What if the PL went on strike?

[spendsum4uckingmoney]

I know it isn't just AW that is angry about Man Cities sponsorship deal. I'm sure that atleast 18 clubs in the PL are unhappy with what can only be described as money laundering. So what if the whole league went on strike? The FA would have to do something. Can you see it happening?

[northbank123]

Is it really money laundering? No suggestion Etihad Airways are a huge criminal franchise, if they want to pay Citeh well over market value that's their prerogative. The only people they might have to answer to is their shareholders. The PL also have no rules on FFP etc beyond their dubious fit and proper persons test, which only applies to owners. The only body with the capability and motivation to question the deal would be UEFA, and they haven't got the balls.

Besides, a strike would never happen, too much money at stake in TV commitments etc.

[StuartL]

wasn't there a meeting today with most pl clubs regarding implementing some kind if financial fair play in the prem ( it will currently only be brought into European competition)
so as you stated the vast majority of clubs, particularly us, would like to see spending linked to income / profit to avoid the whims of wealthy owners just propping up clubs with personal wealth not them getting by on club generated invome.
of couse sponsorship would be classed as club income, so how could overinflsted deals be curbed ?

[Top Londoner]

"Besides, a strike would never happen, too much money at stake in TV commitments etc."


Dunno mate. Wasn't the NFL wiped out for a season a few years ago? They are awash with $$$$$'s.

[ohsobooko]

nfl lost a whole season while back, nhl is currently suffering from a lock out .. i think it is their second in the last 10 years .

[Top Londoner]

nfl lost a whole season while back, nhl is currently suffering from a lock out .. i think it is their second in the last 10 years .

What is the nhl lock out about? Wages????

[TeeCee]

Won't happen in a million years.

Players would never strike because they are too greedy and wouldn't be paid
Clubs wouldn't allow it because they cannot lose the revenue

[Top Londoner]

"Won't happen in a million years."


Like Rooney would never ask for a transfer?

[augie]

Why should other clubs/uefa/fifa be allowed to tell citeeh that they cannot negotiate a sponsorship deal like they have ? Who are they to deem it to be a ridiculous and over-inflated price ? This is one of the biggest flaws in this FFP bullshit and as I have said on numerous occasions, I am totally totally against it ever being introduced and if it wasnt for clubs like us throwing our toys from the pram as a result of our demotion in the pecking order then this proposal would never have surfaced

Btw there is no point in comparing the nfl players situation and their strike with what happens in england - for starters the money in question dwarfs that of footie in england plus players over there see the tv deals increasing in value and see the salary cap retricting their ability to get a bigger slice of the pie. They also fought to get the nfl to contribute more money to looking after retired players who have fallen on hard times or who have suffered healthwise (mainly from repeated concussions suffered playing the game) and this was a good thing considering that 78% of nfl players are bankrupt or in severe financial trouble within two years of retirement

[DB10GOONER]

"Won't happen in a million years."


Like Rooney would never ask for a transfer?

He didn't though, did he. He called Manure's bluff and won like he knew he would.

A strike over a club's activity will never happen. Once the modern arrogant mercenary footballer is getting his 100K+ a week he does not give a flying fuck about the bigger picture or broader issues affecting the game. They are THAT shallow.

[richpye]

nfl lost a whole season while back, nhl is currently suffering from a lock out .. i think it is their second in the last 10 years .

What is the nhl lock out about? Wages????

The NHL has a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) which amongst other things includes an agreement on how revenue is shared between the owners and players. The current CBA is due to expire, so the players (naturally) are seeking a higher share, however the owners have not only said no, but don't even want to keep to the existing arrangement which they state has become uneconomical (a lot of clubs are struggling financially with some cities losing their franchises e.g Atlanta and the continual rumours of Phoenix) since the economic downturn. So the clubs have effectively locked the players out, saying the league can't continue until an agreement is reached.

When people discuss the benefits of the financial models of us sports, this is what happens when it goes badly wrong.

[OneBardGooner]

If there was a strike in the prem players like Chamakh, squillaci, arshavin, rosicky and flappy would all get paid for sitting around doing nothing!...and errrmmm hold on!

[AFCjames]

There was a lock out with the NFL players last year related to players salaries, retirement plans and all sorts. Could never see it happening in the premier league.

[northbank123]

There was a difference with American sports strikes, because those were players striking from their own greed. City paying their players stupid amounts doesn't mean other PL players earn less, if anything they earn more. Why would the players want to strike because City are too good for them?

At the end of the day I do agree with Augie in that there's no real need for that kind of strict financial regulation in football. Despite what they say it's not to protect clubs' long-term future and the fans and shareholders etc, it's basically just a competition policy. Do you remember A1 racing? No, because watching everybody playing on an even playing field is fucking boring, people want action and glamour.

We would undoubtedly benefit from rigidly-applied FFP rules but at the end of the day where do you then draw the line? I agree City, Chelsea, PSG etc are ridiculous but that's modern football. You pays your money you takes your chances, many clubs (Portsmouth etc etc) have taken risks with supposed multimillionaire owners from overseas and suffered, others (like Everton and us) have decided against it either based on risk or supposedly principle.

If an individual wants to throw billions at a football club why shouldn't he be allowed to?

[TeeCee]

If you strike, you don't get paid.....like I said the footballers of today are far too worried about money to even consider taking action......unless someone told them all there was going to be a salary cap.....then they might!!

Like Rooney would never ask for a transfer?

and why did he ask for a transfer? To get more money, hence my point I made, that players are just too greedy to strike over anything but themselves.