Financial Fair Play - will it even work?

'Financial Fair Play' has been floated around a lot recently, most notably in our LW club where we are constantly repeating how it is vital we get to the premiership before it happens. But does anyone actually know how it works? I thought I didn't have a clue because in my heads understanding there were too many loopholes and flaws. But after reading up it turns out I was pretty much spot on afterall.

For those that don't know, the 'real' financial fair play applies really only in the top leagues where European football is a possibility. The general ethos is you can't spend more than you are earning, but in actual figures that equates to teams that lose more than 40 million pounds over a rolling three year period are subject to penalties including suspension from European competitions, transfer embargoes and heavy fines.

Following this example, the football league set up their own version for the championship through to league 2. In their version however the amount you are allowed to lose each year is banded, from 8 million in te championship to 6 million in league two. This then is expected to drop every year down to between 4 and 2 million. The football league can't ban you from European football, but they can still transfer embargo and fine you.

Now the flaws I and others see. The most obvious one in my opinion is the ignorance to the fact teams like Manchester United and Chelsea have a much greater income than say Wigan Athletic. The system is supposed to level the playing ground transfer fee wise but it doesn't - it means the teams that make the most money will always have an advantage, and those teams with low incomes may even find it harder to punch above their weight than they can now. When you compare even our top teams against Barcelona and Real Madrid's incomes however, you start wondering how we'd ever be able to develop the best teams in the world.

The second problem is the possible abusal of the system. Sponsorships being in extra, perfectly legal, income. Manchester Unted for example have a sponsor for near enough everything that delivers them hundreds of millions every year. Do Stoke and Sunderland have enough of an international reputation to match that sort of global sponsorship? Not to mention the ethics of it - people went nuts when Newcastle picked Wonga for a sponsor. If a company with a shady business practice give you 50 million pounds a year to put their name on your shirt, the difference between relegation and survival potentially, the team would probably take it.

I'm not sue it fixes anything, and potentially even makes it worse.

I need.a lie down after reading that,

No it wont solve anything, Howeverbmay make it bit fairer to less fortunate teams who hvent got 100 mill to spend every transfer window

The point is though, the top teams can still afford to spend 100million every window, so long as they don't show extensive losses. Which they won't as they'll find a way to wangle it.

The reason it won't work is because, as you mentioned, owners can simply put £100,000,000 into the club through sponsorship deals. Problem sorted.

Doubt it will work. Although it appears a good idea, it was Platini's vote winner when he was campaigning to be UEFA president. It isn't possible to fully enforce because, as has been mentioned above, clubs can hide cash donations from benefactors through the finances. It's another farcical, ill conceived idea by the football powers that be. It will be a good day when someone useful runs UEFA or FIFA but it's simply too corrupt for that

If FIFA truly wants to alter football finances forever, the only truly profitable sporting model is that of American Football.

Seasons take place in a much shorter period of time, leagues are broken down into small groups and there are no top flight games on Friday's or Saturday's in order to ensure that the amateur and college games played on those days receive maximum exposure without competition from the top tier.

But if they won't even put a microchip in a football they aren't going to do anything big that helps football are they?!

The worst thing, presuming no club can weasel around it will be that the best teams will remain as so for far longer that we have now. The FFP system will help turn the top echelons of the game into locked groups that will dominate for untold years. At least now we get new elite teams, even if it is by cash.

But also, owners have been spunking money into clubs for decades. It just so happens that now it's the popular thing to do and it's done with billions.

The Lad wrote:The worst thing, presuming no club can weasel around it will be that the best teams will remain as so for far longer that we have now. The FFP system will help turn the top echelons of the game into locked groups that will dominate for untold years. At least now we get new elite teams, even if it is by cash.

But also, owners have been spunking money into clubs for decades. It just so happens that now it's the popular thing to do and it's done with billions.