• Liverpool Message Board

  • LFC_Armchair_Supporter LFC_Armchair_Supporter Oct 24, 2010 21:11 Flag

    What If ....

    The F.A gets tough on clubs that are in debt?

    Imposes a blanket ruling no exceptions..

    On clubs that are in debt.

    They way I'd like to see it work is like this.. The F.A is given free and open access to every clubs accounts.

    1. If a club is found to be in debt ie if they've zero or less in their accounts the F.A has the power to dock an instant 9 points there and then..

    2. The club/s in question have 3 - 6 months to balance the books. The F.A would go back and check the clubs progress in resolving and clearing debt. If that club sill is in debt after 6 months they're docked a further 9 points and a fine issued..

    3. If that club has qualified for the Champions League but remains in debt then they're immediately barred from taking part.

    4. Then the club next in line but hasn't qualified due to league placement,, but has kept their account in order then takes the place of the club who'd qualified out of right..

    Sending a message to all clubs that it's not fair that clubs such as Man Utd who continue to spend on expensive players but are in severe debt. That being in such debt isn't permitted and the F.A will act accordingly.

    What we think to those measures? Surely it would stop clubs being so reckless?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Why wasn't this posted two months ago when we were up to our armpits in it and sinking rapidly?
      Is this another desperate attempt to "reason" us into an ECL place for next year?
      Gawd help us!

    • Who cares. I don't give a damn about other clubs, there is only one. And anyway we weren't reckless, we were allowed to be brought on the never, never and there was only one way that could end. Now we have new owners and that buyout was structed in the correct manner. End of story.

      • 1 Reply to Mysteron
      • I used to think this was a useless cause and that implementing rules on spending versus generating would be such a great thing, but after reading earlier posts and getting to think more, it's probably correct in that clubs will find a way to get around the rules and still over spend, AND that's just fine.

        Let's take a look at Manchester for example. They are 1 billion in debt, why they haven't or when they will be looked at for possible penalties and repayment is beyond me, but who cares, let it pile up even more. Add in the recent, almost certain scam by Ferguson and Rooney in what many believe to be a ploy for them to spend another 100 million in players and this equals more trouble. Let's say for that 100 million they attract 4 new players, they then will all command at least 200,000+ a week in salary which will multiply faster than the eye can blink and they will ship several hundred million more in debt while trying to achieve success for it. And in any attempt to balance the losses, who have they really got to sell? Certainly not Nani, probably their best player. Nobody will pay the 37 mill for Berbatov, Valencia is a very good winger but wouldn't get top dollar same with Fletcher. Then they are left with a severely aged squad that will all either be released or sold on for very cheap if anyone wanted them, ie Scholes, Neville, Ferdinand, Giggs and the ever wasteful Hargreaves and Carrick. All that spending would put them in a rebuilding mode and put them deeper in water, in the end with Rooney maybe "really" wanting to leave, Vidic too.

        Manchester City recently posted an EPL record loss of what I recall around 120 million or so. Why, A- they've grossly overspent on a ridiculously large squad just on purchases, B-they are paying the wages for all 38 players which is a complete waste of money, and C- they are not and most likely will not become a world wide brand name. Maybe for a short period of time when they reach the champions league and win a title in a few years, but after that I could see the sheiks jumping ship and them being in crisis.

        Chelsea obviously had spent ridiculous amounts of money over the years and it's brought them success on every front with the exception of Europe, and certainly this year could be theirs. But they are an extremely aged squad, though they've done the best of the 3 aformentioned clubs at bringing in youth. They still will be faced with a challenge of rebuilding mode or over spending to sustain the success they've endured. Drogba 32, Anelka 31, Lampard 32, Malouda 30, Terry 30, Cole 30.. these guys can't play forever and certainly have hit their collective peak.

        Assuming nesv are as good as we all hope, we are a very financially sound club now with no debts that can operate profitably on cash generated, similar to that of Arsenal who have been the most conservative and smart spenders of all. If Liverpool can generate cash on marketing and brand name alone while purchasing 3-4 class players that aren't outrageously priced, we will be right near the top in 2-3 years time while the others are on their way down, and I'm sure everyone would prefer it be that way. I wouldn't be proud if we went out and spent 200 million, that's embarassing and would just put us back into debt again. Wages alone for these players are absurd, and the overspending by United, Chelsea, Man City, Barcelona and Real Madrid have ruined it for everyone. Even the latter clubs for being 2 of the world's biggest names are struggling severly financially and continue to spend, but who cares about them..

        World football is becoming cyclical just like everything else in life, and when you have a billionaire like Roman Abromovich calling for a salary cap like in American sports, you know there's a problem, becuase he's certainly one who demands winning...

    • I think they should just leave it alone. If a club takes a risk by taking on massive debt then that is down them.

      If UEFA/FIFA/FA interfere then by default they will end up siding with some clubs against others.


      no debt allowed = clubs with rich owners win, as they can pay cash for big players

      spend within means only (revenue) = big clubs with big ticket sales win, extra cash means big players


      Small clubs wanting to win trophies and get big, offset the above by taking out loans, hence debt can level the playing field if managed properly with success on field.

      Just leave it alone I say. If a club wants to risk doing a Leeds, then that is down to them.

    • i dont think anyone can impose those type of rules especially regarding finances as now we are virtually debt free we would pass all tests but we would have fell fowl of them 3 weeks ago and lets not get all preachy about debt now we dont have any coz who knows what the future holds