Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
How about the near misses?
Bury (34 Viewers)
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
How about the near misses?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
There’s always near misses but the accusation against the EFL gets muddied
They are now scrutinising the owner and saying he’s not fit for purpose and will pull the plug
Now I suspect if a consortium turned up consisting of Bryan Richardson, Peter Ridsdale and Owen Oysten rolled into town and the choice was accept this offer or die Bury fans would take the offer and the EFL would be lambasted for blocking it
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
The near misses happen because of the attitude described above. Take Derby selling their ground and offering Rooney an obscene contract to again gamble at the top flight. If it works they’ll get endless praise and if it doesn’t there will be a cold shoulder.
It goes beyond the EFL in culpability for the problem and lack of gumption tackling it
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Again that’s a commercial choice a company has made and the EFL cannot intervene in business practices
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Where did I say they should-the problem goes far beyond them and it is ordinary fans who pay the price. That said, they rubber stamped Wolves’ insanity in their promotion season
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
But isn't the fit and proper persons test supposed to scrutinise the owner BEFORE they buy the club and fuck it up.
If the EFL are now deciding he's not fit and proper why was this not flagged up during the initial investigation? All it shows it that their own system is a complete shambles and they're not fit for purpose.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
What other governing body in any industry does that?
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
The efl will accept virtually anybody in their quest to keep 72 clubs
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Think they wanted anyone to keep the club afloat. Really odd that CCFC fans think to blame other clubs for poor ownership
Nick
Administrator
It's more pointing out the efl can't really do that much.
They spent loads of money they didn't have to get promoted.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Who sanctioned the deals then? As before the problem as a whole goes beyond the League but when you have Wolves spending £15-20m on single players in the Championship shouldn’t at least some scrutiny be applied?
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
But if they're going to put that test in place what's the point if they just wave it through and only actually properly look into it when it goes tits up and it's too late.
Either get rid of the test and say it's up to the owners of a business to decide who they sell to, or conduct the investigation properly prior to the sale. Don't just use it as some lip-service to make it seem like you give a shit and want to protect clubs and fans.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
What test are you going to put in place that will tell you how someone will run a football club 1, 2 or 5 years later?
Realistically football club are businesses. The EFL have no power to stop anyone legally allowed buying a business. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point we end up with someone buying a club who fails the test but still owns the club. What do the EFL do then, kick that club out of the league?
The problem isn't the fit and proper test, the problem is clubs not being self sustaining and that seems to be a problem nobody is keen on fixing.
Nick
Administrator
Sanctioned what deals?
The club's are businesses, there's no point shouting at the efl because of people spending way over what they bring in.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
They put in a test because of idiots who think they should
If sisu had took this club over two years ago and operated its policy on financial self sustained then they’d have been accused of being disgraceful owners not prepared to invest - i.e not pissing money up the wall to try and get promotion
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
What a joke
Grendel
Well-Known Member
So you think a body can act against a PLC and it’s shareholders?
You seem a bit dumb a lot of the time to be honest
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
I’m shouting at the attitude. It doesn’t have to be encouraged
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Do you think the SMMT should have powers to block automotive manufacturers selling to others as that is what you are suggesting
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
It already tries to by retrospectively fining overspenders and by attempting some kind of FFP.
Would be easy to trade ad homs with you but really what’s the point-you never admit a mistake to the point of absurdity
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Do you think we should be encouraging poor practices or promoting responsible ones?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
No as FFP is a legislative process the company agreed to sign up to as part of becoming involved in a specific industry - it’s a regulation not a view on who can purchase the shares of a limited company
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Changing the argument-FFP could be extended in the form of absolute or relative spending caps that are accounted for during transactions
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Well I’d imagine the customers of Bury were celebrating promotion last year and would have not been as keen on a live in budget 15th place finish
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
You really just don’t get it
Grendel
Well-Known Member
A governing body can put in regulations but it can’t dictate who buys football clubs
I don’t believe in FFP regulations - and fans only do if their club becomes a victim of owners who want to behave in a live within your means mentality
Grendel
Well-Known Member
No you don’t - honestly you come across as a 15 year old whose doing a GCSE in business studies
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Much stricter FFP is the road we need to go down. You have to force clubs to start living within their means and have punishments that will stop teams breaching the rules.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
I'm not arguing about who gets to buy clubs it's about the attitudes towards clubs who massively overspend. That said-German football successfully maintains its 50+1 ownership rule...
Look at what the English game has turned into and ask if it's actually worth it
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
If not pushing clubs to live within their means what is the solution? Or are you just accepting that every club needs to find a new owner every few years prepared to chuck millions in with no return?
Would you enforce that with regulation? There are rules and regulation around entry to the league at the moment, although mostly linked to ground and facilities. Owners having to agree to fund to some sort of salary floor without loading any money put in to the club as debt.
Something needs to change. Yes there has always been clubs who get in to trouble financially but not on the scale we are seeing in recent years.
The alternative is we accept there are too many clubs. I'm certain if you were starting a professional league from scratch you'd have nowhere near the number of clubs we currently have. Do we need to just live with the fact we're going to lose a lot of clubs before we get to a sustainable number.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Then when you get failing clubs you will have fewer potential owners wishing to buy them. You can only put in fairly limited rules around this as heavy restriction could result in legal challenges
Grendel
Well-Known Member
So you’d like the German model here? That’s interesting shall we talk about the 3rd tier of German football?
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
You won't get failing clubs if they are forced to operate within tolerable limits.