Birmingham possibly facing 12 point deduction for breaching FFP restrictions

[Badger 2,415]

https://talksport.com/football/efl/420090/birmingham-city-12-point-penalty-efl-financial-fair-play-regulations/Be interesting to see if they go through with it - could have a big impact if they do.

[KeiranShikari_2 0]

Doubt it''ll be the full 12 points but they aren''t a london team so they''ll probably get something.

[Badger 2,415]

Tend to agree Keiran, but even a smaller deduction with the rest "on suspension" would have a big impact. Stone said at the Fans Forum that there were quite a lot of clubs pushing for this.

[norfolkngood 1,097]

They have to really all these clubs they fail FFS need points deducted as fines are small compared to failing to go up or going down a league

[Coneys Knee 1,005]

I’m not a fan of the points deduction thing. In my opinion all that does is penalise the fans ultimately. The owners should be the ones fined - personally I reckon

[nutty nigel 7,667]

If the punishment ultimately penalises the fans then breaking the rules ultimately benefits them.

If nothing is done to these clubs then the fans that are really penalised are those of the clubs who don''t break the rules.

[SwindonCanary 455]

Always remember Swindon town were prevented from top flight football because of illegal payments made to players. No consideration to the fans.  

[nutty nigel 7,667]

Yes but Swindon admitted 36 charges of breaching league rules. The real losers that year were the Newcastle fans.

[norfolkngood 1,097]

i Agree Nutty if we finished behind a team that broke the FFS they went up to PL and we stayed down

Norwich as a club and fans would be the ones who are the ones who lose out

Fines to PL clubs and some championship teams are small change points can mean Europe or Dropping down leagues

[cornish sam 968]

Unfortunately they don''t seem to be facing the points deduction for breaching FFP, but rather from breaching the transfer embargo. It still doesn''t give the teeth this rule needs...

[Jim Smith 2,365]

I don’t agree Coneys Knee. Ultimately you’ve got to hit the club where it hurts and if that means the fans suffering so they don’t tolerate it again from the owners then so be it. The fines to Bournemouth and I suspect in the future Brighton will have no impact on them whatsoever now they are in the prem as it’s a drop in the ocean compared to the monies they have earnt. Its not a significant deterrent, the gamble is worth it for those owners. It’s only an issue for QPR because the sun is bigger and it’s several years down the line after they’ve been relegated.

[PurpleCanary 5,603]

[quote user="Jim Smith"]I don’t agree Coneys Knee. Ultimately you’ve got to hit the club where it hurts and if that means the fans suffering so they don’t tolerate it again from the owners then so be it. The fines to Bournemouth and I suspect in the future Brighton will have no impact on them whatsoever now they are in the prem as it’s a drop in the ocean compared to the monies they have earnt. Its not a significant deterrent, the gamble is worth it for those owners. It’s only an issue for QPR because the sun is bigger and it’s several years down the line after they’ve been relegated.[/quote]

I agree. Penalties have to damage a club on the field, including scuppering a promotion or precipitating a relegation. That is tough on the innocent supporters but, as nutty said, fans of other clubs are being cheated out of promotions or suffering relegations by the clubs that break the rules

[Indy 3,344]

This is exactly what’s needed, real penalty for breaking the rules.

I also think it should be cast in stone, if you break the FFP by set amounts you get set points deducted, thus it’s set for all clubs and not penalising certain clubs as they don’t have the high profile of other clubs.

Still think by having a 13 million pound yearly buffer still allows richer owners an unfair advantage. Would like to see that reduced to 5 million per season.

[Badger 2,415]

[quote user="cornish sam"]Unfortunately they don''t seem to be facing the points deduction for breaching FFP, but rather from breaching the transfer embargo. It still doesn''t give the teeth this rule needs...[/quote]It does really. The transfer embargo was given as a result of breaching the FFP rules. I can see your point though - it is "indirect" rather than a points deduction for simply breaking the FFP rules initially, but there are signs that things are being more pro-actively monitored now, which give it more teeth.

[Guest]

Lets face it. Quite a lot of clubs, and their supporters especially, will be hoping Birmingham, likely to struggle anyway, will get a 12 point penalty.

That only leaves two spaces to fill.

I am ignorant of financial consequences but does anyone know whether it would suit Birmingham, if likely to go down with a big penalty, to go into administration, if they are in a lot of debt anyway?

Are there more serious consequences of administration?

[Badger 2,415]

KG, there is a further points loss for going into administration.If a company goes into administration, the administrator tries to help it continue trading by reaching a deal with its creditors enabling the company to continue (Company Voluntary Arrangement). If this is not possible, the company may be liquidated - i.e. cease to exist and have all its assets sold off (as happened with Rangers).The aim is to keep the company (club) going, but it''s possible that they will have to sell off assets (including the ground/ training facilities) to pay creditors. Of course, some football clubs have a "brand value" which may attract bargain hunters keen to pick up the name (as also happened with Rangers). This is why we ended up with Steven Whittaker for a free - the rangers which had employed him had ceased to exist and he refused a new contract with the new Rangers. The same with Naismith, who went to Everton.