14 Oct 2026 09:25:52
I do not believe any current version of FFP is fit for purpose. I also don't believe that salary caps are workable and may not even be legal. I'm also not a fan of dictating to owners what they can and can't spend of their own money.
I do believe in securing the future of all football clubs. To that end I remain convinced that all owners should have a secure bond held in an escrow account that covers all the salary costs for a period of no less than one year.
The latest report from the so called independent regulator will create headlines and certainly there is cause for concerns but as I have never met a regulator with any business sense, I am probably more horizontal than most other observers.
14 Oct 2026 10:47:53
Tom, The real reasons behind Financial Fair Play (FFP) were to protect the economic motivations of Europe's traditional football elite which included the so called red cartel in the UK.
While officially introduced to prevent clubs from going bankrupt and to curb hyper-inflation, critics, analysts, and football figures note that its practical and structural function was to act as a protective barrier for established, historic clubs against "new money" takeovers.
They accepted Jack Walker at Blackburn Rovers was a one-off but when Roman came along alarm bells sounded and when the saudi's came in at City and PSG the established elite went to work.
Look at clubs like Newcastle who are now restricted from spending the billions Roman invested early on. I think all genuine football people, myself included would like to see all clubs protected from financial ruin, look at what Ridsdale nearly did at Leeds, he nearly wiped that club out, but on the other hand what is wrong with another Jack Walker coming along and funding a club to achieve the impossible? a balance has to be found but I fear the established elite, and we are now in that group, will always get there way.
ED01, I know we have spoken about this in depth previously and you have strong opinions on what happened at Leeds.
{Ed001's Note - the Saudis have been nowhere near either Citeh nor PSG. You do realise that Arabs are different in the same way Europeans are right? Emiratis, Qataris and Saudis are not the same, they don't even particularly get on and are busy fighting proxy wars against each other all the time. So to talk about them like that is very offensive.
It is a difficult path, but they have clearly set about, first and foremost, ensuring no new money can break the monopoly. There should be a middle ground which protects clubs against reckless spending. Tom suggested an excellent method of a bond.}
14 Oct 2026 13:26:42
Ed, I am pleased you agree that a bond would potentially solve part of the FFP question.
I did send a proposal to the Premiership and the FA, neither acknowledged receipt. Just to clarify my bond suggestion was different for each football division.
I personally do not care for the term "elite" but I repeat, I have no problems with "any" owner spending whatever they can afford. As long as the club itself has a secured future.
{Ed001's Note - the only thing that should matter is ensuring the club's future is safeguarded, then they should be able to spend what they like. But while the rules are in place, and the teams sign a contract to abide by them, it is the way it is.}
14 Oct 2026 13:52:29
Thanks for clarifying the ownership ED01. I shall research the ownership in more detail next time before posting but my main point was the fact that the so called elite clubs want to stop new money coming in which makes a mockery of competitive football and is why the same few clubs keep winning the big competitions like the Premier League and the Champions League.
{Ed001's Note - I always enjoy when a new name appears and starts competing at the top level, personally. I don't understand why they want to stop it, it lowers interest if it is the same old teams every season.}
14 Oct 2026 15:39:07
Ed, I agree completely the long term security of the club should always come first. I also think it is outrageous when we have situations when employees of a club are not paid.
{Ed001's Note - that should certainly never happen!}