test

Welcome to Talk Chelsea

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Tomo

Chelsea Transfer Pub

Started by Tomo,

10,843 posts in this topic

If FFP is kaput for the summer then maybe we should prioritize a dominant, commanding CB rather than Chilwell and just opt for Tagliafico at LB.

Who that dominant, commanding CB is I'm not sure. Koulibaly is the obvious player that comes to mind but he doesn't fit the age profile that our board and Frank have been targeting. Struggling to think of any CB that is attainable who can come in and have a VVD-like effect on our team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Vesper said:

wowowow

£44.93m

is all????????????????

 

3 hours ago, Jason said:

Matt Law said £47.5 million. Somewhere around there, I guess. 10 million or so cheaper than Morata! :lol: 

Apparently we got him cheaper than the clause because there was a discount if the transaction went smoothly. 

killer1257 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to see Werner get over the line. I expect the LB to be next. Although there is no reporting on it, my money is still on Telles. I say this as his profile is everything we could ask for and he is only £20-25m. After that I would say we need: 

Harvetz (going to be a great player, as result if you get a chance you need to take it and ask questions later) 

CB - I just want De Ligt. However, Romagnoli would also be a great shout. After those two I would maybe look at Vertonghen on a free as he has the right profile we need i.e. bit of a bast*rd, left footed CB and has experience (this however is if everyone is crazily priced/won't move.) 

GK - This is probably actually No.1 priority for me but due to the money spent on Kepa I have it lower as I cannot see the club ponying up for a another GK. For me the smart money is on getting a Ben Foster type GK as he is a real solid PL GK. That way Kepa can get another year and if he is still crap then we can get a proper replacement in 2021. 

CF - I am not convinced Giroud will be here next season and get Luiz vibes from his extension. If he goes I would like Cavani for a year or two. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8435697/UEFA-postpone-Financial-Fair-Plays-break-assessments-end-season.html

UEFA relax their Financial Fair Play rules to allow clubs to record coronavirus losses during football's finance crisis without being banned from Europe

 

 

This explains a lot now and why our interest in Havertz isn't going away. 

Vesper likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Vesper said:

sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet

I think there's some caveats to this relax of ffp. 

I would like a full analysis of this please. :)

Vesper likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Blues Forever said:

 

Can we get full article please? 

Thanks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Pizy said:

If FFP is kaput for the summer then maybe we should prioritize a dominant, commanding CB rather than Chilwell and just opt for Tagliafico at LB.

Who that dominant, commanding CB is I'm not sure. Koulibaly is the obvious player that comes to mind but he doesn't fit the age profile that our board and Frank have been targeting. Struggling to think of any CB that is attainable who can come in and have a VVD-like effect on our team.

Varane with Kante and some cash (only due to age) on the other end (or AC + Kante, as AC is made for La Liga)

or 

De Ligt for Jorginho and Emerson (maybe try and add cash too and do a two for two and get Alex Sandro as well, this LB is sorted for 3 years or so)

or

other combos and/or cash for them and these other following four

Marquinhos

or

Skriniar

or

José Giménez

or

Romagnoli (least expensive on this list, but also the best left-footed CB remotely available on the planet (and 3rd best overall, after Laporte and Lucas Hernandez)

 

those are the 6 best even faintly available CB's on the planet (Lucas H I still do not believe will be sold to PSG unless its a swap for Marqinhos) that are still young enough to buy (KK is not, he turns 30 in January and the poison dwarf said zero chance he is sold for less than 100m euros)

in fact

the only other top ten CB I did not list somewhere up above is VVD

there are you ten best CB's on the planet atm

massive drop off after those 10

easiest position on the planet to pick the clear top ten

ps

fuck Harry Maguire

that cunt is not close to any of those above

Manure is deluded

I would go bonkers if we somehow bought him or did some trade

I detest him, detest Stones, and Gomez is also a tad overrated, although he is young and should pass those two up

 

 

Johnnyeye likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Fernando said:

Can we get full article please? 

Thanks 

 

Exclusive: UEFA to relax FFP regulations in light of coronavirus crisis

https://theathletic.com/1690193/2020/03/20/exclusive-uefa-relax-ffp-regulations-coronavirus/

UEFA-logo-FFP-scaled-e1584727793162-1024x683.jpg

European football’s governing body UEFA has relaxed its Financial Fair Play regulations to help cash-strapped clubs survive the crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic.

With the professional game facing its biggest economic challenge since World War Two, the move has been broadly welcomed by football finance experts but some have warned UEFA not to let clubs with the wealthiest owners take advantage of the temporary relaxation.

In response to calls for urgent help, the Swiss-based governing body has extended the deadline for clubs to prove they have no “overdue payables” — such as unpaid tax bills, transfer instalments or wages — from March 31 to April 30.

Furthermore, it has also reminded clubs that the principle of “force majeure”, a French term that means greater force, is written into the spending rules.

“Any extraordinary event or circumstances beyond the control of the club that are considered a case of force majeure are taken into account as part of the club’s assessment, on a case-by-case basis,” a UEFA spokesperson told The Athletic.

Introduced in 2011 to curb overspending, the FFP regulations are based on the idea that clubs should not spend more than they make from their ordinary business activities. Owners are allowed to invest as much as they like in the club’s academy, community work, stadium and women’s teams but there are strict limits on how much additional funding they can put into the first team playing budget or transfer kitty.

The rules are policed by an independent body known as the Club Financial Control Body, which has investigatory and adjudicatory arms. Numerous clubs have been sanctioned for breaching these rules, most notably Manchester City, who are currently appealing against a two-year ban from European club competition that was imposed last month.

It is understood that the decision to push back the deadline for unpaid bills and reassure clubs that any extra support from owners in the coming months will be assessed more leniently than usual follows talks with the European Club Association, the organisation that represents the interests of the continent’s leading clubs.

Confirmation of UEFA’s move comes a day after the Premier League warned clubs that domestic broadcasters might ask for £762 million back if no further fixtures can be played this season and former Football Association chief executive Mark Palios told The Athletic that clubs will go bust if players do not agree to pay cuts.

“UEFA has employed a practical and sensible approach,” says Kieran Maguire, a football finance expert who lectures at the University of Liverpool. “By giving clubs longer to provide proof of no outstanding debts it allows the clubs to focus on day-to-day issues rather than administrative compliance issues.

“In relation to the monitoring for FFP, UEFA has acknowledged we are in extraordinary times. It has effectively allowed clubs some flexibility in terms of FFP compliance.

“At the same time, those clubs who do have significant resources behind them cannot exploit their financial advantage to use the present circumstances to give themselves carte blanche in terms of spending money without fear of action.”

John Mehrzad QC, a leading sports law specialist at Littleton Chambers, agrees with Maguire that this move was necessary, pointing out that the relaxation of the March 31 deadline will help “clubs remain afloat” at a time of continuing expenses and uncertain income.

He warned, however, that it might not be so good for “clubs, players or staff wishing to be paid over the next six weeks, as clubs can effectively default until the end of that period and not face UEFA sanction”.

But this, he explained, is the “hard balancing act” governing bodies have right now, as they prioritise saving clubs on the basis that if they go bust, their players and staff might not receive any further pay at all.

On the decision to take a more generous view of injections of cash from owners, Mehrzad says: “That approach makes sense but it is potentially open to abuse if, for example, a very rich club injected in a lot of cash from an owner not to use on wages but to buy players in the next transfer window. Hence, the assessment on a ‘case-by-case’ basis.”

Nick De Marco QC, from Blackstone Chambers, is perhaps the leading legal expert on FFP rules in the UK and described the UEFA move as “obviously sensible”. But he would like to see the British football authorities follow suit.

“The suggestion that clubs may be able to rely on the principle of ‘force majeure’ will be of particular interest,” says De Marco. “In England, the clubs that are struggling the most to pay their players and keep going are governed by the English Football League’s (Profitability and Sustainability) rules which are far stricter than those of UEFA.

“In my view these rules need to be suspended during the current health emergency. Clubs are already struggling to be able to pay their players and other staff, and if the only way they can do so is by going into debt it makes no sense at all to then punish them for it.”

The EFL declined to comment on UEFA’s decision to loosen its rules but it is understood that any change to its profitability and sustainability regulations would have to be agreed by its 71 clubs and those conversations are ongoing.

Sean Cottrell, the founder and chief executive of LawInSport, sums up the situation like this: “Extending the deadline makes sense, given the crisis countries across the world are facing.

“Football, like all sports, is having to adjust rapidly to the situation and in many cases they are supporting local communities at this difficult time whilst managing their own internal difficulties.

“What is of interest is UEFA suggests COVID-19 is considered a case of force majeure in terms of FFP. This may have significant legal implications later down the line for clubs and players.”

Fernando likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now