MATCHWATCH : Rotherham United (h)

[Nameless]

Yeah there probably isn't loads of wriggle room but I don't think it's worth the conversation starter of potentially breaking any rules that have been set against us, especially when the club have said that we are on forecast at the moment. If we begin to hear any differently then yes fair enough.

Of course it’s worth remembering we still have a suspended penalty hanging over us !
The question was are we free ofrestrictions come the end of the season and the answer is we have no real idea.
I have always said it would need a deliberate decision to not hit the business plan and for the EFL to be complicit in that and I think we will be ok.
However we may find that we remain under some kind of monitoring,and depending how close we are to FFP limits we may find we still have some limits on transfers (I could see us needing to get clearance for spending any transfer fee, but not having specific limits)

We may have limits as you say but that would probably be unprecedented in that we agreed a penalty and seem to be abiding by it - so once out we should be able to trade under the same terms as other clubs i.e. minimise loses to the 39m over 3 years but knowing full well that if we so much as go a pound over we will get the full 12pts thrown at us.

I think it would be perfectly reasonable for us to continue being monitored. The league shouldn’t let clubs get into the situation we were in and they have changed the way FFP is reported I believe. I would much rather we had some restrictions which meant we were run sensibly than we were back in trouble in 2-3 years.

[Nameless]

If it was that close to us getting another breach I doubt we would have brought in Casadei…

Depends on the terms. We sent several of our youngsters out on loan remember.
I don’t think there are any signs we’ll be in trouble but assuming we’ll be free to go crazy in the summer is probably wrong …

who is assuming we will go crazy in the summer?

I don’t know. Why would we ?

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Of course it’s worth remembering we still have a suspended penalty hanging over us !
The question was are we free ofrestrictions come the end of the season and the answer is we have no real idea.
I have always said it would need a deliberate decision to not hit the business plan and for the EFL to be complicit in that and I think we will be ok.
However we may find that we remain under some kind of monitoring,and depending how close we are to FFP limits we may find we still have some limits on transfers (I could see us needing to get clearance for spending any transfer fee, but not having specific limits)

We may have limits as you say but that would probably be unprecedented in that we agreed a penalty and seem to be abiding by it - so once out we should be able to trade under the same terms as other clubs i.e. minimise loses to the 39m over 3 years but knowing full well that if we so much as go a pound over we will get the full 12pts thrown at us.

I think it would be perfectly reasonable for us to continue being monitored. The league shouldn’t let clubs get into the situation we were in and they have changed the way FFP is reported I believe. I would much rather we had some restrictions which meant we were run sensibly than we were back in trouble in 2-3 years.

There must be a balance though. The league shouldn't want anyone to break their rules, but likewise I can't see why having any restrictions on us after this summer, provided we comply with the Business Plan, would be beneficial. If we break the rules again, then we break them and we get sanctioned with whatever it would be. All things said and done, that's why they have rules/regulations.

[Coppells Lost Coat]

Didn't the EFL have to sign off on our signings? So if we were to break the business plan they would have allowed it to happen?

As we got a FA cup money and we have had a ok amount of SKY fixtures - I would like to think we get a 6 figure sum every time we play on SKY and the FA cup must have given us another high 6 figure some as well. On top of that we are hiring backroom staff too. So we must have a decent amount of wiggle room.

I think the only things that would put us over would be a fine from the FA for something.

[Brogue]

well this was an article in getreading on the 7th feb

https://www.getreading.co.uk/sport/foot ... o-26168639

Paul Ince admits he does not know when Reading FC's transfer embargo will be lifted.

The club continues to work under severe restrictions from the English Football League (EFL) for breaching profit and sustainability rules. Royals have only been able to bring in players on loan or on free transfers for the past three-and-a-half years, with Cesare Casadei from Chelsea the one and only addition in the most recent window which shut last Tuesday.

The club is also working to an agreed business plan with the EFL to improve their financial problems and it is hoped the embargo will be lifted in the summer which would allow a fee to be spent on a player.

However, Ince says he is not 100 per cent sure that will be the case and insists the short-term focus for him and the club is to reach survival in the Championship before building for next year and beyond.

"The most important thing is to see where we are [in the summer] first," he said. "The quicker we can get to where we want to get to to stay in this league...then you can start planning and recruiting people.

"A lot of things cost money and we don't know what budget we will have next year and whether we will be in an embargo or not - we don't know."

If the manager of the football club doesn't know then there is zero point anyone on here speculating

[Dirk Gently]

Didn't the EFL have to sign off on our signings? So if we were to break the business plan they would have allowed it to happen?

As we got a FA cup money and we have had a ok amount of SKY fixtures - I would like to think we get a 6 figure sum every time we play on SKY and the FA cup must have given us another high 6 figure some as well. On top of that we are hiring backroom staff too. So we must have a decent amount of wiggle room.

I think the only things that would put us over would be a fine from the FA for something.

I think you're over-estimating the Sky income - ten years or so ago it was something pitiful like 30k per match, and as no-one else other than Sky has bid for FL rights i can't see it having gone up substantially. Essentially, Sky can name their own terms and conditions of contract.

Just looked it up on t'interweb and it says:

... clubs also receive an amount for every broadcasted match on Sky Sports, varying between 10,000 and 100,000 pounds. While the away side usually earns £10K, the home team could receive up to £100K depending on the time slot.

So a six-figure sum is the absolute maximum possible, and I can't see it happening that much.

[Hound]

We may have limits as you say but that would probably be unprecedented in that we agreed a penalty and seem to be abiding by it - so once out we should be able to trade under the same terms as other clubs i.e. minimise loses to the 39m over 3 years but knowing full well that if we so much as go a pound over we will get the full 12pts thrown at us.

I think it would be perfectly reasonable for us to continue being monitored. The league shouldn’t let clubs get into the situation we were in and they have changed the way FFP is reported I believe. I would much rather we had some restrictions which meant we were run sensibly than we were back in trouble in 2-3 years.

There must be a balance though. The league shouldn't want anyone to break their rules, but likewise I can't see why having any restrictions on us after this summer, provided we comply with the Business Plan, would be beneficial. If we break the rules again, then we break them and we get sanctioned with whatever it would be. All things said and done, that's why they have rules/regulations.

We should be given the same level of restrictions or monitoring as every other club from this point on. Been under an embargo for about 4 years already

[YorkshireRoyal99]

I think it would be perfectly reasonable for us to continue being monitored. The league shouldn’t let clubs get into the situation we were in and they have changed the way FFP is reported I believe. I would much rather we had some restrictions which meant we were run sensibly than we were back in trouble in 2-3 years.

There must be a balance though. The league shouldn't want anyone to break their rules, but likewise I can't see why having any restrictions on us after this summer, provided we comply with the Business Plan, would be beneficial. If we break the rules again, then we break them and we get sanctioned with whatever it would be. All things said and done, that's why they have rules/regulations.

We should be given the same level of restrictions or monitoring as every other club from this point on. Been under an embargo for about 4 years already

Exactly - sanctions will undoubtedly be greater if we were to break them, but it just leaves us at a disadvantage to the other clubs if we still end up with some restrictions after this summer, if we don't break our business plan in the meantime.

[Nameless]

There must be a balance though. The league shouldn't want anyone to break their rules, but likewise I can't see why having any restrictions on us after this summer, provided we comply with the Business Plan, would be beneficial. If we break the rules again, then we break them and we get sanctioned with whatever it would be. All things said and done, that's why they have rules/regulations.

We should be given the same level of restrictions or monitoring as every other club from this point on. Been under an embargo for about 4 years already

Exactly - sanctions will undoubtedly be greater if we were to break them, but it just leaves us at a disadvantage to the other clubs if we still end up with some restrictions after this summer, if we don't break our business plan in the meantime.

That’s a very naive way of thinking.
Much preferable to remain under a light touch oversight (which in no way puts us at a disadvantage) and avoid crippling penalties than think we won’t get things wrong because if we do we are punished.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

We should be given the same level of restrictions or monitoring as every other club from this point on. Been under an embargo for about 4 years already

Exactly - sanctions will undoubtedly be greater if we were to break them, but it just leaves us at a disadvantage to the other clubs if we still end up with some restrictions after this summer, if we don't break our business plan in the meantime.

That’s a very naive way of thinking.
Much preferable to remain under a light touch oversight (which in no way puts us at a disadvantage) and avoid crippling penalties than think we won’t get things wrong because if we do we are punished.

I'm not suggesting we won't get things wrong, future punishments etc. But why the necessity to keep us under any sort of restrictions if we comply with our Business Plan in the agreed timeframe? Just so we don't break rules? That should be our responsibility, not anyone else's.

[Nameless]

Exactly - sanctions will undoubtedly be greater if we were to break them, but it just leaves us at a disadvantage to the other clubs if we still end up with some restrictions after this summer, if we don't break our business plan in the meantime.

That’s a very naive way of thinking.
Much preferable to remain under a light touch oversight (which in no way puts us at a disadvantage) and avoid crippling penalties than think we won’t get things wrong because if we do we are punished.

I'm not suggesting we won't get things wrong, future punishments etc. But why the necessity to keep us under any sort of restrictions if we comply with our Business Plan in the agreed timeframe? Just so we don't break rules? That should be our responsibility, not anyone else's.

Fine, you are happy to just hope nothing goes wrong, when evidence is we’ve got plenty wrong over an extended period. Your casual acceptance of future punishments is bizarre.
Not sure why having someone keeping an eye on what we do a little more closely than clubs who have not screwed up is such a problem. Another season of ‘probation’ with regular external review of our accounts seems utterly sensible, and in fact is pretty much what the new FFP Regime requires.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

That’s a very naive way of thinking.
Much preferable to remain under a light touch oversight (which in no way puts us at a disadvantage) and avoid crippling penalties than think we won’t get things wrong because if we do we are punished.

I'm not suggesting we won't get things wrong, future punishments etc. But why the necessity to keep us under any sort of restrictions if we comply with our Business Plan in the agreed timeframe? Just so we don't break rules? That should be our responsibility, not anyone else's.

Fine, you are happy to just hope nothing goes wrong, when evidence is we’ve got plenty wrong over an extended period. Your casual acceptance of future punishments is bizarre.
Not sure why having someone keeping an eye on what we do a little more closely than clubs who have not screwed up is such a problem. Another season of ‘probation’ with regular external review of our accounts seems utterly sensible, and in fact is pretty much what the new FFP Regime requires.

Yes, like many fans, I am happy to hope nothing goes wrong and hope our owners have learnt their lessons and we can do things correctly and comply with whatever regulations are in place. I wouldn't really say it's bizarre to "casually accept" future punishments as 1) I'm not expecting/hoping for any and 2) there is naff all me or anyone on here can do in the event it does happen.

I don't see the issue with anyone reviewing our accounts and our situation like they do with other clubs, but I also don't think we should be subject to anymore restrictions providing we comply with the business plan that is different to any other club who are not under restrctions.

[Snowflake Royal]

Given how trustworthy we proved ourselves following the last time restrictions were released and we immediately spunked over £10m on two players, I'd fully expect us to be under closer scrutiny even if we come out from full restrictions.

Any regulator should bebtaking a risk based approach to monitoring, and a club that's been under heavy restrictions for a prolinged period are a greater risk, especially where the person in charge hasn't changed.

I wouldn't be surprised if we're not under an embargo, or formal business plan, but there is an expectation that our wage bill does not significantly increase and we have to have signings over a certain squad size or value approved to make sure we don’t just go straight back to wildly overspending.

It's worth remembering that even our current enforced wage budget is probably leaning closer to a couple of million loss than any profit.

Without parachute payments, our income is going to be in the region of £14m - £16m. And wages should be about 70% of that to be sustainable.

[Hound]

Closer scrutiny - fine, whatever really. But I hope the likes of Stoke are also

Extra Restrictions - nope that would be a step too far

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Given how trustworthy we proved ourselves following the last time restrictions were released and we immediately spunked over £10m on two players, I'd fully expect us to be under closer scrutiny even if we come out from full restrictions.

Any regulator should bebtaking a risk based approach to monitoring, and a club that's been under heavy restrictions for a prolinged period are a greater risk, especially where the person in charge hasn't changed.

I wouldn't be surprised if we're not under an embargo, or formal business plan, but there is an expectation that our wage bill does not significantly increase and we have to have signings over a certain squad size or value approved to make sure we don’t just go straight back to wildly overspending.

It's worth remembering that even our current enforced wage budget is probably leaning closer to a couple of million loss than any profit.

Without parachute payments, our income is going to be in the region of £14m - £16m. And wages should be about 70% of that to be sustainable.

The changing rules are making it so that 70% of income is spent on wages, transfers and agents fees, however that's dropping down slightly to allow time for the change, so I believe it's at 90% in 2023.

I just don't see the need to keep us under restrictions or sanction any further ones, unless we do not comply with the agreed business plan for whatever reason.

[Elm Park Kid]

Once this season is out the way are all our FFP restrictions etc out the way?

There are two things going on:

1. I think that all of the specific rules that the EFL have placed on us regarding our spending will be removed. We'll be 'free' to manage our finances ourselves again.

2. We still need to obey the general FFP rules regarding how much money can be lost over a 3-year rolling period.

I guess it's like asking if we can now drive however we want now that we've got our license and the instructor isn't in the car with us. Yes and no.

[paultheroyal]

What we can say, once safety is assured, we are in for an exciting summer with what will approximately be 8 new signings and 4 loans coming in.

[Crowbar6753]

What we can say, once safety is assured, we are in for an exciting summer with what will approximately be 8 new signings and 4 loans coming in.

It will be interesting to see if any of the current team are offered new contracts for next season? There are a few whom should be extended or re-signed: Lumley, Mbengue, Fornah would be my main three. Not sure how long NGW signed on for so would have him extend if needed. I would also like to keep Meite who on his day and played in the correct position is deadly and unplayable.

Hutchinson, Dann, Babba, Hendrick, Ejaria, Loum, Hoilett, Carroll, Long, Joao can all go.

Bring in 4/5 from the U23 side and rebuild within budgetary constraints from young hungrey players in the lower leagues and Premiership fringe players.

Whatever happens, it will be an interesting and fun post season.

[paultheroyal]

What we can say, once safety is assured, we are in for an exciting summer with what will approximately be 8 new signings and 4 loans coming in.

It will be interesting to see if any of the current team are offered new contracts for next season? There are a few whom should be extended or re-signed: Lumley, Mbengue, Fornah would be my main three. Not sure how long NGW signed on for so would have him extend if needed. I would also like to keep Meite who on his day and played in the correct position is deadly and unplayable.

Hutchinson, Dann, Babba, Hendrick, Ejaria, Loum, Hoilett, Carroll, Long, Joao can all go.

Bring in 4/5 from the U23 side and rebuild within budgetary constraints from young hungrey players in the lower leagues and Premiership fringe players.

Whatever happens, it will be an interesting and fun post season.

Azeez and NGW pretty sure they expire at the end of the season so that is paramount that they are kept on. Agree on your 3, Lumley is excellent for this level, fan favourite and still in his 20's. Yes to Mbengue and Fornah. Caroll i am sure got 18 month contract so he is here to stay.

[Stranded]

What we can say, once safety is assured, we are in for an exciting summer with what will approximately be 8 new signings and 4 loans coming in.

It will be interesting to see if any of the current team are offered new contracts for next season? There are a few whom should be extended or re-signed: Lumley, Mbengue, Fornah would be my main three. Not sure how long NGW signed on for so would have him extend if needed. I would also like to keep Meite who on his day and played in the correct position is deadly and unplayable.

Hutchinson, Dann, Babba, Hendrick, Ejaria, Loum, Hoilett, Carroll, Long, Joao can all go.

Bring in 4/5 from the U23 side and rebuild within budgetary constraints from young hungrey players in the lower leagues and Premiership fringe players.

Whatever happens, it will be an interesting and fun post season.

Azeez and NGW pretty sure they expire at the end of the season so that is paramount that they are kept on. Agree on your 3, Lumley is excellent for this level, fan favourite and still in his 20's. Yes to Mbengue and Fornah. Caroll i am sure got 18 month contract so he is here to stay.

NGW signed a 1 year deal. Azeez signed a 2 year deal in the summer, so is tied down to 2024 but if he stays fit and shows form, we should look to extend that this summer.