Financial Fair Play

[archanios]

Las litt innpå der om Chelsea og FFP.

 

"Chelsea could reasonably afford to spend ridiculous money on Radamel Falcao and still comply with FFP, but doing so will almost certainly mean the departures of quite a few legendary members of the squad. I'll probably never be convinced that this purchase would be anything approaching wise, but just looking at the rumored numbers, it definitely can be done. If we do, though, we better start filling holes from within, and the fans better accept the fact that the "old guard" are not going to be here. Unfortunately we can't have our cake and eat it too, as Michel Platini will take it away from us."

 

Greit at det er ein fantastisk spelar, men det er snakk om at ein spelar skal erstatte to spelarar som ikkje er i nærleiken av å spele spiss (hoppar som bloggaren glatt over Ferreira, Hilario og Malouda). De har sjølvsagt nokre unggutar som kan kome tilbake og forsterke desse posisjonane, men det spørs om det vil vere godt nok, og om de plutselig må hente inn ein eller to spelarar til for å framleis ha ein tropp som er solid nok. Han reknar jo med at inntektene frå CL vil vere lavare enn det har vore siste året (noko som er tydelig alt i år) og om de må hente inn fleire spelarar for å kunne kjempe om både å kome til CL, samt å gjere det såpass godt at inntektene er tilstrekkelige, så har også "prisen av Falcao auka" og då spørs det om det er lønnt likevel? Eg trur nok at om ein ser vekk ifrå det sportslege ei lita stund, så er det eit økonomisk sjansespel, men det har vel kanskje ikkje Roman brydd seg så mykje om til no.

[Tåkefyrste]

Skal ikke forundre meg om Lampard kommer til united. Ferguson elsker jo gamlinger.

[Latias]

Haha. Fem spillere ut for å få plass til én spiller? Hva med å faktisk begynne å produsere egne spillere selv? Gleder meg til den dagen Roman går lei av leketøyet sitt og noen yanks tar over stafettpinnen.

[archanios]

Ei mogelegheit for dei er jo å direkte erstatte Lamps og Cole med Josh McEachran og Patrick van Aanholt. Dei tre andre er strengt tatt ikkje brukt likevel. Samtidig er det vanskelig å seie korleis to unggutar vil klare seg om dei skal inn å erstatte to svært etablerte og erfarne spelarar og då virkar det meir sannsynleg at det kan kome fleire signeringar for å dekke opp

[Aleks]

Las litt innpå der om Chelsea og FFP.

 

"Chelsea could reasonably afford to spend ridiculous money on Radamel Falcao and still comply with FFP, but doing so will almost certainly mean the departures of quite a few legendary members of the squad. I'll probably never be convinced that this purchase would be anything approaching wise, but just looking at the rumored numbers, it definitely can be done. If we do, though, we better start filling holes from within, and the fans better accept the fact that the "old guard" are not going to be here. Unfortunately we can't have our cake and eat it too, as Michel Platini will take it away from us."

 

Greit at det er ein fantastisk spelar, men det er snakk om at ein spelar skal erstatte to spelarar som ikkje er i nærleiken av å spele spiss (hoppar som bloggaren glatt over Ferreira, Hilario og Malouda). De har sjølvsagt nokre unggutar som kan kome tilbake og forsterke desse posisjonane, men det spørs om det vil vere godt nok, og om de plutselig må hente inn ein eller to spelarar til for å framleis ha ein tropp som er solid nok. Han reknar jo med at inntektene frå CL vil vere lavare enn det har vore siste året (noko som er tydelig alt i år) og om de må hente inn fleire spelarar for å kunne kjempe om både å kome til CL, samt å gjere det såpass godt at inntektene er tilstrekkelige, så har også "prisen av Falcao auka" og då spørs det om det er lønnt likevel? Eg trur nok at om ein ser vekk ifrå det sportslege ei lita stund, så er det eit økonomisk sjansespel, men det har vel kanskje ikkje Roman brydd seg så mykje om til no.

Jepp. Blir nok mest problematisk å skaffe ny venstre back. Har blitt linket til navn som Marcelo og Coentrao. Altså ikke noen som kommer særlig billig. Erstatting for Lampard blir ikke så problematisk.

 

Haha. Fem spillere ut for å få plass til én spiller? Hva med å faktisk begynne å produsere egne spillere selv? Gleder meg til den dagen Roman går lei av leketøyet sitt og noen yanks tar over stafettpinnen.

Har du fulgt med på Chelsea de siste årene så har du kanskje fått med deg at det er rimelig naturlig at disse spillerne drar uansett om noen kommer inn eller ikke. Cole kunne gjerne blitt, og Lampard vil det bli trist og ta avskjed med, men resten holder ikke mål. Spissplassen er det naturlig og forsterke med tanke på at også Sturridge mest sannsynlig drar. Er allikevel skeptisk til akkurat Falcao.

[Emils.]

Haha. Fem spillere ut for å få plass til én spiller? Hva med å faktisk begynne å produsere egne spillere selv? Gleder meg til den dagen Roman går lei av leketøyet sitt og noen yanks tar over stafettpinnen.

 

Utskifting kalles det. Hva skal vi uansett med Malouda, Hilario og Ferreira? Lampard kunne fått blitt mener jeg, samme med Cole. Men når de ikke blir enig med klubben er det lite man kan gjøre.

 

Vi har faktisk spennende talenter på vei opp. Tillegg til at mange glemmer hvor unge mange av våre faste også er. Vi har også gode spillere som kan komme hjem og bli en stor del av klubben.

[Aleks]

Tro det eller ei så satser vi faktisk på yngre spillere og. For å sitere meg selv:

 

For å sette det litt i perspektiv. Fant litt forskjellige tall på dette så rett meg gjerne om jeg tar feil.

 

United-spillere på lån:

 

Fabio - QPR

Ben Amos - Hull City

John Cofie - Sheffield United

Reece Brown - Coventry City

Sean McGinty - Oxford United

Luke Giverin - Royal Antwerp

Gyliano van Velzen - Royal Antwerp

 

Totalt 7 spillere. (http://www.manutd.co...-two-games.aspx)

 

Liverpool-spillere på lån:

 

Danny Wilson

Villyan Bijev

Andy Carroll

Henoc Mukendi

Jay Spearing

 

Totalt 5 spillere. (http://en.wikipedia..../Liverpool_F.C.)

 

Arsenal-spillere på lån:

 

Ryo - Wigan Athletic

Emmanuel Frimpong - Charlton Athletic

Benik Afobe - Bolton Wanderers

Conor Henderson - Coventry City

Chuks Aneke - Crewe Alexandra

Craig Eastmond - Colchester United

Sanchez Watt - Colchester United

Daniel Boateng - Oxford United

Philip Roberts - Inverness Caledonian Thistle

Denilson - Sao Paulo

Nicklas Bendtner - Juventus

Joel Campbell - Real Betis

Ju Young Park - Celta Vigo

Wellington - SD Ponferradina

Samuel Galindo - Club Deportivo Lugo

 

Totalt 15 spillere på lån. (http://www.arsenal.c...senal-s-loanees)

 

Chelsea-spillere på lån:

 

PATRICK BAMFORD

JEFFREY BRUMA

PATRICK VAN AANHOLT

GAËL KAKUTA

SAM HUTCHINSON

JOSH MCEACHRAN

ROMELU LUKAKU

KEVIN DE BRUYNE

MICHAEL ESSIEN

YOSSI BENAYOUN

MATEJ DELAC

THORGAN HAZARD

THIBAUT COURTOIS

SAM WALKER

TODD KANE

TOMAS KALAS

ARCHANGE NKUMU

KENNETH OMERUO

NATHANIEL CHALOBAH

AMIN AFFANE

BEN GORDON

CONOR CLIFFORD

ULISES DAVILA

MILAN LALKOVIC

JHON PIREZ

 

Totalt 25 spillere på lån. (http://www.chelseafc...on-loan-players)

 

Og selv om vi fjerner spillere som Essien og Benayoun har vi faktisk et ganske høyt antall spillere på lån. Lurer på om det er noen i PL som har høyere?

Problemet er at vi bytter manager hele tiden, som ikke får pusterom til å satse på disse. Det er også en lang prosess som tar tid, og hvor United ligger milevis foran oss. Pengebruken er også et problem som jobber mot dette, men når FFP begynner å presse enda mer så skal man ikke se bort i fra at navn på denne listen kommer til å dukke opp.

[Emils.]

Vi er faktisk i rute med tanke på FFP. Vi gikk vel i pluss i år så.

[Aleks]

Ja, men akseptabelt underskudd blir redusert mer og mer og ender vel på 15m tror jeg. Så ting må endres. Og vi har ikke 25 spillere ute på lån for moro skyld.

[archanios]

Vi er faktisk i rute med tanke på FFP. Vi gikk vel i pluss i år så.

 

Ja for det er jo svært imponerande mtp at klubben skulle vere uavhengig av Roman sine pengar innen 2010.

[Aleks]

"Málaga CF (ESP): The club is excluded from participating in the next UEFA club competition for which it would otherwise qualify in the next four seasons (i.e. 2013/14, 2014/15, 2015/16, 2016/17). In addition, Málaga will be excluded from a subsequent UEFA competition for which it would otherwise qualify (in the next four seasons) if it does not prove, by 31 March 2013, that it has no overdue payables towards football clubs or towards employees and/or social/tax authorities, in accordance with the UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations.

 

Málaga has also been fined €300,000. The prize money withheld on 11 September 2012 (as a conservatory measure) will be released." - http://www.uefa.com/uefa/footballfirst/protectingthegame/financialfairplay/news/newsid=1908817.html

[Jotun]

http://www.vg.no/sport/fotball/artikkel.php?artid=10048985

 

Aiaiaiai....... Her skal det brukes kronasjer tenker eg!

[Lunalotic]

http://www.vg.no/spo...?artid=10048985

 

Aiaiaiai....... Her skal det brukes kronasjer tenker eg!

Falcao til Leeds?

[Latias]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2013/jan/09/premier-league-financial-fairplay-away-fans

 

You will have heard about the 900 tickets Manchester City have returned to Arsenal for the Premier League match on Sunday because they were considered overpriced at £62, and how this is supposed to be a watershed moment or tipping point in the madly inflationary English game.

 

You will have heard less about the 2,000 or so City fans who stumped up £62 each quite happily – well, perhaps not happily, but they bought the tickets – and that Arsenal are unlikely to lose out because their own supporters will willingly take up the shortfall, £62 being around the going rate for a Category A game at the Emirates. In most cases, especially for big games, big clubs can readily find buyers for unwanted tickets in the away end, so is this really a significant protest about seat prices or is it a step on the road to reduced allocation for visiting supporters?

 

One thing is clear: clubs are concerned only about selling tickets. They don't really mind who buys them and, given the extra stewarding costs and segregation issues that come with away supporters, it would not be an enormous surprise to see clubs pitching the price of away seats sky high to keep the numbers of travelling fans as low as possible. Some would argue they are already doing that. Certainly the premium that away supporters generally have to pay is an unfair burden on people who also have increased transport and subsistence costs.

 

If you think of where Newcastle, say, site the away contingent it is easy to suppose clubs with plenty of home support are going out of their way to make visitors uncomfortable. Against that there are clubs such as Wigan who are grateful for all the paying support they can get and will happily allow away fans to fill an entire end behind a goal.

 

The point of all this is not only to show that away fans often get a raw deal but that clubs can pretty much treat them how they wish. There are no hard and fast rules and perhaps there should be. One Manchester City spokesman, commenting on the refusal to pay the £62 Arsenal were asking, said plenty of fans could have afforded it but felt the London club were taking the mickey and refused on principle to fork out so much. Fair enough, though Arsenal fans would point out that while the average price for an Emirates seat over the course of a season works out at around £37, a Category A game such as one against the champions would cost them in the region of £60 too.

 

The top London clubs are notoriously expensive and Arsenal are the dearest of the lot now the wage bill is so high, as a result of having to pay players exorbitant amounts to prevent them leaving for, er, Manchester City. It would be wrong to pin the blame for high ticket prices elsewhere on City supporters – the club did not stop to check with its fanbase before doing its bit to contribute to the inflationary rise by throwing stupid money at players such as Robinho and Emmanuel Adebayor – but what City have to come to terms with is that since winning the title they are Category A, top drawer, and will be priced accordingly.

 

Broadly speaking, if significant numbers of Arsenal fans are paying £60 for Sunday's game then City cannot put up too many objections. They are not exactly impoverished country cousins, coming down from the frozen north. A more interesting question is how happy Arsenal fans feel about paying so much to watch a game. All too clearly they do not feel they are getting value for money at the most expensive stadium in the league and now a new television deal has been signed that will inject even more into the collective coffers from next season, they are at the front of those clubs petitioning to reduce prices across the board to give supporters a fairer deal.

 

The point has been made that Premier League clubs could make every seat price around £20 cheaper (or knock about a third off in the case of less expensive tickets) and still make a profit from the extra TV revenue. This would help return the game to the supporters, promote happiness and goodwill all around and do much to embrace the spirt of Lord Justice Taylor's post-Hillsborough recommendations when he said that all-seat stadiums need not involve huge price hikes being passed on to the spectator. It isn't going to happen, of course. Football clubs would far rather pour most of their new-found income into the pockets of players and their agents rather than think of the future and invest a little in their continued support.

 

But I digress. Away ticket prices became a bone of contention long before Arsenal began charging £62 for them. We are only halfway through this season and I have lost count of the number of complaints I have heard from away fans about iniquitous prices. We let them in for £20 and they charge us £35, for example. Or they put the prices up for us and not for themselves. City's return of 900 overpriced tickets may not matter too much in itself if Arsenal can easily sell them elsewhere – thus proving, in the daft way that supply and demand operates, that they were not all that overpriced after all – though someone soon should stop and think. Nine hundred tickets at £62 equates to around £56,000 of revenue. That might be chicken feed to Arsenal, or City for that matter, but most football clubs could put £56,000 to very good use indeed. Just think how good Bradford City, allegedly put together for a mere £7,500, could become with seven times as much to spend.

 

Leading clubs do not appear to be blase only about the revenue away fans can contribute, they underestimate their contribution to the match-day atmosphere as well. If you don't have two sets of supporters you don't have a proper football match and the increasingly token presence of away fans in the Premier League compares unfavourably with the greater numbers and enhanced atmosphere at cup games.

 

West Ham have already sold out their allocation for next week's FA Cup replay at Old Trafford – £45 a pop, since you ask – and while that may seem at odds with City's reluctance to pay high prices for a similar trip in the opposite direction, remember that Irons fans are keen to be in on a potentially historic I-was-there moment, certainly something to boast about in future, and are more than willing to provide their own input into the occasion.

 

That is the quality away supporters find missing from too many Premier League games, where they are fast becoming almost passive observers. They are often treated appallingly and overcharged for it, and in the interests of preserving what is, or used to be, unique about football, some sort of financial fair play for away support should come into operation. The cost of an away ticket for a Premier League game should be no more than the cheapest price for a home supporter. The two prices should always be set at the same rate. Away fans get the cheapest seats and the worst views but they often find themselves having to pay over the odds for the privilege. Away fans are necessary, desirable, and mostly well-behaved these days. The Premier League can afford to treat them better.

 

Blir bortefansen urettferdig behandlet? Koster det altfor mye for en bortekamp? Er det sånne ting man må regne med når det tross alt er hjemmelaget som bestemmer?

[Muggkaare]

Ja. Ja. Nei.

[Emils.]

Var en av de bedre stopperne i PL da han var i B'burn, men absolutt ikke verdt £100k. Coloccini i Newcastle tjener vel halvparten, og han er per dags dato flere hakk over Samba.

 

Et spørsmål, gjelder FFP kun i Europeiske turneringer? Altså CL og EL?

[Latias]

Et spørsmål, gjelder FFP kun i Europeiske turneringer? Altså CL og EL?

 

Er på vei til PL også.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/premier-league/9681983/Premier-League-steps-closer-to-financial-fair-play.html

[Aleks]

Tror det ja. Er vel en pågående diskusjon om det skal innføres i pl og.

[Emils.]

 

 

Er på vei til PL også.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/premier-league/9681983/Premier-League-steps-closer-to-financial-fair-play.html

Åh. Det var jeg ikke klar over. Blir vanskelig for QPR da.

[Emils.]

www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/manchester-city/9847120/Uefa-report-reveals-46-European-clubs-need-funds-to-meet-financial-controls-with-Man-City-one-English-club-at-risk.html

 

City og PSG i trøbbel med FFP.