Jump to content


Chris Moss Acid

Recommended Posts

Rafa is a piece of shit manager ..


He Wins the Champions league (Thanks to Gerrard) and then he gets Immunity forever.. no matter how shit things are going ...


Ngog is shit .. and he plays him

Babel doesn't want to play for the Fat Fuck ..



Oh Maxi Maxi Rodriguez SAVE US !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Usually Saturdays at 3pm, but later on in the season there's loads midweek games that pile up. 46 games in a Championship season following my beloved Cardiff City.


Going to Scunthorpe on Saturday, it'll be fun. Not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that's a short season. typical NHL season is 82 games, plus however many playoff games your team manages. and a series in the playoffs is a best of seven so you can be playing 28 extra games if you max out all your playoff rounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there hasn't been a full league 2 game for 2 weeks. because of the snow/ice.. because 'we' don't have money to survive let alone has under soil heating.

lets not talk about the embargo we have either.



The Coca-Cola Football League 1 and 2 are diffrent from the Premiership.




Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a mandatory wage cap in this division that limits spending on players' wages to 60% of club turnover.


That's what i'd prefer to happen in the premier league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a mandatory wage cap in this division that limits spending on players' wages to 60% of club turnover.


That's what i'd prefer to happen in the premier league.



they say that.. but look at Notts county. they spent fuck loads and no way was it 60% of there turn over either. but got away with it because of the media storm with Sven joining as a director of football.


they treat some teams better then others, like the FL have continuously picked on AFC Bournemouth all season:


AFC Bournemouth have been informed by the Football League that the transfer embargo will remain in place.


The Cherries have been operating under a transfer embargo for the past year. No permanent signings have been made during that time, while the emergency 30 day loan of West Ham midfielder Anthony Edgar in October and the emergency 7 day loan of West Ham 'keeper Marek Štěch in December are the only playing additions Howe has been able to make in 12 months.


The Cherries had hoped the embargo would be relaxed slightly to enable longer loan signings, as the Cherries small squad has been hampered by long term injuries.


However AFC Bournemouth Chairman Eddie Mitchell has now been contacted by the Football League and that plea has been rejected.


Mitchell told the Daily Echo...


'...We asked the Football League board if they would lift the absolute embargo which was previously placed on the club to allow loan players, but they said no...'


'...It puts pressure on the players because we are down to a smaller squad than the 19. We do need to get an extra person in to help. We`re just trying to get one loan player."




AFC Bournemouth Chairman Eddie Mitchell has admitted the Football League's concerns over the Cherries financial situation is the reason behind the transfer embargo remaining in place.


The Cherries had hoped to receive some leniency from the Football League over their recent request to relax the embargo.


Due to Eddie Howe's small squad picking up injuries, at times this season the Cherries have only been able to name a match day squad of 14, sometimes including 16 year old school boy Jayden Stockley and twice previously retired assistant manager Jason Tindall.


Due to the small squad, AFC Bournemouth requested permission to make one loan signing, but that has been rejected.


Mitchell told BBC Radio Solent...


'...the League still has concerns over financial situations which we're readily reducing. But obviously we can only go at the speed we can.


'We've cleared an awful lot of debt so far and we're making inroads into what's left.


'But until such time as it's all gone, it looks as though we're not allowed to do anything at all,'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

plus this from a AFCB fan wrote to the football league


I had an extensive e mail exchange with the FL and below is a list of questions I asked, along with FL answers. It is from August/Sept 09. It clarifies many of the questions people have asked, and are still asking.


1.Salary Cost Management Protocol has an effect on all League 2 clubs by limiting a club's spending on player salaries to 60% of turnover and on all staff to 75% of turnover. What is the distribution of the SCMP regulations?

Answer 1. All League Two clubs are sent documents pertaining to the SCMP before the start of each season.


2.In League 1 the SCMP is a pilot although in League 2 it is a controlling mechanism that prevents Clubs from signing new players unless they can demonstrate that they are staying within the 60% limit.

Why are they not publicly available?

Answer 2. The SCMP is not specifically included in The Football League’s published regulations. It is a decision by The League to share precise elements of the scheme with member clubs only.


3. Turnover is all income due to a football club in the club's financial year. This will include basic award, match income, commercial income, transfer fee income and any additional injections. The turnover must be relevant and received in the financial year the SCMP relates to. For this season I understand that all League two clubs are limited to spending 60% of 'turnover' on players' salaries and 75% for all salaries - what is the % based on? Is it turnover for financial year 08/09?

Answer 3. The % is based on actual year ended (07-08), forecast year ended (08-09) and budgeted year ended (09-10).


4. The Football League monitors club finances to ensure that they are complying with regulations. A new regulation has been introduced for this season which allows the League direct access to HMRC information on club debt which will help to tighten things up further. What are the implications for League 1 clubs re this being a pilot? I thought a pilot was something that you did first to test something before introducing it. In this case it appears to be a pilot as well as being implemented. Does the fact of it being a 'pilot' for league 1 mean that clubs comply with it if they choose to?

Answer 4. The scheme is voluntary for League One clubs and there are no plans to make it compulsory at this current time.


5.As far as your member of staff knows this season's spending is based on accounts for April 2008 - April 2009. Do all league 2 clubs have to demonstrate that they are staying within the 60% limit (see question 3)?

Answer 5. Yes.


6. The regulations about SCMP are not publicly available, they are not on the website and it appears to be impossible to find out very much about them. If the answer to 6 is yes, how can Notts County pay their players so much when their average gate over the last two seasons is less than 5,000.

Answer 6. See answer 3 – turnover is made up of many different elements, of which gate receipts are only a small part.


7.What is the difference between turnover and income (see question 3)?

Answer 7. Turnover is income and outgoings i.e. players bought and sold etc.


8.Does the definition of 'turnover' (ie basic award, match income, commercial income, transfer fee income and any additional injections) include money paid to the club form all sources - ie can a private individual pay a player's wages and that be outside the SCMP.

Answer 8. Yes , it includes money from all sources. No – this would be classed as a gift and thus included.


9. What is the new regulation that has been introduced for this season which allows the League direct access to HMRC information on club debt? Is that part of the SCMP?

Answer to 9. Clubs that fall behind on payments to HMRC can now be embargoed from signing further players. In addition, The League can now get details of club’s indebtedness direct from the Revenue. This relates to Football League Regulation 16.



In October I posed the following question


The embargo (on AFCBournemouth) rumbles on. Most blame the FL, some (myself included) believe that the club should put its own house in order. It is far too easy for a club to blame the FL, as supporters we don't have a clue, we have been lied to so many times over the years, there is still no real dialogue between fans and board.


I do not expect you to comment on the club in particular, but can I ask. If a club were to have no debt to HMRC and the FL had clear evidence that the finances were able to support the wages of the club and players - at 70 and 60% respectively - would the embargo be lifted?




As you acknowledge, I am unable to comment on the specific case of any particular club.


Theoretically though, the answer is yes, provided a club also met any specific requirement of the League, often exclusive to them.


To summarise, the board are well aware of the criteria they have to satisfy to have the embargo lifted. They choose, as is their right, not to share that information with the fans. We have no choice but to respect that decision. What I would say is that, in taking that decision, the chance of building trust between the board and supporters is lessened. It may be that, with a more cohesive fans' group, the club would share more. I do not know.


The situation is not simple, the club has a history of bad management and false promises. If you or I went to try and get a mortgage and told the building society that there was enough income to pay a mortgage, but were not able or prepared to provide evidence of income, what would happen? No mortgage. The club have been asked for specific information that is either not forthcoming, or has been provided and is found wanting.


It is not hard to understand. The answer lies with the board of AFC Bournemouth. If the board want fans to understand then be clear about what the FL are demanding, if the board feel they have met the FL's demands then issue a statement and, if it is clear we are being hard done by, we can make informed representation to the FL. I would be happy to ask to meet with the FL, along with a board member, and put the fans' views.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is bollocks all that. The rules at present make it a lot harder for a team like Bournemouth when they should be offering support to keep the club going.


Good job you've got Eddie Howe, but he'll probably get headhunted at some point in the near future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Conor74

It is bollocks all that.


It is all a complete load of bollocks. I think Leeds got docked about 105 points overall for their problems, there was a 10 point deduction one season and a 15 point deduction the next. And then some club like Portsmouth gets tea and sympathy. A Leeds player is accused of serious assault, the FA say players charged with an offence should be dropped, a Liverpool player is accused of serious assault, the rule goes into the bin...I could go on and on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...

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.