Do you guys actually consider violating FFP to be the equivalent of bribing refs or paying other clubs to throw matches?
I want to get a read of peoples opinions here:
- Yes, it is the exact same. Cheating is Cheating
- No, obviously paying your own players and coaches more money to entice them to join your club is not as bad as bribing refs and match fixing.
- Financial Doping is actually worse.
Personally:
If i found out Roman had been bribing refs or Paying the other clubs to throw matches, I would be devastated.
I am entirely fine with Paying players more money that FFP allows.
Eg. Restaurant A has an early start in a neighborhood and earns 4 times as much revenue as Restaurant B.
Every good chef Restaurant B hires gets poached away by Restaurant A, because the local laws dictate Restaurant A can spend 4 times as much on payroll and the ingredients it buys.
Do you think this is fair competition?
The way FFP is setup, whether intentional or not creates an established hierarchy
FFP is something I find to be an unjust rule set. I dont care that unjust rules get broken. Eg. before Washington state legalized weed I knew of many people who smoked. I never judged them because I didnt agree with the law.
FFP isn’t fair and isn’t right. It somehow limits growth and shouldn’t be there in the first place. Need better rules to prevent administrations.
But with that said, football is a competitive sports with a certain set of rules to make it fair. Some rules maybe right. Some rules maybe wrong. But even if the rules are wrong and the other 19 teams abide by those rules, and the one team who doesn’t follow it, it gives that team a bit of an unfair advantage. By how much, it’s hard to say but still an advantage nonetheless.
Will that advantage translate it into success? I doubt anyone can easily calculate it in breaching FFP.