Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
J*B

Supporters Consultation Meeting

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

Still an oversimpification.

We can spend roughly £13m per season via FFP. We literally spent a third of our entire FFP budget on two players who have flopped and we'd be no worse off without. It might be simple but it's also true. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, arbitro said:

It is talked about a lot because it's an important issue in many fronts. Here's a suggestion - if you don't like it don't respond!

It's just boring to keep reading weekly with the same old already had debates. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Groundhog day again. Lets keep going day after day the signings of Gallagher and Brereton. You literally never have a day off from talking about it. 

Because Chaddy, it’s absolutely galling to hear our manager and board refer to FFP concerns when they are only a concern because of those transfers. It takes some front for Mowbray to sit there knowing that.

I’m sure you repeat yourself regularly (as we all do) but people leave you to it. If you don’t like it, just keep scrolling and don’t respond?

Edited by K-Hod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

It's just boring to keep reading weekly with the same old already had debates. 

 

It's simple really I think. Either don't read them or don't respond. 

Lots of debates carry on daily which you are often involved in. That's the nature of a message board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gallagher may well have taken a pay cut to his basic. It may also be the case that he is on a chunky appearance bonus. That would explain a lot.

Personally I think he needs a friggin haircut,

I am sick and tired of seeing him, DG and Travis constantly brushing their hair off their faces and out of their eyes.

With Gallagher its almost every time he does even a jog nevermind bolloxing up a header.

Edited by AllRoverAsia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AllRoverAsia said:

Gallagher may well have taken a pay cut to his basic. It may also be the case that he is on a chunky appearance bonus. That would explain a lot.

Personally I think he needs a friggin haircut,

I am sick and tired of seeing him, DG and Travis constantly brushing their hair off their faces and out of their eyes.

With Gallagher its almost every time he does even a jog nevermind bolloxing up a header.

I was speaking to somebody who has watched Rovers for decades who never misses a game and said he saw something from a Rovers player (or any player for that matter) that he has never seen before. During a break in the recent QPR match Gallagher came over to the bench for a replacement hair band as his had snapped.

Game's gone. 😁😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, arbitro said:

It's simple really I think. Either don't read them or don't respond. 

Lots of debates carry on daily which you are often involved in. That's the nature of a message board.

I have no problem with debating the issues but I just feel that we are over the same ground day after day with Gallagher and Brereton signings. Like the wages of Gallagher. We discuss it a couple of weeks ago. Yes I am as guilty as others at going over the same points cos we discuss the same issues. So I hold my hands as much as anyone @K-Hod

Edited by chaddyrovers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DE. said:

We can spend roughly £13m per season via FFP. We literally spent a third of our entire FFP budget on two players who have flopped and we'd be no worse off without. It might be simple but it's also true. 

There will always be an excuse. She says ‘over-simplification’, I say ‘Occam’s razor’.

If I spend my entire monthly wage on garden gnomes and then can’t afford my mortgage and utility bills, do I get to blame market forces for high prices and my employers for not paying me enough? Or am I oversimplifying?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

It's just boring to keep reading weekly with the same old already had debates. 

 

I daresay if those 2 had been ripping it up you'd be quite happy to continually debate TM's eye for a player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ewood Ace said:

He's wasted plenty more money besides that as well. He gave Mulgrew a 2 year extension and since that extension began he has played just once. Smallwood was given a year extension and since that year extension kicked in he has played no league games. Davenport has been at the club nearly 2 season now and has made just 2 substitute appearance. Chapman has been here over a year and made just 4 substitute appearances. Sam Hart was signed on a two year deal during those two years he barley played yet he was given another year and this year he hasn't played a single second. Whittingham had to be paid off and that can't have been cheap as I expect he was one of our higher paid players in league 1. Then of course we had Gladwin who spent 2 years injured and yet he then gave him another 6 month contract.

Ouch.

Please don't spoil Tony's "woe is me" agenda by citing inconvenient facts like that!

Also it was admitted apparently at the meeting by the manager that more money is always available if he wants it! What's that all about, we must have the only manager in all four divisions who doesn't like bringing players in and won't use the full budget available to him.

It's his job to get the best possible team out on the pitch at the earliest opportunity. It's the owners job to decide if they can provide the finances to do that, but if they are willing to do so, Mowbray should definitely not turn it down.

Thanks to those who reported back in such detail from the meeting. Sounds like the abysmal performance of the recruitment department since we were promoted didn't receive half as much scrutiny as it might have done. If we had the chance to send Walton back last month that's another colossal error imo.

Did anyone ask if the owners or management had any genuine desire to (legally) circumnavigate FFP rules or are we just going to meekly accept it?

Edited by RevidgeBlue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Inglorious basturk said:

Arrogant 

When Chaddy hears too many home-truths it's onto the ignore list you go. It's the equivalent of him putting his fingers in his ears and going La la la la la la la la laaaa!” 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Amo said:

When Chaddy hears too many home-truths it's onto the ignore list you go. It's the equivalent of him putting his fingers in his ears and going La la la la la la la la laaaa!” 

I feel like I’ve had a lot of interaction with him but to be honest I just find the behaviour bizarre , I’m almost incredulous . 
what are people so precious about ? People can’t seem to handle a bit of debate . It also seems that criticism is a crime 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DE. said:

We can spend roughly £13m per season via FFP. We literally spent a third of our entire FFP budget on two players who have flopped and we'd be no worse off without. It might be simple but it's also true. 

We can *Lose* £13m (on average) per season based on the FFP calculation. If our turnover grows, we can spend a lot more than £13m.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Ouch.

Please don't spoil Tony's "woe is me" agenda by citing inconvenient facts like that!

Also it was admitted apparently at the meeting by the manager that more money is always available if he wants it! What's that all about, we must have the only manager in all four divisions who doesn't like bringing players in and won't use the full budget available to him.

It's his job to get the best possible team out on the pitch at the earliest opportunity. It's the owners job to decide if they can provide the finances to do that, but if they are willing to do so, Mowbray should definitely not turn it down.

Thanks to those who reported back in such detail from the meeting. Sounds like the abysmal performance of the recruitment department since we were promoted didn't receive half as much scrutiny as it might have done. If we had the chance to send Walton back last month that's another colossal error imo.

Did anyone ask if the owners or management had any genuine desire to (legally) circumnavigate FFP rules or are we just going to meekly accept it?

What are the legal ways to circumnavigate FFP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Herbie6590 said:

We can *Lose* £13m (on average) per season based on the FFP calculation. If our turnover grows, we can spend a lot more than £13m.

Yeah, but since TM has arrived we haven't really sold anybody of significance. I don't know how much truth there was in Dack being the sacrificial lamb in January or the summer, but during the last period of Jan 19 - Jan 20 we've essentially splashed £12m on transfer fees with only Raya's £3m sale as a return, although that fee was likely gobbled up by a combination of Tosin and Cunningham's wages and loan fees. 

I'm still not convinced FFP is as big of an issue as is currently being touted. Up until last month it wasn't being talked about at all by Tony or anybody else at the club - I've previously linked an interview from September regarding the upcoming window where it literally wasn't mentioned once. So why all of a sudden has it become this huge barrier? Was nobody paying attention until January?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Did anyone ask if the owners or management had any genuine desire to (legally) circumnavigate FUP rules or are we just going to meekly accept it?

What do you think? My only real hope is that numerous clubs file a joint lawsuit (perhaps headed by Manchester City) and crush UEFA in court. When they drop it the EFL will drop it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Herbie6590 said:

What are the legal ways to circumnavigate FFP?

Sponsor the stadium, stands or training ground, either with third parties or in the cases of Birmingham and Sheffield Wednesday by the owners directly.

'Sell' the stadium or training ground to another company under the owner's control, knowing full well it can be transferred back for nothing in future.

Bring in sponsorship from companies linked to the owners e.g. Visit Malaysia at Cardiff.

Invent fake companies to sponsor us e.g. D Taxis at Hillsborough 

Get a third party to pay the wages of players e.g. Derby and Rooney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, DE. said:

Yeah, but since TM has arrived we haven't really sold anybody of significance. I don't know how much truth there was in Dack being the sacrificial lamb in January or the summer, but during the last period of Jan 19 - Jan 20 we've essentially splashed £12m on transfer fees with only Raya's £3m sale as a return, although that fee was likely gobbled up by a combination of Tosin and Cunningham's wages and loan fees. 

I'm still not convinced FFP is as big of an issue as is currently being touted. Up until last month it wasn't being talked about at all by Tony or anybody else at the club - I've previously linked an interview from September regarding the upcoming window where it literally wasn't mentioned once. So why all of a sudden has it become this huge barrier? Was nobody paying attention until January?

Have a listen to Episode 126 of the BRFCS podcast ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JHRover said:

Sponsor the stadium, stands or training ground, either with third parties or in the cases of Birmingham and Sheffield Wednesday by the owners directly.

'Sell' the stadium or training ground to another company under the owner's control, knowing full well it can be transferred back for nothing in future.

Bring in sponsorship from companies linked to the owners e.g. Visit Malaysia at Cardiff.

Invent fake companies to sponsor us e.g. D Taxis at Hillsborough 

Get a third party to pay the wages of players e.g. Derby and Rooney.

1. Legal - but only if true market value - if it's legal, it's compliant within the rules so not "circumventing" as such

2. Legal - but only if true market value - but Rovers Trust put an ACV on Ewood & the value of the stadium will I suspect be relatively small beer - kicks the can down the road for one season

3. Legal - but only if true market value

4. Not Legal - so opening up to a challenge from EFL which could involve financial & points penalties

5. Massive grey area - I suspect Derby will spend a lot on lawyers trying to prove it's within the rules

 

The Price Of Football podcast by Kieran Maguire is a terrific resource for this stuff if anyone's interested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Herbie6590 said:

2. Legal - but only if true market value - but Rovers Trust put an ACV on Ewood & the value of the stadium will I suspect be relatively small beer - kicks the can down the road for one season

Derby County's supporters put an ACV on Pride Park as did Villa's on their own stadium. That didn't stop the "sales" so to speak. So obviously if Venkys are to sell to what is effectively themselves (who else would feasibly buy it besides new owners for this reason?) the issue might not even come up. I'm sure there was little advance warning of the Villa/Derby examples. I've asked this question before and it wasn't expanded on unfortunately. Here's a paragraph from stadiumdb.com.

Even if they don't, there's one more issue: facing the fans. Back in 2011 the Localism Act was introduced, which allowed communities (football supporters included) to list buildings as Assets of Community Value (ACV). Villa Park is among stadia which were listed as an ACV.

Such move means precisely that the owner cannot sell the stadium without giving the local community a chance of placing a counter bid. And the community, represented by Aston Villa Supporters Trust, was not informed of the transaction until weeks after it was completed. The law has been broken.

“The Trust is concerned to read the news today, that despite the recording of an Asset of Community Value on the stadium, a transfer of ownership may have taken place. We are attempting to clarify the details. When they are available we will seek an urgent meeting with the club.” the AVST have written on June 28.

If Venkys want to sell it to themselves and it's an effective way of getting round FUP could the ACV hold things up? It was recently noted by the club itself wasn't it?

Edited by Vinjay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, arbitro said:

I was speaking to somebody who has watched Rovers for decades who never misses a game and said he saw something from a Rovers player (or any player for that matter) that he has never seen before. During a break in the recent QPR match Gallagher came over to the bench for a replacement hair band as his had snapped.

Game's gone. 😁😁

Definitely happened. We saw it..and cringed lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.