Other clubs looking to punch up?

Why would they?

I thought you were a tory capitalist? All of a sudden you are turning communist on us?

comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 6 minutes ago
Why would they?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To reduce the cost to themselves and others.

One of the reasons why transfer fees are so high is because of the value of the contract that the player is currently on. So putting a cap on wages would have an effect on the transfer fee.

Jimmy Hill would have had something to say about that however…

UK employment and competition laws prevent companies from colluding to cap wage (and rightly so).

The CMA has recently issued advice that even verbal agreements and informal practices are unlawful, and freelancers and contracted workers, as well as permanent salaried staff, are protected under the law.

comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unlimited Pote-ntial of the Fernançalvemiro triumvirate (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
UK employment and competition laws prevent companies from colluding to cap wage (and rightly so).

The CMA has recently issued advice that even verbal agreements and informal practices are unlawful, and freelancers and contracted workers, as well as permanent salaried staff, are protected under the law.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Welcome back

Because it would start leveling the playing field, and we don't want that.

comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 7 seconds ago
Because it would start leveling the playing field, and we don't want that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually that would make for an excellent league if all clubs had the same budget

comment by Baz tard - Ineos your face, proud owner of the 100k comment, fack you Michael Edward’s and your 5m, th (U19119)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unlimited Pote-ntial of the Fernançalvemiro triumvirate (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
UK employment and competition laws prevent companies from colluding to cap wage (and rightly so).

The CMA has recently issued advice that even verbal agreements and informal practices are unlawful, and freelancers and contracted workers, as well as permanent salaried staff, are protected under the law.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Welcome back
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just passing through, Baz. Couple of weeks off teaching so I’m back in the office and trying to avoid work.

Hope you’re good mate

comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unlimited Pote-ntial of the Fernançalvemiro triumvirate (U17054)
posted 10 minutes ago
UK employment and competition laws prevent companies from colluding to cap wage (and rightly so).

The CMA has recently issued advice that even verbal agreements and informal practices are unlawful, and freelancers and contracted workers, as well as permanent salaried staff, are protected under the law.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

If a player and club agree to £200k, what can a 3rd party do?

Collusion is illegal.

Next article.

"What is stopping the major clubs agreeing to maximum transfer fees of £50m and wages of £200k per week"

Once it was Chelsea, then it was PSG, then Man City....etc etc

To answer your question..... GREED !!! Big clubs are not interested in competitive balance and the overall health of the game. They are interested in making as much money as they can from jacking up ticket prices, TV rights, advertising/Marketing and multi purpose/multi revenue generating stadiums. Welcome to football in 2024.. Its a sad and depressing place

The state of the game is dire and it's becoming pretty boring. Not only is VAR ruining the product but when you have a club like Forest who have been docked points for breaking the rules, accusing match officials of corruption it's hard to take any of it seriously.

comment by Baz tard - Ineos your face, proud owner of the 100k comment, fack you Michael Edward’s and your 5m, th (U19119)
posted 36 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 7 seconds ago
Because it would start leveling the playing field, and we don't want that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually that would make for an excellent league if all clubs had the same budget
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Big teams would die. Tables will rely mostly on management of players and tactics. We would get relegated

comment by Diamondlights (U20501)
posted 4 minutes ago
To answer your question..... GREED !!! Big clubs are not interested in competitive balance and the overall health of the game. They are interested in making as much money as they can from jacking up ticket prices, TV rights, advertising/Marketing and multi purpose/multi revenue generating stadiums. Welcome to football in 2024.. Its a sad and depressing place
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Buy paying £50m I steas of £100m and £200k instead ofb£400k per week is far more lucrative than those other things.

comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 12 minutes ago
"What is stopping the major clubs agreeing to maximum transfer fees of £50m and wages of £200k per week"

Once it was Chelsea, then it was PSG, then Man City....etc etc
----------------------------------------------------------------------

All 3 have had issues with FFP, or are facing punishment

Not too fussed by how clubs want to spend their money but it would be great if there were binding caps on the cost of watching games live and live on TV.

comment by Baz tard - Ineos your face, proud owner of the 100k comment, fack you Michael Edward’s and your 5m, th (U19119)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 7 seconds ago
Because it would start leveling the playing field, and we don't want that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually that would make for an excellent league if all clubs had the same budget
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, United will work to Bournemouths' budget and the Glazers can pocket the rest.

comment by Custardeyes (U4500)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Baz tard - Ineos your face, proud owner of the 100k comment, fack you Michael Edward’s and your 5m, th (U19119)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 7 seconds ago
Because it would start leveling the playing field, and we don't want that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually that would make for an excellent league if all clubs had the same budget
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, United will work to Bournemouths' budget and the Glazers can pocket the rest.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. Think about it.

comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Custardeyes (U4500)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Baz tard - Ineos your face, proud owner of the 100k comment, fack you Michael Edward’s and your 5m, th (U19119)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson (U1282)
posted 7 seconds ago
Because it would start leveling the playing field, and we don't want that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually that would make for an excellent league if all clubs had the same budget
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, United will work to Bournemouths' budget and the Glazers can pocket the rest.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. Think about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's the issue with capping spending by a random amount that's not based on club income.

All that would happen is the already obscenely wealthy owners would take a larger profit from the game while the ones who play/manage clubs end up with a smaller share of the revenues.

As I mentioned, capping the cost to fans would be my preferred route.

The Prem clubs announce plans to cap spending.

It’s understood that Manchester City, Manchester United and Aston Villa voted against the new rule, while Chelsea abstained.


The cap has been mooted to be £530million pounds based on last season, but likely to be closer to £600million.