• ! ! ! IMPORTANT MESSAGE ! ! !

    Discussions about police investigations

    In light of recent developments about a player from Premier League being arrested and until there is an official announcement, ALL users should refrain from discussing or speculating about situations around personal off-pitch matters related to any Arsenal player. This is to protect you and the forum.

    Users who disregard this reminder will be issued warnings and their posts will get deleted from public.

Aston Villa: Unai Enemy

jones

Captain Serious
Trusted ⭐
Again, I'm not saying there shouldn't be rules. I'm saying the current rules favour the already established clubs.

You say it's possible, but who has done it?
You can grow to a certain point and then there's a huge chasm which is almost impossible to bridge. You basically HAVE TO spend for a short period of time, make sure it's spent effectively and then catch up with the revenue you get as a result. It's a risk, but it's that or just stay in the pack with everyone else.


As for Diaby, we finished 7th in 22/23 and qualified for Europe. That's hardly midtable. We finished abovcve Sp**s. And we bought Diaby in a summer when our net spend was about 70m, which isn't exactly huge these days for a premier league club in the european places. Plus we have an elite manager now who will help attract players so we probably have a slight advantage over other teams at that level because they want to play for him. I hardly think that's a crazy transfer.

In the same window Forest spent 35m on a midfielder. Sp**s spent 100m on two midfielders, West Ham spent 45m on a midfielder, Wolves spent 50m on a midfielder.

Diaby seems like a really weird transfer to single out as being excessive spending. Really weird.
Or are non CL teams not allowed to pull off small coups now?
I said before you're looking at this from a PL centric lens. Yes other teams are even worse but you're distorting if not destroying the market for everyone outside of England if you just allow everyone to do what you've done in recent seasons. That City and Chelsea should be stopped or in an ideal world liquidated doesn't change that fact.

Never said it was "excessive spending" I said it was a perfect example of illegitimate funds at work. Diaby could've had his pick of several title challenging clubs last summer yet he decided to go to a midtable club in the Midlands instead. Even if you want to argue with Emery being there you having an elite manager is only because of your billionaire owner in the first place, he left Villarreal a club that won the EL and got into a CL semi shortly before to join a club that was close to get relegated.

I agree it's not fair within the PL and that these rules cement the status quo. But the PL isn't the only league in the world and you passing the buck further down the line or in this case abroad, where clubs operating within their means have to sell the talents they developed to some club that's done nothing but be bought by some Egyptian piece of sh*t isn't fair either.
 

Stevo the Villan

Established Member
I said before you're looking at this from a PL centric lens. Yes other teams are even worse but you're distorting if not destroying the market for everyone outside of England if you just allow everyone to do what you've done in recent seasons. That City and Chelsea should be stopped or in an ideal world liquidated doesn't change that fact.

Never said it was "excessive spending" I said it was a perfect example of illegitimate funds at work. Diaby could've had his pick of several title challenging clubs last summer yet he decided to go to a midtable club in the Midlands instead. Even if you want to argue with Emery being there you having an elite manager is only because of your billionaire owner in the first place, he left Villarreal a club that won the EL and got into a CL semi shortly before to join a club that was close to get relegated.

I agree it's not fair within the PL and that these rules cement the status quo. But the PL isn't the only league in the world and you passing the buck further down the line or in this case abroad, where clubs operating within their means have to sell the talents they developed to some club that's done nothing but be bought by some Egyptian piece of sh*t isn't fair either.
But we're following the rules, so how does any of this make sense? Either the rules are stopping this happening or they're not?

Your argument is all over the place.

How is our spending "illegitimate". We're following the rules :D


What you're basically saying is no clubs who aren't at the top level already should be allowed to spend a bit of money to try and catch up. You're basically proving exactly what I'm saying. The reason clubs abroad suffer is because of the premier league as a whole. They're not suffering because teams like us are trying to catch up and buying good players, they're suffering because of the money in the league in general.

That's a legitimate argument. But the solution should be to address the league as a whole, including the already established "big" clubs.
All you're saying is no other clubs should be allowed to join the party and the big clubs should be allowed to carry on enjoying their success unchallenegd

I don't blame you. I'd argue the same if Villa were already at that level. I wouldn't want any other clubs joining in either. But let's call it what it is instead of pretending to care about other clubs and leagues.
 

Macho

North London Forever
Dusted 🔻

Country: England
I said before you're looking at this from a PL centric lens. Yes other teams are even worse but you're distorting if not destroying the market for everyone outside of England if you just allow everyone to do what you've done in recent seasons. That City and Chelsea should be stopped or in an ideal world liquidated doesn't change that fact.

Never said it was "excessive spending" I said it was a perfect example of illegitimate funds at work. Diaby could've had his pick of several title challenging clubs last summer yet he decided to go to a midtable club in the Midlands instead. Even if you want to argue with Emery being there you having an elite manager is only because of your billionaire owner in the first place, he left Villarreal a club that won the EL and got into a CL semi shortly before to join a club that was close to get relegated.

I agree it's not fair within the PL and that these rules cement the status quo. But the PL isn't the only league in the world and you passing the buck further down the line or in this case abroad, where clubs operating within their means have to sell the talents they developed to some club that's done nothing but be bought by some Egyptian piece of sh*t isn't fair either.

So you like a lot of A-M are saying Aston Villa don't deserve to sign a Diaby then? They should stick to wheeling and dealing with midtable talent + using academy only and wait their turn for a Saka or Kane to emerge?

I don't really agree with that tbh.
 

HattoriHanzo

Active Member

Country: Croatia
We're not having troubles financially, we're having troubles staying within the rules (but we are staying within the rules)
Which is basically the point.

As you say, we haven't spent CRAZY money. But unfortunately we are quite a way behind clubs like yourselves, Sp**s, Liverpool, Chelsea etc in terms of revenue. So because we don't bring in as much revenue we can't spend as much.

I of course understand the reasons for those rules. It's a good thing to not let teams spend loads of money they don't have.

All I'm saying in this thread is that as a result of those rules, it's much harder for clubs to bridge the gap between being a good premier league club, and being a top 6 premier league club.
I think there is a discussion to be had about whether the rules in their current format are entirely suitable, and whether there's a way that can be tweaked to ensure that clubs are protected from mismanagement AND the elite clubs aren't ringfenced like they are now
Now Villa will play in UCL and UEFA rules are even stricter.
Do you expect that your owner will demand that UEFA changes their rules?
Even City, do they really expect that UEFA will change these rules?
Or they will sue also UEFA?

Villa is now richer than some European giants, like AC Milan, Inter, Juventus.
Since they came back to Prem, their net spend is bigger than net spend of City, Bayern, Real Madrid, Liverpool (according to Transfermarkt).
Only Chelsea, United, Arsenal, Sp**s, Newcastle, PSG and Al-Hilal have bigger net spend.
And 5 seasons ago they were in Championship.
I really don't understand what more do you want.
 

jones

Captain Serious
Trusted ⭐
But we're following the rules, so how does any of this make sense? Either the rules are stopping this happening or they're not?

Your argument is all over the place.

How is our spending "illegitimate". We're following the rules :D


What you're basically saying is no clubs who aren't at the top level already should be allowed to spend a bit of money to try and catch up. You're basically proving exactly what I'm saying. The reason clubs abroad suffer is because of the premier league as a whole. They're not suffering because teams like us are trying to catch up and buying good players, they're suffering because of the money in the league in general.

That's a legitimate argument. But the solution should be to address the league as a whole, including the already established "big" clubs.
All you're saying is no other clubs should be allowed to join the party and the big clubs should be allowed to carry on enjoying their success unchallenegd
Illegitimate because it's not on the back of sporting merit or selling your players, don't be dense.

I literally said in my post before that PL big clubs should be punished as well, I don't even make an exception for Arsenal we've profited massively off of Kroenkes money in recent years. But your argument "the league as a whole should be addressed" is exactly the opposite of what you'd be doing by allowing every club to spend as much as their owner wants.

If you take emotion out of it how do you address anything if Luton going forward is also allowed to buy CL level players from Spain? Forest as a newly promoted club buying Sangaré who was linked with us and other bit clubs abroad, ****ing Bournemouth beating out Milan for players etc how are you seriously arguing this spending from smaller clubs isn't hurting other leagues?
 

Stevo the Villan

Established Member
Now Villa will play in UCL and UEFA rules are even stricter.
Do you expect that your owner will demand that UEFA changes their rules?
Even City, do they really expect that UEFA will change these rules?
Or they will sue also UEFA?

Villa is now richer than some European giants, like AC Milan, Inter, Juventus.
Since they came back to Prem, their net spend is bigger than net spend of City, Bayern, Real Madrid (according to Transfermarkt).
And 5 seasons ago they were in Championship.
I really don't understand what more do you want.
Again, you seem to be making up a scenario where I'm really unhappy about this.
I'm not.

I'm very happy with how Villa have managed to work within the current rules and I'm absolutely over the moon with the progress we've made.

I've never said I agreed with our owners wanting to change/abolish the rules. I actually disagree with that quite strongly if it involves legal action. And if it in anyway lends support to what Man City are doing then I'd be ****ing disgusted by it.


I DO, however, agree with the general point that there is a discussion to be had about whether the rules are the best way to tackle what they intended to tackle. Whilst they do protect clubs from financial mismanagement to a degree, I believe, like many others, that it makes it harder for clubs not already at the established "big club" level to bridge the gap. I don't really think that protecting the big clubs like that is the right outcome of a set of rules.

Just because we are doing really well whilst working within those rules doesn't change that conversation. I think the rules will probably stop Villa, and other clubs, ever being able to bridge that gap.
Whether that's a good thing or not I guess is up for debate. My only argument is it protects the already big clubs and creates an extra barrier of entry to that level of football, and I don't think that's a good thing
 

jones

Captain Serious
Trusted ⭐
So you like a lot of A-M are saying Aston Villa don't deserve to sign a Diaby then? They should stick to wheeling and dealing with midtable talent + using academy only and wait their turn for a Saka or Kane to emerge?

I don't really agree with that tbh.
What have Villa done to deserve Diaby?

You guys are sounding like the gentry complaining about the aristocracy oppressing them lol.
 

HattoriHanzo

Active Member

Country: Croatia
Illegitimate because it's not on the back of sporting merit or selling your players, don't be dense.

I literally said in my post before that PL big clubs should be punished as well, I don't even make an exception for Arsenal we've profited massively off of Kroenkes money in recent years. But your argument "the league as a whole should be addressed" is exactly the opposite of what you'd be doing by allowing every club to spend as much as their owner wants.

If you take emotion out of it how do you address anything if Luton going forward is also allowed to buy CL level players from Spain? Forest as a newly promoted club buying Sangaré who was linked with us and other bit clubs abroad, ****ing Bournemouth beating out Milan for players etc how are you seriously arguing this spending from smaller clubs isn't hurting other leagues?
As already mentioned many times on this forum, insane level of spending of City, Chelsea and United inflated transfer fees for all types of players.
And the main culprit is Premier League itself, they allowed it.

As a result, you can read posts here how Serie A, Bundesliga, etc. are farmers leagues.
 

Stevo the Villan

Established Member
Illegitimate because it's not on the back of sporting merit or selling your players, don't be dense.

I literally said in my post before that PL big clubs should be punished as well, I don't even make an exception for Arsenal we've profited massively off of Kroenkes money in recent years. But your argument "the league as a whole should be addressed" is exactly the opposite of what you'd be doing by allowing every club to spend as much as their owner wants.

If you take emotion out of it how do you address anything if Luton going forward is also allowed to buy CL level players from Spain? Forest as a newly promoted club buying Sangaré who was linked with us and other bit clubs abroad, ****ing Bournemouth beating out Milan for players etc how are you seriously arguing this spending from smaller clubs isn't hurting other leagues?
Again, this is a PL problem. Not an FFP problem.
Your argument seems to have pivoted from Villa challenging FFP rules to a different argument altogether.

It's an argument I actually agree with, I do think the money in the premier league is hurting other leagues. I just don't see why that's being used in this discussion about something else.


Again, our spending has been within the rules, so how is it illegitimate? How is it different to any other club trying to improve?
 

HattoriHanzo

Active Member

Country: Croatia
Again, you seem to be making up a scenario where I'm really unhappy about this.
I'm not.

I'm very happy with how Villa have managed to work within the current rules and I'm absolutely over the moon with the progress we've made.

I've never said I agreed with our owners wanting to change/abolish the rules. I actually disagree with that quite strongly if it involves legal action. And if it in anyway lends support to what Man City are doing then I'd be ****ing disgusted by it.


I DO, however, agree with the general point that there is a discussion to be had about whether the rules are the best way to tackle what they intended to tackle. Whilst they do protect clubs from financial mismanagement to a degree, I believe, like many others, that it makes it harder for clubs not already at the established "big club" level to bridge the gap. I don't really think that protecting the big clubs like that is the right outcome of a set of rules.

Just because we are doing really well whilst working within those rules doesn't change that conversation. I think the rules will probably stop Villa, and other clubs, ever being able to bridge that gap.
Whether that's a good thing or not I guess is up for debate. My only argument is it protects the already big clubs and creates an extra barrier of entry to that level of football, and I don't think that's a good thing
We will see how they will act in this newest City's legal action against Prem.
 

jones

Captain Serious
Trusted ⭐
Again, this is a PL problem. Not an FFP problem.
Your argument seems to have pivoted from Villa challenging FFP rules to a different argument altogether.

It's an argument I actually agree with, I do think the money in the premier league is hurting other leagues. I just don't see why that's being used in this discussion about something else.


Again, our spending has been within the rules, so how is it illegitimate? How is it different to any other club trying to improve?
Mate you're generally one of the more sensible posters here I can't believe you're not getting any of this :lol: guess it's different when you're involved emotionally.

My argument hasn't moved even once, I'm not talking about anything but the spending of clubs like Villa. Yes it's wrong that City and Chelsea spend ****loads, no it's not "fair" that you get to spend any amount yourselves. PSR is unfair to clubs trying to break into the oligopoly at the top of the PL but it has/could have the unintended by effect that it actually protects the rest of Europe from being preyed on by clubs outside the PL top 6.
 

jones

Captain Serious
Trusted ⭐
Not once have I argued that this is what I want :D
Why do you mean by this then?
Yeah we’ve spent a fair bit. You have to spend to grow, that’s my point.

But we haven’t spent irresponsibly. The club has no debt, very rich owners, the money has been spent on sensible players. That shouldn’t be what the rules do. They shouldn’t restrict clubs spending money sensibly otherwise it just cements the big clubs and lets nobody challenge them.
 

Macho

North London Forever
Dusted 🔻

Country: England
What have Villa done to deserve Diaby?

You guys are sounding like the gentry complaining about the aristocracy oppressing them lol.

It’s not complaining, it’s more none of you guys can clearly explain why only Arsenal have the divine right to spend and other clubs it’s cheating.

How does a team like Villa kindly and gently break into the top 6 without offending anybody or spending I’m actually dying to know :lol:

What is the alternative?
 
Last edited:

Stevo the Villan

Established Member
Why do you mean by this then?
Exactly what I've been saying the whole time.
I don't think the rules should protect already established big clubs the way they do, because even if clubs slowly and sensibly spend they're heavily restricted from bridging that gap.
I think there's a discussion to be had about whether the rules could loosen that protection around the big clubs whilst also achieving what they set out to achieve.

At no point have I argued there should be no rules and everyone should be allowed to spend whatever they want
 

jones

Captain Serious
Trusted ⭐
Igoodt’s not complaining, it’s more none of you guys can clearly explain why only Arsenal have the divine right to spend and other clubs it’s cheating.

How a club can attempt to improve you guys haven’t made clear either. Basically accept their role in the league and perform above their means?
I said in my last post I don't think Arsenal have that right either. Just saying it's not right to allow 20 clubs to **** up the market for everyone else instead of just 6.

If it were up to me all club owners of the PL would be expropriated and shot but that's probably just me.
 

jones

Captain Serious
Trusted ⭐
Exactly what I've been saying the whole time.
I don't think the rules should protect already established big clubs the way they do, because even if clubs slowly and sensibly spend they're heavily restricted from bridging that gap.
I think there's a discussion to be had about whether the rules could loosen that protection around the big clubs whilst also achieving what they set out to achieve.

At no point have I argued there should be no rules and everyone should be allowed to spend whatever they want
You don't spend "slowly" by buying Diaby for 55m as a midtable club is what I said the whole time for the reasons put forward as well.

It's fine if you disagree I'm just saying you're not fixing the problem (which isn't your responsibility anyway), you don't make it more fair either you just fix it for yourself and become part of the problem for everyone else. But that's fair enough, think we're going in circles at this point.
 

Stevo the Villan

Established Member
You don't spend "slowly" by buying Diaby for 55m as a midtable club is what I said the whole time for the reasons put forward as well.
But we're working within the rules. So what's your issue? Do you think the rules should be even stricter?

What about Wolves buying Cunha for 50m the same window? Or West Ham buying Kudus for 45m?
Or Sp**s buying Madison and Brennan Johnson for 50m each (or there abouts)?
They could all have gone to CL clubs abroad if they wanted.

We finished above all of them the season before that window. Why is Diaby not ok?
 

db10_therza

🎵 Edu getting rickrolled 🎵
Trusted ⭐

Country: Bangladesh

Player:White
The fact that this conversation has been going on for as long as it has should tell everyone there’s no easy answer here. There’s a couple of competing principles at work:

1) In a meritocracy, success (and only success) should be rewarded. Prolonged success over long time leads to greater rewards and this is how the legacy big clubs got to where they are.

2) There should be equal opportunities for all. There shouldn’t be an invisible glass ceiling that holds down the Villa’s of this world.

Do those sound familiar? They should… society as a whole has been struggling with this exact problem. And there is no easy answer, so you’re unlikely to find a solution no matter how hard you all beat your chest.

You could try and level the playing field more with more affirmative action style policies like inverting payouts but again, that would fall foul of meritocratic principles and people would cry about it.
 

Arsenal Quotes

Other clubs never came into my thoughts once I knew Arsenal wanted to sign me.

Dennis Bergkamp

2024 Summer Transfers Deadline

Daily Transfer Updates

Friday, July 19

Marseille would offer around £20m for Eddie Nketiah, but it’s likely that Arsenal would ask for more [Alan Nixon - The Sun]

West Ham are frontrunners to sign Reiss Nelson and a fee of £15m-20m could be enough to clinch a deal [Evening Standard]

Inter and Juventus have asked Arsenal about loaning Jakub Kiwior, but the club will only let him leave on a permanent transfer [Goal Poland]

Academy striker Chido Obi-Martin visited Manchester United’s training ground to discuss a move to the club [AcademyScoop]

Crystal Palace are preparing a £30m bid for Emile Smith Rowe [Ed Aarons - The Guardian]

Latest posts

Top Bottom