Why is PSR being scrapped? | Kaveh Solhekol explains new Premier League financial rules
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 апр 2024
- ► Subscribe to Sky Sports News: bit.ly/SkySportsNewsSub
Kaveh Solhekol explains the reasoning behind the Premier League's new financial regulations that will be voted on by clubs. Under the new rules, clubs are likely to be limited to spending 85% of their revenue on squad wages, transfers and agents’ fees.
#SkySportsNews #SkySports #Liverpool
► For the latest developments on this story: qrcode.skysports.com/skysport...
More from Sky Sports on RUclips:
► Sky Sports Retro: bit.ly/SkySportsRetroSub
► Sky Sports: bit.ly/SkySportsSub
► Sky Sports Football: bit.ly/SSFootballSub
► Sky Sports Boxing: bit.ly/SSBoxingSub
► Sky Sports F1: bit.ly/SubscribeSkyF1
► Sky Sports Cricket: bit.ly/SubscribeSkyCricket
► Sky Sports Golf: bit.ly/SubscribeSkySportsGolf
► To enquire about licensing Sky Sports News content, you can find out more here: www.skysports.com/more-sports... 
Спорт
Don't need a 6 min conversation, it's simple, so they don't have to deduct points from Man City & Chelsea.
Chelsea haven’t been charged and were not guilty. City are different
@@nathanhenry7692chelsea need to make up €100m in sales in the next year or two otherwise they dont meet the criteria (i think)
Even if that's true you, can't be charged of a breach/crime and be judged on a new law.. Well in the real world you can't, but i guess this is football they'll make it up as they go...
Cry about chelsea all you want, fact is without them, the super league would've already started.The americans will jump ship in a heart beat as will city if the 115 charges actually stick. Then any financial regulation goes out the window.
It’s should go back to the time of the offense, so the penalty should be points deduction
Getting rid of PSR so Man City get away with the 115 charges.
It would only start in the 2024-25 season but City aren't charged with PSR so it wouldn't matter even if it didn't.
Yeah, no. Even ignoring the fact that these rules would only apply *beginning next season* (and if a team broke the rules of previous seasons, they still gained an unfair advantage and are subject to punishment)...
Even under these new changes, Man City broke *actual laws* (like lying on official financial documents and money laundering) and would still be in violation of the new rules if they committed the same acts under the new rules!
Yes, I *am* still worried they'll lawyer their way out of facing consequences for the charges, but *not* because of these new rules.
If you waiting for PSR to make your club compete with Man City then keep waiting
@mazdakmina9493 what's you're evidence for this claim because eufa had no evidence at all to support that claim. The PL has no new evidence.
@@russellward4624 LOL Oh, another gaslighter! It was already proven *in court* that Man City's owners falsified documents, and UEFA *proved* it, fined Man City £50 million, and later put a 2-year European competition ban on Man City - which Man City got off of only due to the "technicality" that the statutes of limitation had passed (which it only passed because they *delayed* the ruling by obstructing the investigation)!
Take you pathetic gaslighting somewhere else, cheater lover!
Even if they change the rules, Man City FFP was before the changes so the old rules should apply for them
key word being "should". with how the world works, they're gonna scrape the charges when they make the change. there's no justice left
Well they managed to dodge a bullet like that already, when the PL/FA brought in the rules for associated 3rd party sponsorship it only related to future / new deals and didn't apply to historic or retrospective sponsorships, just another dodgy rule that suited City and other Big 6 clubs.
@pablodrogo City aren't charged with PSR. This is PSR not FFP.
And then they leave for the super league and the rest of the domino's begin to fall. Abramovic was the only owner standing in the way of the super league and you all hounded him out under the false pretence of being a war criminal - for nothing more than paying taxes in his home country. Using the same logic, you're responsible for the million murdered civilians in Iraq because you paid taxes to the uk government. Yall actually deserve the Premier league to crumble because of your fickleness and inability to support the clubs who hold your values at heart.
It's to let of yhe cheating clubs city and Chelsea if nothings done other teams should refuse to play them
I can imagine club owners in a room with the authorities all arguing for the right to spend more money and Daniel Levy sitting quietly at the back sweating.
😂😂😂 nah man
😂😂😂😂😂
the owners loot these clubs in many ways, including mad consultancy fees. they dont care about the game and we are just forced to take it.
"I'm nipping out to the bog guys" 😂
Sat at the back texting his team to commence the water park & rollercoaster designs for the stadium
Are they scrapping them so that City can get away with 115?!
I can't see Richard Masters surviving that - and I don't mean his job.
Ye they will get a massive fine instead of being relegated down the pyramid
Whatever law comes in play, it won't be retrospective.
No. We’ll still be tried over current rules. Charges came in against current rule set.
No.
So PSR isn't fit for purpose? Can Everton and Forest have their points back then?
Let's be clear, the old rules still applied when they did and anyone who broke them is still liable (and that at least *should* include Man City - more on them later)!
For a more simple (purely hypothethical) example, the rule currently states you're not allowed to have >11 players on the field. If a team fielded 12 for multiple games, and they changed the rule *now* to allow 12 players - sorry, those teams fielding 12 still were gaining an unfair advantage by fielding 12 over the teams that only fielded 11!
And if one team was currently under trial for fielding *115* additional players (and had 126 players on the field while other teams played by the rules and only fielded 11), then yes, that trial still moves forward because they *still* broke the rules for a *major* unfair advantage!
Oh, and it should also be noted, even with the rule changes being suggested, Man City *still* would be in breach of them if they did what they did today with the new rules! Again, in the analogy above, they can increase the number of players a team can play to 12, or even 14, or even 20, and Man City *still* would be in *massive* breach of that by fielding 126 (again, it's an example for simplicity sake. The point is, Man City broke the rules *and the law* so severely, no amount of rule changes will keep them out of violation of them! They literally laundered money and doctored their books! These aren't just rule violations, these are *major crimes* that are punishable by *prison* time! And the people being paid through these means, like Roberto Mancini, *knew!* He was being paid under the table, and guaranteed there were many others! No one better dare try to claim, "well the players and coaches didn't know, don't punish them with judgment." That's yet another defense mechanism to refuse to acknowledge the seriousness of the situation)!
Hope that makes sense! I'll be happy to answer any further questions!
City charged against old rules. These dont apply to 115 charges.
Yes it's very possibly corrupt
Then you know f all about the charges.. Do you know the rules have to be voted by 20 clubs? City is even against the new rules
Man City are not being charged with any breach of PSR rules, old or new. This is a massive misconception. They are being charged with, basically, accounting fraud, which is far more serious. The Premier League are accusing them of putting money into their accounts that didn't exist.
Only 14 need to be for in to pass
Definitely some brown envelopes passed out by city owners here.
So they are getting rid of PSR due to it not being fit for purpose but trust the same people who made PSR up to have another go at getting it right.... That makes sense..
Yet the same people are okay with personal payments to Ref's from owners of a competing club, team's breaching T&C's and violating financial agreements is also okay, wonky var lines that don't actually make any sense if you understand basic mathematics and the protection of officials who clearly are controlling the flow and creating drama to maximise 'entertainment' is also okay. But you can't call it out otherwise you face fines and being lambasted in the media. Grim.. I could go on and on too.. This isn't a fair sporting competitive leauge, it's borderline a dictatorship masked as football.
I and I'm sure so many others are loosing trust and faith in the Premier league.
Instead of basing it off the bottom team, which can change every season.
Do an AVERAGE of the non-European slots. Even the average revenue of the entire league should be explored.
This allows lower clubs to spend more, and don't forget the big guns are always lifting the averages up. This average revenue is still way higher than other league winners. This still makes EPL competitive, and maintains the no1 league in the world.
It’s based on broadcast revenue, which is distributed by the league
How do our top clubs compete in Europe then? Are Real Madrid, Barcelona etc going to play by these rules, of course not.
They are the only 2 clubs that pay silly money outside of the prem and Saudi.
@RgjDj1878 but thats because Bayern have a monopoly in Germany. Thier wage bill is double Dortmunds and 28xs the bottom club. So they don't have to pay big transfers or wages because they're the only option in Germany and can't get into bidding wars.
@@russellward4624 monopoly or not they aren’t paying big money. It isn’t mega money to go to a game either. At the end of the day the rate money is going at in the prem it will become a bubble that bursts and everyone will suffer down the pyramid. This is a working class game and fans can’t expect to have to keep footing the bill.
Oh your mean that bankrupt club
@RgjDj1878 because they have a monopoly. Theyre the only club in the country that can pay high wages. That's why they sign every good player from their rivals. Their rivals can't pay wages that even Forrest can pay.
I love how Kaveh explains it so clearly and precisely
All these rules do is prevent investment in clubs. Some clubs outside the big 6 have extremely wealthy owners but are unable to continually break into the top four because they are limited to what they can invest. We are already heading towards having a 1 or 2 team league like France, Spain or Germany because competition is being sucked out year by year. The big teams profited before the rules were brought in and it's the rest that have to suffer now.
Wealthy owners don't want to have to pump huge sums of money into their club every year to cover losses. But if your competitors are doing it, you feel you need to do it too. All that "no restrictions" would do is result in transfer fees and wages spiraling out of control, and then it becomes a race to see who can go into administration first. Every club voted for the new rules, it was a unanimous decision, that tells you everything.
No these rules should prevent some owners like Newcastle buying an entire squad with 1 billion budget every season lol
If the premier league really want to fix something thats actually broken how about starting with the abysmal standard of refereeing and VAR in the league. It is by far the biggest thing hurting their on-field product. These new rules is all just a bunch of shuffling around the deck chairs on the titanic especially while city and chelsea are allowed to continue cooking their books for a decade.
Bending over backwards for City and UAE.
Cancer in our beautiful game.
The 85% rule just cements the status quo
Give Everton and Forest their points back, admit you screwed it all up, and start again when you get yourselves together. Embarrassing.
Fine the 100 million instead. Cheats
No, they cheated.
The rules have not been used. That is the issue.
Everton & Forest want their points back!!
Just making Man City's case stronger,
why don't they just say we have accepted City's bride and would like to forget about them breaking the rules!
That would be great for the league
What I can’t understand is if they’re saying PSR didn’t work then what benefit does the new model provide?
Essentially you’ve gone from being able to make a loss to needing to remain in profit by only spending up to 85% of your revenue?
To me it sounds like even more of a problem than previously. The anchoring makes some sense though but these rules just don’t add up for me.
That’s where I’m kinda at also. The anchoring needs to pass or at least have some form of anchoring such as taking the league average team broadcast revenue as opposed to the lowest teams broadcast revenue. Otherwise I don’t see it working as well as we all hope, but if anchoring doesn’t pass then hopefully I’m wrong!
Next vote.... increase the lowest teams tv rights 😂😂😂 just because Leeds and pompey shat the bed I don't see why we have to strangle the prem with it
Love the panel..keep up the good work…kaveh is 🔥..
It’s being scrapped as part of negotiations with super Rich owners of clubs
I don't think you will ever get a "One size fits all" scenario
Finally some common sense.
This has been waaaay too much Kaveh the last few days, I've reached my quota
Whys it taking so long to charge Citee 😮
The wealthiest club in the world can’t spend, while a club in 500million of debt can spend 200m/season, giving 300k/wk contracts, with no issues… very sustainable 😂
Update to replies:
I’m a Newcastle fan - I know it’s the owners that are wealthy, not the club. It’s not rocket science. However, that is pretty much a technicality in regard to transfer spending since it’s so clear they’d invest and spend what they want if they were allowed to. They’ve openly said this and their actions in other sports are a shining example that they don’t mess around given the chance.
As for servicing any debt - I.e. United - yeah, but it’s still not sustainable in a loss making business in the real world.
LEt me take a wild guess. You think Newcastle is "the wealthiest club in the world"?
So you're telling everyone that you don't understand economic principles. Debt is irrelevant providing it can be serviced through revenue and profits. Most companies have debts.
@@gustaaf1892 problem is, no other club is now allowed to take on that level of debt otherwise newcastle would take out a massive loan
@@jimhuf8102 Newcastle can take out whatever loan it wants to, but it won't increase their revenue or profit. In fact it would reduce their profit because the debt servicing costs would be deducted from those. Newcastle is limited by how much money the club generates.
@stevenhaas9622 newcastle have the wealthiest owners in the world but we are very very far from being a wealthy club 😂
There’s always something new with this league
Corruption is as old as the hills, the only thing 'new' is that it's so blatant.
Kaveh is so good at explaining football rules
This spending limit (of 5 times what the least wealthy club spends) is a decent idea and much fairer than what currently exists.
And that's why many of the big clubs are lobbying against it!
But yes, I absolutely agree it needs to be in place!
Their nothing to discuss, the people responsible are failing to uphold the law
Not sure why it should be based on television revenue. Thats basically saying Sky and TNT control clubs spending or have i picked that up wrong?
Potentially a good idea just need agree on who’s revenue to use
Luxury tax > Salary cap
The MLB is the best example of how well the luxury tax works. Smaller clubs win the World Series fairly often.
I agree! However I think with how wealthy some owners are they also need to implement a hard cap at some point to make it so the owners with hundreds of billions can’t just still overpay to win the league every year. Personally I’d do a soft cap at 85% of the leagues average team broadcast revenue. Anything past that gets fined 100% so 100M over would have to pay 200M, etc. Then I’d have a hard cap at 100% the broadcast revenue of the highest paid club (that didn’t qualify for Europe). This way any clubs can go over the soft cap if they’d like but there’s still a hard cap that no team can cross. I think this would be a fair approach most teams could get behind that wouldn’t clearly favor or punish bigger and richer clubs significantly more than the smaller clubs. Plus the fines paid for going over the soft cap could be distributed further down the pyramid
Surely "Anchoring" by this description, will only hinder the European clubs the poorest championship promoted club is setting the budget for clubs in champions league, and europa league cup competitions. Why not just adopt the UEFA rules to give the clubs playing European football the best chance of European success which ultimately strengthens the national team as well.
It doesn’t matter how poor they are because it’s based on their broadcast revenue. Gives an incentive to split that more equally (or maybe even give the lower clubs more)
Wages don't strengthen teams
Simple solution for the big 6: give up a bigger percentage of broadcasting revenue to the smaller clubs. ;)
This is great👍👍
So get rid of it in time so it won't possibly affect bigger teams ?
The top 6 clubs with these deep pockets should be ashamed of themselves. Instead of embracing ideas for rules that try to give more of a level playing field that in turn should create a better competition for every team and every supporter they continue to think about themselves and splashing their money around. The law/rule makers should think of a system for the good of the game's supporters. Not the owners, not the players. Think along the lines of finding something with principles along the lines of a Golf Handicap system. The best players always grumble about how many shots their higher handicap opponents get before the game starts. The best players nearly always win regardless but the game is more of a competition.
If they don't want to do this then just bob off and form your elite club league and see how that goes...
I don't watch European or international games and I can certainly not watch another competition.
You do know arsenal and spurs are 2/3 clubs that voted keep the PSR.
Get rid of VAR until you get fully automated offsides
It’s a new season FFP rules have been scrapped and Man City will start the league with a 15 point head start due to how well they have complied with newly implemented regulations 😂
All these rules would mean nothing until it is enforced, NOT just for clubs at the bottom of the table but also to those who managed to win the league by breaking the rules.
It will kill the market if you squad cap likes wages and stuff
That's okay. Who cares about the market.
What happened to 85% of Rev for clubs in Europe and 100% for all other clubs?
How about banning state owned clubs?
How about having an actual owner test that works?
“Just” 14 out of 20 clubs voted for PSR… so 70% then kaveh 🙄.. so majority voted it in. Not just the big clubs and now they’re wanting to limit the spending of big clubs… look at madrids team. They’re going to get mbappe, Endrick, alphonso Davies almost nailed on too! Apparently really keen on yoro from Lille. By limiting the spending of the big clubs, it’ll have a big impact on how they do in Europe and also the league! It doesn’t enable the smaller clubs to spend more, it’s just restricting the bigger clubs from spending!…. Being a lfc fan we’re 8/9th for net spend in the last 9 years.. spent hundreds of millions less than the other top 5. So I’m not biased with my comments. As I said 8th/9th in the table for net spend
I think that’s what they want more of spend smarter not more
The big clubs have to comply with the stricter UEFA regs. Those regs are the same for Madrid as they are for Liverpool. The new PL regs will make no difference to the spending power of the big clubs.
Can we really recognise any of United, Liverpool or Arsenal's historical success if they just rig rules in their favour? Luckily for us our owners were able to run rings around them
So will the new rules be punished with points deductions for breaching these new rules or will it all be just financial penalties and a fine just become part of the transfer cost?
They won't retrospectively apply PSR to 115 and Chelsea Hotel Sales Ltd, but they also won't give Forest or Everton their points back, of course.
Because that's not how rules work.
@@russellward4624 That's right.
That's why I said they won't do it. You can read, right?
But it's very convenient for 115 and the Hotel Sellers.
Explain your issue selling the hotels? Assets they own?
@@mrgzola25 They sold them to themselves 🤣🤣🤣
I didn't think that needed explaining
@captainhowdy9845 it's still theirs so they have the right to sell it to whoever they want .
If this doesn't scream Government intervention required, I don't know what does
PSR in theory is fine, not perfect but the concept is sound. Problem is the rules themselves havent been updated to reflect transfer fee inflation, wage growth etc so the £35m per season would have been more sensible in 2018 or whenever it was conceived but in 2024 £35m hardly buys a squad player.
This is bad, your affecting premier clubs in european competitions by doing this, like how MLS is limiting there potential they can have by a dumb salary cap rule
Salary caps are used to ensure a reasonably even competition and provides every club with an opportunity to potentially win the competition. You don't get a few clubs to dominate from here to eternity.
@@gustaaf1892 And that's why MLS is limiting it's potential ask any American and they will say to get rid of the rule, thats why they suck in international competitions they same will happen to premier league clubs if that happens
If the squad control rule limits costs to 85% of revenue, it still benefits the “big 6”. The anchor rule will never pass.
Teams like Newcastle and Aston Villa need to be able to spend the wealth they have available, which will only make the league better. They need to find a way to not hold back teams that are more than able to spend, and which would then be able to challenge the top of the table if allowed to do so. I dont know Villas or Newcastles Revenue though so not sure if these new rules will even help.
Villa 😂😂
Okay.
@@Hungdiddly Newcastle supporter here. You do realise where Villa are? you do realise the type of players Villa can attract? Villa are a massive club who can quite easily challenge the so called top 6 if they were allowed to, just like Newcastle can
@@Hungdiddly yes villa. Do your research...
villa are far from a “massive club”…
They rely on Watkins, martinez and VAR to pull victories, which was evident during the Chelsea match.
Villa have a long way to go.
@@Hungdiddly haha what a load of rubbish. sore chelsea fan it was a foul anywhere on the pitch get over it. if its the other way round they woiuld be crying penalty.
To reinforce the glass ceiling futher
anything but cities charges
Just come up with a figure say 250 million per year no club could spend more than that per year on transfers would be fair
Look, just let the clubs spend what they want on their own team, but deduct a team 10 points for every £100 million in debt. All these stupid rules are just stopping the best players coming to the premier league. Our league is getting worse every year and all because the top 6 cartel does not want any competition.
Punishing clubs for debt would mean that clubs couldn't build new training grounds, redevelop their stadiums, or build new stadiums.
As for investing into the squad punishing debt would make it more difficult. Why? Because wealthy owners pump money into clubs via loans. Debt. Think about a team that gets promoted to the PL. They have a wealthy owner. He pumps £200m in via loans to buy players so they can be competitive in the PL. Under your rules that club would be docked 20 points. But if the rules are based on allowed losses, or a squad cost ratio, that club owner can make that investment because of the way transfer fees are expensed and losses calculated.
Premier league is already hoarding all the talent with their ridiculous wages
They should limit the amount of foreign players in each squad . Look after ur own
what is happening with manchester city and leicester city?
Whatever rules they’ll introduce the clubs with the mega budgets will get around it. There’s too much money in the PL. The PL itself is not going to limit itself on how much revenue they get from the clubs. It’s all conjecture .
There is a very simple solution. Each club can spend whatever they want on transfers, players' wages, etc. The catch is the weekly wages of each team's starting XI cannot exceed a certain agreed upon number. This will also prevent rich clubs from hoarding top players earning top salaries since you cannot field them together on matchday.
‘We don’t think it’s fair’ 😂. No the issue is it’s actually FAIRER, which is exactly what the ‘media 6’ don’t want.
Exactly
Because Mr Masters has realised he will never send Everton down via points deductions ...plus nobody signed any players in Jan which makes the league look bad
Curious about a tax related to over-spending rich clubs to subsidize poorer clubs. The share portion would be distributed based on league position. Divide the table into 4ths. Bottom half brackets split 60% of the tax. Top half brackets split 40% of the tax.
So then teams with nothing to play for tank games to get in the bottom half of the table toward the end of the season? Think it through a bit
@@stephenparker5421thanks for the suggestion. This concept is used in other sports leagues. Not suggesting that mine is the ultimate solution. Important to note that having the bottom three relegated to a league that produces less revenue is a strong disincentive to “tank”.
People are so deluded they dont understand City are still getting charged due to "allegedly" breaking the rules within the time frame they existed.
While the top 6 want the rules changed before they are also in breach, as they only wanted the rules to stop teams like City displacing them in the first place.
England needs an independent regulator because the original top 6 are out of control.
I will put money on all they get is a fine , so they put a load of money into the fa pockets.
The top clubs have to comply with the stricter UEFA regs, with a squad cost control ratio of 70% and allowed losses of just €5m per year. If the big clubs pass the UEFA regs, which they have to, they absolutely fly through the PL regs.
To be fair, England's dubious ownership rules have damaged European football as a whole. Oligarchs and petro-states aren't good for football.
@@donjesson7160because the PL has no evidence.
@@Bdbtg28691and Barca and Real are?
Just let clubs spend wot they want in my opinion but have a rule in place that if that owner of the wants too sell club that they have to clear deubts strait away or face instant points deduction or administration or relegation ,because you have mega rich owners at ncastle ,villa , bmouth that are not aloud to spend cos off ffp ,psr so they have to sell 1 of there stars hows that fair and its not fair compettion
Squad Cost Control Rules. What a joke
People need to remember we are not Americans
How would you know the bottom side?
So the Man City case will commence after abolishment of PSR? Are they trying to render the Man City Case irrelevant?
Literally moving the goalposts
Then why have PSR next season? It's an exercise in futility.
Because it's starting to affect the big 6 clubs. Any other excuse is a lie.
Surely the big problem facing any EPL rules is that clubs play in England and Europe. Any of these suggested rules will make English clubs uncompetitive in Europe. Salary caps only work with comps like the NFL, NBA, NRL (in Australia) because all games played by the teams are in that competition. If you set rules for all of Europe, you'll create greater spending differences within some countries. And any effort to substantially reduce all player costs will just see players begging poor and going on strike. I just think it is so difficult to structure a system that works.
So city can avoid being relegated
City aren't charged with PSR
They will give Everton and Forest points back so they can wave away Man City violations.
115 CHARGE ?
There should be a world wide cap of 350k and a minimum of 50k it would take away the money issues most teams have when it comes to buying players and more than likely players would go where they want not where had more money
Every league has a right to decide we live in a free market world!
Kaveh has not read UEFA's rules.
Squad Cost includes:
Amortisation.
Agents Fees.
Manager's Salary.
Any fees for a manager.
Team's salary.
Minus transfer fees in.
Plus, if you want to play in UEFA competition you have to meet 70% and not 85%, with maximum loss per year of €20m (ie being above 70%).
A club should be able to spend what they want, if it goes wrong for the club that the owners faullt
Then it just becomes a race to the bottom and lots of clubs would go into administration.
What about the fans, these are 100 Yr old clubs, no one wants to see them going into administration
@creepingbrain then a sugar daddy comes along and invests billions into turning it around and next thing you know you're in the champions league. Why shouldn't that be allowed??? Just so long as there are some kinds of rules around the new owners from stitching up the club like that pompey bloke it shouldn't be an issue
If they don’t punish City or Chelsea after they change the rules then shouldn’t Everton and Forest get their points back
Imagine being able to talk without clapping your hands...
There will still be points deductions with the new one or won't they? and appeals
right. if the "problem" with the old rules was that clubs broke them and had to be punished then nothing really changes. clubs will still break the new rules and have to be punished for it. Personally I'm glad teams are getting points deducted. The only problem is that they have thrown the book at the small fish and not the big time cheaters (city and chelsea).
Very easily circumvented as city have already been doing with inflated sponsorship deal eg: Etihad Airline sponsorship.
C'mon sky sports why can't you talk about 115 charges anymore???🤔
The rich clubs will keep winning, while the bottom clubs will always be in the bottom half of the table.
Top teams should support the bottom teams to broadcast more..so that they spend more
the sad fact is that when it comes to TV revenue no one cares about the likes of Sheffield united, bournemouth, palace etc. They only exist to be opponents of the top teams. Truth be told no one really cares about City either. Their global fan base is minuscule. United, Liverpool, Arsenal are the big TV draws around the world
But this is gonna disadvantage smaller clubs, they can't compete with the bigger teams
If anything bigger teams can bypass this easily, this will keep bigger teams at the top
This is football, you can pay via back doors
sccr isn't an acronym
Moving the goal posts for the big clubs so they don't have to go through a lengthy ffp breach case nice 🤦🏻
Everton did vote for PSR
Ultimately owners should be able to spend what they want but they should have to sink it in cash in an account they cant touch. No leveraged debt. Wages capped to 85%. No club could then go out of business. The money is secured, wages unable to outstrip income.
a fixed salary cap is either never going to happen. Or if it does, it will be at Chelsea/Man City wage bill levels and it will be completely irrelevant for 75% of the league.
The enforcement/penalties for the PROFITABILITY and SUSTAINABILITY ruleset need to be limited to PROFITABILITY and SUSTAINABILITY. For example, the penalty should be something like restricted transfer budget, transfer window ban, wage increase restriction, wage reduction mandate, etc
The penalties should absolutely NOT take points away from a club. These types of penalties do nothing to promote PROFITABILITY and SUSTAINABILITY. In fact, they could end up directly causing the exact opposite effect if the result is relegation to a club that would have otherwise avoided relegation. I can't think of anything more detrimental to a Premier League club's PROFITABILITY and SUSTAINABILITY than relegation.
You mean man u and Arsenal yeah?
@@mrgzola25 that's what you took out of my comment? Yea sure, them too. Feel better?
If the top 6 dont think its fair, why dont they just level the tv money across the league then it makes it fair for everyone..?
No chance of that though 😂
Kaveh, the king of "talk a lot," but says little 😂
This needs to be completed fast however it’s done so that the EFL funding deal can be done
They can't have it both ways. Otherwise award more points to teams with lower squad costs for every win and draw against bigger squad cost teams.
It's being scrapped because the big clubs don't like it, pure and simple. They want to be able to spend as much money as they like in order to keep feasting at the top table, and if there's any kind of tax to pay for that, so be it, they can easily afford it. And of course all the smaller clubs in the Prem will vote it in, because they don't want to risk losing their slice of the money pie.
Why not the bigger your debt the less you can spend. I don’t think spurs or Man U are likely to vote for that
Changing rules because Man Utd and Arsenal are getting close to threshold. Only clubs not close are Man City ( prize money from treble)West Ham (rice money ) and Liverpool.
Hope Everton and Notts Forest sue them for millions. Rules for the 14 but not the 6.
It's being scrapped because it's now affecting Utd, that's it. They and liverpool invented the rules through Parry and Gill but because utd are so bad it's constricting them. So their lap dogs at the Pl change the rules. It's a cartel and 15 PL clubs just accept it and blame City. It's mad how some fans just blame City while 2 or 3 clubs just change rules to suit themselves. Don't worry though, Carragher and Neville will be along to tell you it's the right thing to do.
How is it restricting Man Utd they still have one of the biggest turnovers in world football
The PL regs don't affect MUFC at all. MUFC, and all teams that play in Europe, have to comply with the stricter UEFA regs with a squad cost control ratio of 70% and allowed losses of €5m per year.
No, it's not the big clubs voting through these PL rules. It was a unanimous vote. Every PL club voted in favour of them.