always do makes it impossible for us to be competitive. As it is, both parachute payments and ffp are here to stay. We can only hope that ffp rules are governed more tightly and punished accordingly. It won’t be.
I'm starting to think it's all a waste of time. If the owners of a club want to pump money then just let them have at it.
