I've just decided.
The PL have to approve deal sheets.
So they're just being lazy. Ask a team to prove they can comply with FFP before signing off on any transfer.
And then if a team has lied, double the punishment
Surely any team has a day by day view on running costs. Not like June 30th or...
I think Arsenal, Newcastle Liverpool, Man United and Spurs it doesn't matter because they do a good enough job at managing it. It does apply to them because they do a good enough job at managing it.
Chelsea and City on the other hand...
More extreme than my version, but actually I like that a lot. A hell of a lot. Punishes the club, player and agent. Means player and agent need to do more research other than "how many zeroes"
(Edit) Actually in hindsight after two minutes of thinking, will the player or agent care if on an 8...
Covering losses within the official boundaries is far different from spending way above that. I think in our final two years in the Champ we lost something like 12m overall (covered by chairman) when there were teams in the Champ getting 4-6 times that a season in parachute payments alone
Money still goes to the club. Just won't be able to be included within FFP calculations. In the same way that Chelsea won't have "spent" (for FFP) £115m on Caicedo in this year's accounts, for FFP purposes that's spread over 8 years (amortisation of the cost over the length of the contract)...
All I know is if I was a Premier league team, I would not be paying top dollar for players from any of these teams. I'd rather spend abroad.
"Oh, FFP struggles you say? Well instead of 60million, we'll give you 30m if you're desperate... Oh, and if not, enjoy the points deduction because no...
I have been thinking of a better / additional way to penalise clubs who breach FFP. 10 points is nothing, really. Fines are nothing if a breach means you avoid the drop.
I do think that as a secondary punishment, say a club has broken FFP by £20m.
All of the most recent transfers in, covering...