Rival Watch

[TiagoIlori]

Sheffield United’s manager seems to be really up for it and the club itself don’t seem that fond of Colin either, in fact they want to break the club points record in the Championship that he set.

Keep all expectations low, but anything can happen now.

[Hound]

Think wage bill wise we’ll be fine. Even if Puscas and ejaria end up staying, they’ve only 12 months left. I don’t think either are on massive wages either

Despite the gloom I’d say we almost as in as good a state as possible to go down in terms of playing squad. Enough contracted to keep a core but plenty of scope to make low cost signings, as well as a number of academy lads pushing for the first 11

I think any other year since Dai came in would have been an absolute disaster potentially - imagine if we’d already had 5m wages committed to a bunch of crocks like we did this year

[Orion1871]

Colin as been bigging up this game on twatter, telling fans to fill the stadium and make themselves heard, well it`s a local derby so I would expect that anyway.
I`m cautiously optimistic that SU can go there and get a result, I was encouraged by the performance Luton put in yesterday while already securely in the play-offs.

We've been optimistic quite a few times in recent weeks about our relegation rivals losing certain games, and it hasn't happened.

[tidus_mi2]

Colin as been bigging up this game on twatter, telling fans to fill the stadium and make themselves heard, well it`s a local derby so I would expect that anyway.
I`m cautiously optimistic that SU can go there and get a result, I was encouraged by the performance Luton put in yesterday while already securely in the play-offs.

We've been optimistic quite a few times in recent weeks about our relegation rivals losing certain games, and it hasn't happened.

I don't think many were on this scale, although Burnley losing to QPR was definitely a surprise, especially when they dominated the majority of the game, likewise, while the game wasn't exactly a spectacle, Boro were controlling the game yesterday but the red card certainly made the difference.

So I'll remain cautiously optimistic as well, but everything does seem to have gone against us in recent weeks, obviously not helped by our own sheer ineptitude. Perhaps though, that late equaliser against Wigan will be the catalyst to keep us up, Huddersfield lose on Thursday and it finally all clicks for Hunt on Monday, we play well like we did against Wigan but take it a step further and actually create decent chances, winning 2-0.

Then I wake up and realise we were already relegated on Thursday evening.

[Clyde1998]

Worth pointing out that L1 FFP caters for the fee as and when it is paid, it is not included as a lump sum.

So for example, Genoa buy Puscas for £3m - if that is paid in 3 instalments of £1m then 1m will be added to the turnover for next season and the rest in the following years. So whilst selling boosts us in terms of turnover it is not quite as straightforward as mentioned previously.

Naturally, in reverse, purchases are handled the same way.

Looks like there maybe different ffp rules in divisions 3 & 4 to the rest of the FL (why don’t stupid inconsistencies like this surprise anyone any more). In Division 3 (League 1) clubs have to obey SCMP (SALARY COST MANAGEMENT PROTOCOL) which limits spending on player wages to a percentage of club Turnover. In League 1 clubs can spend a maximum of 60% of their turnover on wages - in League 2, the limit is 55%. There are no restrictions (in themselves) on the amount a club can lose or spend on transfer fees.

I wonder how screwed will Reading be next season? Really could do with the local media getting a decent interview with Mark Bowen, after the season ends, and getting him to explain exactly where the club sit with all these things at the moment and set clear expectations as to what the future actually looks like for the club and it’s staff and fans.

It's 75% for the first season after relegation from the Championship.

As we've been discussing above, the League One FFP rules shouldn't be a problem for us to comply with - partially due to the differing rules and partially due to almost all of the remaining high earners leaving the club at the end of the season. Because player sales and cash injections count towards revenue for League One FFP, a club has much more room than in the Championship.

I think it's a better system than in the Championship, as owners who can afford to put money into the club aren't restricted in doing so; it also prevents owners who cannot fund the club from pumping money in via loans. Clubs aren't required to sell assets to try and keep within a loss threshold, especially when the club is able to sustain that level of expenditure through their owner.

[3points]

Worth pointing out that L1 FFP caters for the fee as and when it is paid, it is not included as a lump sum.

So for example, Genoa buy Puscas for £3m - if that is paid in 3 instalments of £1m then 1m will be added to the turnover for next season and the rest in the following years. So whilst selling boosts us in terms of turnover it is not quite as straightforward as mentioned previously.

Naturally, in reverse, purchases are handled the same way.

Looks like there maybe different ffp rules in divisions 3 & 4 to the rest of the FL (why don’t stupid inconsistencies like this surprise anyone any more). In Division 3 (League 1) clubs have to obey SCMP (SALARY COST MANAGEMENT PROTOCOL) which limits spending on player wages to a percentage of club Turnover. In League 1 clubs can spend a maximum of 60% of their turnover on wages - in League 2, the limit is 55%. There are no restrictions (in themselves) on the amount a club can lose or spend on transfer fees.

I wonder how screwed will Reading be next season? Really could do with the local media getting a decent interview with Mark Bowen, after the season ends, and getting him to explain exactly where the club sit with all these things at the moment and set clear expectations as to what the future actually looks like for the club and it’s staff and fans.

It's 75% for the first season after relegation from the Championship.

As we've been discussing above, the League One FFP rules shouldn't be a problem for us to comply with - partially due to the differing rules and partially due to almost all of the remaining high earners leaving the club at the end of the season. Because player sales and cash injections count towards revenue for League One FFP, a club has much more room than in the Championship.

I think it's a better system than in the Championship, as owners who can afford to put money into the club aren't restricted in doing so; it also prevents owners who cannot fund the club from pumping money in via loans. Clubs aren't required to sell assets to try and keep within a loss threshold, especially when the club is able to sustain that level of expenditure through their owner.

When Reading the EFL's ruling from last season, it says something about us being relegated and agreed losses for the season will need to be covered in full by the owners, before the season starts. I believe this is what happened when Blackburn were relegated a few years ago and the Venkys stumped up the cash to fund the planned losses for the season

[Webster750]

I don't think many were on this scale, although Burnley losing to QPR was definitely a surprise, especially when they dominated the majority of the game, likewise, while the game wasn't exactly a spectacle, Boro were controlling the game yesterday but the red card certainly made the difference.

So I'll remain cautiously optimistic as well, but everything does seem to have gone against us in recent weeks, obviously not helped by our own sheer ineptitude. Perhaps though, that late equaliser against Wigan will be the catalyst to keep us up, Huddersfield lose on Thursday and it finally all clicks for Hunt on Monday, we play well like we did against Wigan but take it a step further and actually create decent chances, winning 2-0.

Then I wake up and realise we were already relegated on Thursday evening.

In all fairness having watched Cardiff vs Huddersfield there were multiple moments in which Cardiff were able to breakaway and had they been more clinical (/arsed?) the game could have gone the other way.

I'll be interested to see how Warnock approaches the game if they do lose to Sheffield United as they'll only be needing a point, obviously, whereas they've been having to go for it in most other matches while still managing to concede 60-70% possession most of the time.

Anticipating Huddersfield sitting back, Carroll having to double up as a centre half and opportunities for Hendrick/Casadei to get shots away.

[Stranded]

Worth pointing out that L1 FFP caters for the fee as and when it is paid, it is not included as a lump sum.

So for example, Genoa buy Puscas for £3m - if that is paid in 3 instalments of £1m then 1m will be added to the turnover for next season and the rest in the following years. So whilst selling boosts us in terms of turnover it is not quite as straightforward as mentioned previously.

Naturally, in reverse, purchases are handled the same way.

Looks like there maybe different ffp rules in divisions 3 & 4 to the rest of the FL (why don’t stupid inconsistencies like this surprise anyone any more). In Division 3 (League 1) clubs have to obey SCMP (SALARY COST MANAGEMENT PROTOCOL) which limits spending on player wages to a percentage of club Turnover. In League 1 clubs can spend a maximum of 60% of their turnover on wages - in League 2, the limit is 55%. There are no restrictions (in themselves) on the amount a club can lose or spend on transfer fees.

I wonder how screwed will Reading be next season? Really could do with the local media getting a decent interview with Mark Bowen, after the season ends, and getting him to explain exactly where the club sit with all these things at the moment and set clear expectations as to what the future actually looks like for the club and it’s staff and fans.

It's 75% for the first season after relegation from the Championship.

As we've been discussing above, the League One FFP rules shouldn't be a problem for us to comply with - partially due to the differing rules and partially due to almost all of the remaining high earners leaving the club at the end of the season. Because player sales and cash injections count towards revenue for League One FFP, a club has much more room than in the Championship.

I think it's a better system than in the Championship, as owners who can afford to put money into the club aren't restricted in doing so; it also prevents owners who cannot fund the club from pumping money in via loans. Clubs aren't required to sell assets to try and keep within a loss threshold, especially when the club is able to sustain that level of expenditure through their owner.

And pretty sure Bowen was on the record at the Blue Collar Event last week saying he had zero concerns about us being able to comply with the rules in L1, if we end up there. Naturally, we'll want to run the club with an eye on returning to the Champ asap and therefore be able to meet the Champ rules comfortably upon return.

If you want to be kind to those running the club, taking the smaller points hit over 2 years does mean we have a chance of rebuilding the squad from this summer even if we do get relegated, without any restrictions (bar budget) which would not have been possible last year. If we had gone down, with an embargo, we would have really struggled and been swimming for signings in shallower waters than we already were.

[Sutekh]

Worth pointing out that L1 FFP caters for the fee as and when it is paid, it is not included as a lump sum.

So for example, Genoa buy Puscas for £3m - if that is paid in 3 instalments of £1m then 1m will be added to the turnover for next season and the rest in the following years. So whilst selling boosts us in terms of turnover it is not quite as straightforward as mentioned previously.

Naturally, in reverse, purchases are handled the same way.

Looks like there maybe different ffp rules in divisions 3 & 4 to the rest of the FL (why don’t stupid inconsistencies like this surprise anyone any more). In Division 3 (League 1) clubs have to obey SCMP (SALARY COST MANAGEMENT PROTOCOL) which limits spending on player wages to a percentage of club Turnover. In League 1 clubs can spend a maximum of 60% of their turnover on wages - in League 2, the limit is 55%. There are no restrictions (in themselves) on the amount a club can lose or spend on transfer fees.

I wonder how screwed will Reading be next season? Really could do with the local media getting a decent interview with Mark Bowen, after the season ends, and getting him to explain exactly where the club sit with all these things at the moment and set clear expectations as to what the future actually looks like for the club and it’s staff and fans.

It's 75% for the first season after relegation from the Championship.

As we've been discussing above, the League One FFP rules shouldn't be a problem for us to comply with - partially due to the differing rules and partially due to almost all of the remaining high earners leaving the club at the end of the season. Because player sales and cash injections count towards revenue for League One FFP, a club has much more room than in the Championship.

I think it's a better system than in the Championship, as owners who can afford to put money into the club aren't restricted in doing so; it also prevents owners who cannot fund the club from pumping money in via loans. Clubs aren't required to sell assets to try and keep within a loss threshold, especially when the club is able to sustain that level of expenditure through their owner.

I find this annoying 1) the FL are complete retards for not maintaining consistency of FFP/P&S laws within their own competition, 2) could Mr Dai put tons of cash into the club, as there is now no restriction, and therefore risk putting the club back at square 1 if/when it ever gets promoted again?

[Greatwesternline]

Looks like there maybe different ffp rules in divisions 3 & 4 to the rest of the FL (why don’t stupid inconsistencies like this surprise anyone any more). In Division 3 (League 1) clubs have to obey SCMP (SALARY COST MANAGEMENT PROTOCOL) which limits spending on player wages to a percentage of club Turnover. In League 1 clubs can spend a maximum of 60% of their turnover on wages - in League 2, the limit is 55%. There are no restrictions (in themselves) on the amount a club can lose or spend on transfer fees.

I wonder how screwed will Reading be next season? Really could do with the local media getting a decent interview with Mark Bowen, after the season ends, and getting him to explain exactly where the club sit with all these things at the moment and set clear expectations as to what the future actually looks like for the club and it’s staff and fans.

It's 75% for the first season after relegation from the Championship.

As we've been discussing above, the League One FFP rules shouldn't be a problem for us to comply with - partially due to the differing rules and partially due to almost all of the remaining high earners leaving the club at the end of the season. Because player sales and cash injections count towards revenue for League One FFP, a club has much more room than in the Championship.

I think it's a better system than in the Championship, as owners who can afford to put money into the club aren't restricted in doing so; it also prevents owners who cannot fund the club from pumping money in via loans. Clubs aren't required to sell assets to try and keep within a loss threshold, especially when the club is able to sustain that level of expenditure through their owner.

I find this annoying 1) the FL are complete retards for not maintaining consistency of FFP/P&S laws within their own competition, 2) could Mr Dai put tons of cash into the club, as there is now no restriction, and therefore risk putting the club back at square 1 if/when it ever gets promoted again?

It's probably more of an acknowledgement that in Leagues 1&2 the resources of your traditional local benefactor can be more sustainable and perhaps even a necessity to keep clubs afloat given the budgets involved, whereas in the Championship the lure of PL money combined with the higher costs to compete mean it is more sensible to keep a lid on the ability to buy success.

[Loafer]

Looks like there maybe different ffp rules in divisions 3 & 4 to the rest of the FL (why don’t stupid inconsistencies like this surprise anyone any more). In Division 3 (League 1) clubs have to obey SCMP (SALARY COST MANAGEMENT PROTOCOL) which limits spending on player wages to a percentage of club Turnover. In League 1 clubs can spend a maximum of 60% of their turnover on wages - in League 2, the limit is 55%. There are no restrictions (in themselves) on the amount a club can lose or spend on transfer fees.

I wonder how screwed will Reading be next season? Really could do with the local media getting a decent interview with Mark Bowen, after the season ends, and getting him to explain exactly where the club sit with all these things at the moment and set clear expectations as to what the future actually looks like for the club and it’s staff and fans.

It's 75% for the first season after relegation from the Championship.

As we've been discussing above, the League One FFP rules shouldn't be a problem for us to comply with - partially due to the differing rules and partially due to almost all of the remaining high earners leaving the club at the end of the season. Because player sales and cash injections count towards revenue for League One FFP, a club has much more room than in the Championship.

I think it's a better system than in the Championship, as owners who can afford to put money into the club aren't restricted in doing so; it also prevents owners who cannot fund the club from pumping money in via loans. Clubs aren't required to sell assets to try and keep within a loss threshold, especially when the club is able to sustain that level of expenditure through their owner.

I find this annoying 1) the FL are complete retards for not maintaining consistency of FFP/P&S laws within their own competition, 2) could Mr Dai put tons of cash into the club, as there is now no restriction, and therefore risk putting the club back at square 1 if/when it ever gets promoted again?

its 2023 bro

[Clyde1998]

Looks like there maybe different ffp rules in divisions 3 & 4 to the rest of the FL (why don’t stupid inconsistencies like this surprise anyone any more). In Division 3 (League 1) clubs have to obey SCMP (SALARY COST MANAGEMENT PROTOCOL) which limits spending on player wages to a percentage of club Turnover. In League 1 clubs can spend a maximum of 60% of their turnover on wages - in League 2, the limit is 55%. There are no restrictions (in themselves) on the amount a club can lose or spend on transfer fees.

I wonder how screwed will Reading be next season? Really could do with the local media getting a decent interview with Mark Bowen, after the season ends, and getting him to explain exactly where the club sit with all these things at the moment and set clear expectations as to what the future actually looks like for the club and it’s staff and fans.

It's 75% for the first season after relegation from the Championship.

As we've been discussing above, the League One FFP rules shouldn't be a problem for us to comply with - partially due to the differing rules and partially due to almost all of the remaining high earners leaving the club at the end of the season. Because player sales and cash injections count towards revenue for League One FFP, a club has much more room than in the Championship.

I think it's a better system than in the Championship, as owners who can afford to put money into the club aren't restricted in doing so; it also prevents owners who cannot fund the club from pumping money in via loans. Clubs aren't required to sell assets to try and keep within a loss threshold, especially when the club is able to sustain that level of expenditure through their owner.

I find this annoying 1) the FL are complete retards [ ] for not maintaining consistency of FFP/P&S laws within their own competition, 2) could Mr Dai put tons of cash into the club, as there is now no restriction, and therefore risk putting the club back at square 1 if/when it ever gets promoted again?

I doubt he'll put tons of money into the club, but he could put in some money to ensure we meet League One FFP rules in the event our revenue drops more than expected. I would hope the club have learned from the past few years and not spend money that would put us at risk of failing Championship FFP if we did get promoted again.

The one thing I'd be interested to know is whether the ground and training ground could be transferred back to the football club while we're in League One.

[tidus_mi2]

It's 75% for the first season after relegation from the Championship.

As we've been discussing above, the League One FFP rules shouldn't be a problem for us to comply with - partially due to the differing rules and partially due to almost all of the remaining high earners leaving the club at the end of the season. Because player sales and cash injections count towards revenue for League One FFP, a club has much more room than in the Championship.

I think it's a better system than in the Championship, as owners who can afford to put money into the club aren't restricted in doing so; it also prevents owners who cannot fund the club from pumping money in via loans. Clubs aren't required to sell assets to try and keep within a loss threshold, especially when the club is able to sustain that level of expenditure through their owner.

I find this annoying 1) the FL are complete retards [ ] for not maintaining consistency of FFP/P&S laws within their own competition, 2) could Mr Dai put tons of cash into the club, as there is now no restriction, and therefore risk putting the club back at square 1 if/when it ever gets promoted again?

I doubt he'll put tons of money into the club, but he could put in some money to ensure we meet League One FFP rules in the event our revenue drops more than expected. I would hope the club have learned from the past few years and not spend money that would put us at risk of failing Championship FFP if we did get promoted again.

The one thing I'd be interested to know is whether the ground and training ground could be transferred back to the football club while we're in League One.

Well I had wondered about that, couldn't they just transfer both back to the club regardless of division? It's not like we can sell them again, the EFL have closed that loophole now.

[Stranded]

It's 75% for the first season after relegation from the Championship.

As we've been discussing above, the League One FFP rules shouldn't be a problem for us to comply with - partially due to the differing rules and partially due to almost all of the remaining high earners leaving the club at the end of the season. Because player sales and cash injections count towards revenue for League One FFP, a club has much more room than in the Championship.

I think it's a better system than in the Championship, as owners who can afford to put money into the club aren't restricted in doing so; it also prevents owners who cannot fund the club from pumping money in via loans. Clubs aren't required to sell assets to try and keep within a loss threshold, especially when the club is able to sustain that level of expenditure through their owner.

I find this annoying 1) the FL are complete retards [ ] for not maintaining consistency of FFP/P&S laws within their own competition, 2) could Mr Dai put tons of cash into the club, as there is now no restriction, and therefore risk putting the club back at square 1 if/when it ever gets promoted again?

I doubt he'll put tons of money into the club, but he could put in some money to ensure we meet League One FFP rules in the event our revenue drops more than expected. I would hope the club have learned from the past few years and not spend money that would put us at risk of failing Championship FFP if we did get promoted again.

The one thing I'd be interested to know is whether the ground and training ground could be transferred back to the football club while we're in League One.

Bearwood is owned by the club isn't it?

Or rather it is owned by RFC Bearwood Ltd which is 100% owned by The Reading Football Club Limited.

[3points]

Bearwood is owned by the club isn't it?

Or rather it is owned by RFC Bearwood Ltd which is 100% owned by The Reading Football Club Limited.

Totally correct

[Rusty royal]

I wonder how colin will set up against SU. He need to win to guarantee safety but then has another game 3 days later. Does he go for a strong team to defend against SU? hoping for a draw but possibly risking injury or a weaker side and keeping the better team for us?

[LUX]

Lolwut

[Snowflake Royal]

They are professional players, they will want to win every game. Of course there is nothing riding on it, but no player ever thinks they aren't going to be bothered with a game. If they weren't to win they'd look at it after and say that it wasn't damaging, but they will want to win every game.

One thing I read (I think it was the BBC) that didn't make sense was that, if Huddersfield lose to Sheffield United, then that gives Reading a "glimmer" of hope. Well, I'd like to think it was a bit more than that considering we just have to win one game of football. A glimmer of hope is something I'd attach with having to win by 2/3 goals and/or needing a couple of results go your way etc.

Winning 1 game, esp away, is no more than a glimmer nowadays

I was waiting for that response as it's exactly what I thought when typing it!

But ultimately, everything else we've done in the previous 45 games would be meaningless, it's just a one off game, a cup final etc.

We're also spectacularly shit at one off games.

[tidus_mi2]

Was just looking at our potential home for next season and saw that Ipswich could finish the season on 100pts and still finish 2nd, has a team ever finished on 100pts and not won the league?

[Sutekh]

Was just looking at our potential home for next season and saw that Ipswich could finish the season on 100pts and still finish 2nd, has a team ever finished on 100pts and not won the league?

Notts County got 107