| FFP Decision Incoming?! 02:59 - May 17 with 13916 views | FredManRave |
Could be as soon as next week according to The Times article.
I'm apolitical so I'm not registered with The Times but if anybody is and could post the full article I'm sure we'd all appreciate it...
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/sport/qpr-set-for-verdict-over-fine-jh58rhz3d
Queens Park Rangers will learn this month whether they will face a fine of £57.9 million for a possible breach of spending limits in winning promotion to the Premier League three years ago.
The west London club’s dispute with the Football League will be heard by an arbitration panel, made up of three QCs, at a hearing next week.
If QPR win the argument, it could have a knock-on effect for Bournemouth and Leicester City, who have also challenged the League’s attempts to impose a fine on them for recording sizeable losses during their promotion to the top flight. Leicester claim the regulations were “unlawful”.
QPR, who were relegated after just one season back in the Premier League, challenged the legality and accounting principles of… |  |
| |  |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 07:05 - May 17 with 5922 views | PunteR |
QPR, who were relegated after just one season back in the Premier League, challenged the legality and accounting principles of… football agents and Harry Redknap . |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 09:40 - May 17 with 5694 views | terryb |
So, will it be stick one finger to the Football League, or will be have a transfer fund of zero & probable embargo?
Our biggest moment since the Ale Faurlin transfer hearing!
I was more confident of that outcome than I am this time! |  | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 09:42 - May 17 with 5684 views | robith |
I suspect it will be a compromise of a large enough fine to seem like the league has done something, but not so much as to upset us too much. FFP is on pretty shaky legal ground and the league won't want to create a situation that causes the whole thing to collapse |  | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 09:53 - May 17 with 5643 views | Lincoln_Hoop |
Full article:
Queens Park Rangers will learn this month whether they will face a fine of £57.9 million for a possible breach of spending limits in winning promotion to the Premier League three years ago.
The west London club’s dispute with the Football League will be heard by an arbitration panel, made up of three QCs, at a hearing next week.
If QPR win the argument, it could have a knock-on effect for Bournemouth and Leicester City, who have also challenged the League’s attempts to impose a fine on them for recording sizeable losses during their promotion to the top flight. Leicester claim the regulations were “unlawful”.
QPR, who were relegated after just one season back in the Premier League, challenged the legality and accounting principles of the Football League’s Financial Fair Play rules, which at the time restricted clubs to maximum losses of £8 million. While the club announced an annual loss of £9.8 million for the 2013-14 season, when they were promoted through the play-offs, they wrote off £60 million in loans and that figure was transferred to profit and loss as an “exceptional item”.
The Football League says that such equity injections are not permitted and argued over the accountancy. QPR declined to comment. |  | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 10:00 - May 17 with 5608 views | stevec |
When you look at how the FL have stood back and done nothing whilst some owners have ravaged clubs like Orient and Blackpool, allowing them to drown in their debt, it would be somewhat ironic if they punish a Chairman and Board who covered every last penny of the debt they had accumulated.
Despite his many mistakes, I hope we back TF to the hilt on this one. |  | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 10:04 - May 17 with 5606 views | johncharles |
I hope we drive a waggon and horses through their stupid and preposterous rules and I Bournmouth and Leicester join in the fun. |  |
| Strong and stable my arse. |
| |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 10:07 - May 17 with 5589 views | daveB |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 09:40 - May 17 by terryb |
So, will it be stick one finger to the Football League, or will be have a transfer fund of zero & probable embargo?
Our biggest moment since the Ale Faurlin transfer hearing!
I was more confident of that outcome than I am this time! |
It's a fine or nothing, you only get a transfer embargo if you don't get promoted |  | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 10:19 - May 17 with 5547 views | danehoop |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 10:07 - May 17 by daveB |
It's a fine or nothing, you only get a transfer embargo if you don't get promoted |
If the legality of FFP were sound and our position as bad as the league want to spin it, we would have been punished and penalised already. That it has dragged on for so long and is going to such extraordinarily complex process underlines how weak the leagues position is. |  |
| Never knowingly understood |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 10:43 - May 17 with 5490 views | switchingcode |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 10:00 - May 17 by stevec |
When you look at how the FL have stood back and done nothing whilst some owners have ravaged clubs like Orient and Blackpool, allowing them to drown in their debt, it would be somewhat ironic if they punish a Chairman and Board who covered every last penny of the debt they had accumulated.
Despite his many mistakes, I hope we back TF to the hilt on this one. |
FFP is a dead horse,what is the difference between Sky pumping in millions to a club that can be used in FFP than a rich owner who can also afford to do the same. | | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 10:57 - May 17 with 5454 views | daveB |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 10:00 - May 17 by stevec |
When you look at how the FL have stood back and done nothing whilst some owners have ravaged clubs like Orient and Blackpool, allowing them to drown in their debt, it would be somewhat ironic if they punish a Chairman and Board who covered every last penny of the debt they had accumulated.
Despite his many mistakes, I hope we back TF to the hilt on this one. |
You are right and the owners writing off the debt should be seen as a good thing but it all depends on what FFP is for, if it is to reduce clubs debts and make sure they don't go out of business then we've done nothing wrong. If it's to cap spending and create a league where the richest clubs do well and the poorest have to suffer then we're in trouble | | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 10:59 - May 17 with 5443 views | stevec |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 10:43 - May 17 by switchingcode |
FFP is a dead horse,what is the difference between Sky pumping in millions to a club that can be used in FFP than a rich owner who can also afford to do the same. |
Exactly. You'd think the FL could be a little more imaginative and make club owners who spend big put personal funds aside to cover any potential losses. There's only 2 transfer windows and if year ends for football clubs were statutory at 30th June (they may well be?) and basic accounts presented to the League quarterly it wouldn't be too hard to control.
It's not that difficult for medium/large companies to do quarterly accounts, the government are already well ahead on making companies doing this in the very near future. | | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 11:08 - May 17 with 5414 views | Northernr |
The main thrust of QPR's argument is we'd entered into the (ludicrous) player contracts before the rules came in and couldn't just rip them up which seems pretty reasonable to me.
The whole thing is a farce. If you're that bothered about club debt then simply make the rule you can spend as much as you like but owners have to write off any losses and not put the liability on the club, which ours have done.
Better still do away with it altogether and just enforce a proper fit and proper owner test. |  | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 11:08 - May 17 with 5410 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
I'd welcome a transfer embargo at QPR.
We need a break from that bi annual circus.
As Norf said, strenghten the fit and proper person test. [Post edited 17 May 2017 11:10]
|  | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 11:23 - May 17 with 5357 views | daveB |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 11:08 - May 17 by Northernr |
The main thrust of QPR's argument is we'd entered into the (ludicrous) player contracts before the rules came in and couldn't just rip them up which seems pretty reasonable to me.
The whole thing is a farce. If you're that bothered about club debt then simply make the rule you can spend as much as you like but owners have to write off any losses and not put the liability on the club, which ours have done.
Better still do away with it altogether and just enforce a proper fit and proper owner test. |
although I agree with you playing devils advocate what the league will argue is fine the club could do nothing about the contracts given out in 2011-13 but we did know the rules when we spent big on Austin and Matt Phillips and handed out good contracts to the likes of Dunne, Henry, Simpson etc and made several loan and free signings other clubs couldn't afford which got us promoted. | | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 11:25 - May 17 with 5338 views | PinnerPaul |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 09:42 - May 17 by robith |
I suspect it will be a compromise of a large enough fine to seem like the league has done something, but not so much as to upset us too much. FFP is on pretty shaky legal ground and the league won't want to create a situation that causes the whole thing to collapse |
Yes agree.
If it was going to be a large fine or nothing it would haven announced ages ago - somewhere in between is my guess as well.
This isn't a court of law, so in theory, either side could still continue with this after the "verdict" of the independent panel. | | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 11:26 - May 17 with 5334 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
My question is, how do we pin it all on Les? | | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 12:01 - May 17 with 5236 views | nadera78 |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 11:25 - May 17 by PinnerPaul |
Yes agree.
If it was going to be a large fine or nothing it would haven announced ages ago - somewhere in between is my guess as well.
This isn't a court of law, so in theory, either side could still continue with this after the "verdict" of the independent panel. |
Depending on the format it could be a binding decision. | | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 12:13 - May 17 with 5191 views | stevec |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 11:08 - May 17 by Northernr |
The main thrust of QPR's argument is we'd entered into the (ludicrous) player contracts before the rules came in and couldn't just rip them up which seems pretty reasonable to me.
The whole thing is a farce. If you're that bothered about club debt then simply make the rule you can spend as much as you like but owners have to write off any losses and not put the liability on the club, which ours have done.
Better still do away with it altogether and just enforce a proper fit and proper owner test. |
Agree with this but there was some interesting thing on the radio recently which mentioned a proper fit and proper owner test would have passed most of the worst miscreants anyway, it's what they do once they've got their feet under the table that's caused most of the problems. | | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 12:24 - May 17 with 5159 views | daveB |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 12:13 - May 17 by stevec |
Agree with this but there was some interesting thing on the radio recently which mentioned a proper fit and proper owner test would have passed most of the worst miscreants anyway, it's what they do once they've got their feet under the table that's caused most of the problems. |
would help if they continued to monitor the owners and keep checking rather than you've passed the test so do what you like.
Is like passing a driving test, you might have a licence to drive but if you keep running people over it gets taken away, in football you can rape a club but the football league do nothing as the owner passed a test saying he wouldn't do that 3 years ago. | | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 13:09 - May 17 with 5013 views | WeaverQPR |
Fine will probably be 'undisclosed' |  |
| |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 13:17 - May 17 with 4965 views | TGRRRSSS |
INterstingly the people who failed Fit and proper test for Hull just bought Reading... |  | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 14:59 - May 17 with 4796 views | terryb |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 11:23 - May 17 by daveB |
although I agree with you playing devils advocate what the league will argue is fine the club could do nothing about the contracts given out in 2011-13 but we did know the rules when we spent big on Austin and Matt Phillips and handed out good contracts to the likes of Dunne, Henry, Simpson etc and made several loan and free signings other clubs couldn't afford which got us promoted. |
I'm fairly sure this will be their arguement, plus that we accepted FFP when we rejoined the Football League in 2013.
We definitely would have had a better case if we hadn't ignored it! | | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 15:14 - May 17 with 4747 views | Northernr |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 13:09 - May 17 by WeaverQPR |
Fine will probably be 'undisclosed' |
Would have to appear in next year's accounts. | | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 15:32 - May 17 with 4699 views | daveB |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 14:59 - May 17 by terryb |
I'm fairly sure this will be their arguement, plus that we accepted FFP when we rejoined the Football League in 2013.
We definitely would have had a better case if we hadn't ignored it! |
The whole thing will rest on if writing off the loans was acceptable or not | | | |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 16:35 - May 17 with 4576 views | QPR_John |
| FFP Decision Incoming?! on 14:59 - May 17 by terryb |
I'm fairly sure this will be their arguement, plus that we accepted FFP when we rejoined the Football League in 2013.
We definitely would have had a better case if we hadn't ignored it! |
Did they not change the original FFP rules (the rules we are charged with contravening) and those in force in 2013 are different and less strict [Post edited 17 May 2017 16:36]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
