With their next 2 CWC games (relatively easy ones) Chelsea can earn about double the amount of this fine in the same week they are getting this info…
UEFA Punish clubs for financial breaches
- Thread starter duffer
- Start date
-
Nik (@Rood), Jamie (@Vault Dweller) and Ed (@That'sHernandez) give their end of season awards out! They celebrate the best players, goals and moments of the season (there were some, honestly) and also give out awards for the worst and most disappointing players/moments of the season.
They then discuss all the latest transfer rumours and get into the potential ins and outs this summer at Old Trafford.
We're going out tonight. No Lavia or Caicedo.
You are the favourite to win the competition… Getting to the final has become a formality.
The data obsessed wanker or some stats company.
Rude. I am not data obsessed.
its about damn time Chelsea got fined nad punished for basically signing two complete football teams. The amount of signings they have made is beyond ridiculous
That's only because PSG, Bayern and Real Madrid are standing in each others way. Whichever one of them gets to the final will be heavy favourites to win it, whether Chelsea make it there or not.
Yes. One other way to read this is that Chelsea's side of the bracket has a 35% probability of winning the competition [p(Chelsea) + p(Flu) + p(Palmeiras) + p(Hilal)], and the other side has a 65% probability.
Yes, you were third on your side and 5th of the entire tournament before the Round of 16… But once both Inter and City got bounced you became the obvious favourite to make the final from your side of the bracket…
That is all I said, that by Tuesday you will have made up close to double UEFA’s fine… $21M tonight + $30 M when you beat Fluminense in the semifinal…
(With another $40M on the table if you somehow win the final…)
Before R.16
After R.16
Last edited:
Every Barsa fan I know assures me that all is dandy and they’re back on track to meet every financial rule out there. Yet here they are again
Now that is a post that lives up to your name!
Nothing for the main offenders then?
then they go and announce another signing in Jamie Gittens from Dortmund. Are they trying to enter two different football teams in to the league competition???
Linked with Kudus too. But Madueke has just agreed personal terms with Arsenal, and we're obviously down Sancho and Mudryk from last seasons squad.
how many attacking players does maresca need in his squad???
I'm missing something here.....does this mean that were moving more and more towards financial punishments...which you have to offset against the financial and footballing benefits you get from cheating...are. we being softened up so that we won't notice when the baddest of the bad are dealt with
From last season's squad:
Out:
Sancho, Mudryk and Madueke (potentially) . Nkunku probably too.
In:
Gittens, Joao Pedro, Estevao and potentially Kudus.
Uefa are introducing new rules from this season or next where squad/wage ratio has to match 70% of turnover.
This is going to be very challenging for us (Villa) which is why likes of Martinez, Digne and Watkins will be leaving at some point in next 12 months. Probably one per transfer window. All on huge wages and over or approaching 30 and we've had some excellent seasons out of them.
Coutinho was actually our player still until a few days ago so with his contract release that is 200k or so off our books to spend.
Joao Felix must be one of the most pointless players around currently. Just keeps making stupid moves all the time that amount to nothing so even the Chelsea fans are forgetting his existence now
He'd probably do alright somewhere like Villareal, Forest or Everton where he can be key attacker without suffocating focus but he's probably dreaming of PSG now and so another season of his career will just fizzle by.
FFP should really be shot down, it is pointless concept anyway.
UEFA wanted in on the deal.
The Chelsea owners have always been willing to pay whatever it takes to build Chelsea into the team they believe it can be.
People may not agree with their strategy, but the implications they were looking to profit nickels and dimes for themselves off things like players was always dumb.
They set up the 100m fund for paying fines of this nature more than 2 years ago.
The fines do NOT count against PSR. They are administrative costs so even if some bitter cronies in the PL wanted to they couldn’t switch it up. All the money from the tournament will be used towards building up the team. The fines fund doesn’t need to be “paid back”.
This is like the “luxury tax” on the NBA. Teams that wanted to actually keep winning were simply willing to keep paying it.
Instead of asking why Chelsea does this … ask instead: why ISN’T my team willing to do the same?
People may not agree with their strategy, but the implications they were looking to profit nickels and dimes for themselves off things like players was always dumb.
They set up the 100m fund for paying fines of this nature more than 2 years ago.
The fines do NOT count against PSR. They are administrative costs so even if some bitter cronies in the PL wanted to they couldn’t switch it up. All the money from the tournament will be used towards building up the team. The fines fund doesn’t need to be “paid back”.
This is like the “luxury tax” on the NBA. Teams that wanted to actually keep winning were simply willing to keep paying it.
Instead of asking why Chelsea does this … ask instead: why ISN’T my team willing to do the same?
Yeah football seems to be catching up. It's the same in MLB which is probably not a coincidence considering the link between Boehly, Chelsea and the Dodgers.
The Dodgers are paying $100m in luxury tax for this year's payroll alone, and that's a less than it should be as they've got $1bn in deferred payments spread until 2046. Kinda wild really.
UEFA can lay fines but, as you suggest, when the accounting is structured around eating those fines it does become a little meaningless.
Yes, it always was. It was a crooked idea from the start that was never going to accomplish what they were hoping it would anyway. If anything it has kept teams like United from full sale and true recovery, and impeded the growth of the EPL.
The Phoenix Suns paid $190M in luxury tax and $410M total for their roster this past season and didnt even make the playoffs
Luxury tax is exactly what came to mind for me as well. Any heavier punishments are unlikely to hold in court as we've already seen, so this is probably how things will ultimately land.
Nothing fines
He's a season removed from the Saudi league. Great football, but he just doesn't have the right personality and love for the game to ever amount to muchJoao Felix must be one of the most pointless players around currently. Just keeps making stupid moves all the time that amount to nothing so even the Chelsea fans are forgetting his existence now
He'd probably do alright somewhere like Villareal, Forest or Everton where he can be key attacker without suffocating focus but he's probably dreaming of PSG now and so another season of his career will just fizzle by.
Only 2 pages in this thread. UEFA must be delighted... Just as Arsenal are with the Partey charges coming just after his contract was up.
Guys come on! You've spent too much money again. Send us money and we'll let you off.
The restrictions on being able to register players is the main impact of this. That bit I think is really good - and can adversely affect clubs.
Any changes from their A list in January now have to balance.
Whilst not ideal, it’s a quick process, with further implications down the road. This is far better than waiting years.
Chelsea now need to raise £60m in sales to register any new players. They will do this easily of course - but hopefully provides some sort of dis-incentive for them and other clubs as we move forward.
Any changes from their A list in January now have to balance.
Whilst not ideal, it’s a quick process, with further implications down the road. This is far better than waiting years.
Chelsea now need to raise £60m in sales to register any new players. They will do this easily of course - but hopefully provides some sort of dis-incentive for them and other clubs as we move forward.
Last edited:
I can tell from your comment that you act haven’t read the actual agreement and have relied on items in the press like the one in the times where the £60 million figure originates.
I agree the wording in the agreement is extremely clumsy but at this point t in time there seems confusion as to which A list is relevant.
Read this section from that Times article.
“Fortunately for Chelsea, it appears outgoings do not have to be solely from last season’s List A. Those that were left out of Chelsea’s Club World Cup squad and are due back in training at Cobham from Monday — including João Félix, Raheem Sterling, Ben Chilwell, Renato Veiga and Axel Disasi — can count towards improving their transfer balance. They can be added to List A before the September 2 submission deadline and thus income from their sales will count. It is only if Chelsea’s overall transfer balance is negative after the list is submitted that new players could be prevented from registering.”
Now that has to be nonsense. The summer transfer window ends on 1/9 with the 25/26 A list due to be submitted on 2/9.so if you have got rid of a player by 1/9 how can you put them on your player list a day later?
The wording in the settlement agreement talks about “ outgoing players ( not necessarily sold) and new players” and the cost of any additions has to in effect balance out with players being transferred off the list. But what list ? Many have assumed it’s the 24/25 list but
The agreement is unconditional for the seasons 25/26& 26/27 and the settlement again talks about adjustments for lists at any applicable deadline.
Last edited:
The £60m figure comes from the Times.
To me it reads that they can sell anyone they want from their squad.
But in order to add any new players to the A List they have to have a positive or neutral transfer balance - if negative, then they can only play the players who were on the last A List - so no Delap etc etc.
Of course we can sell anyone we like from our squad be they on last January s A List or not
But how can players who weren’t on last Januarys A list be added to that list so as to enable any proceeds from them being sold to be used to counter costs for “ new” players to be added to that list ?
They don’t need to be added to the list to be sold for the UEFA requirement - that’s the point, they can sell anyone and all monies count.
But unless they balance the books, then no one can be added to the next A list.
Can I refer you back to the article which specifically says they are added to the list
“They can be added to List A before the September 2 submission deadline and thus income from their sales will count”