Redslo

I think it is unlikely that EUFA and FIFA will allow English clubs to retrain registrations of out of contract players while the rest of the world cannot.

http://sotonians.com/chat/saints-next-manager#38

Just thing how bad this is for us Americans where the word is a much bigger insult.

When I watched the actual Jeopardy shows, I kept wondering if off camera someone would secretly give Watson this answer "This stock will be the most profitable investment over the next year."

I think this is the new reality of the Premier League. How many clubs would like to win the title next year and can reasonably believe they have a chance? By my count, five to seven: Man U, Man City, Chelsea, Arsenal, Tottenham and maybe Liverpool and Leicester. All but one of them is going to be disappointed. Winning the title one year in three with a good team is going to be a significant accomplishment from now on. Even making the Champions League year after year is going to be much more difficult--even for Arsenal (who are likely to have a post-Ferguson experience when Wenger leaves).

Or maybe he knows that he will be joining a well run club, who will be playing in Europe, for a significant increase in pay.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/jun/14/ronald-koeman-everton-manager-confirmed-southampton

Because it increases the chances that Southampton will be able to continue fielding a high quality team. But you are probably right. What are the chances that a club like Southampton would ever have financial difficulties?

I would sell Wanyana for a decent price, but not to Spurs or, I suppose, Everton.

Or maybe all the manager candidates who have not been weeded out have been told this is a done deal. If they objected they would be weeded out. And we all know how painful that can be.

Dallas

He would have to be really good to replace those two for us.

What is/was that? Not being a Southampton fan back then I am curious.

Clearly this fellow needs to be banned for his complete loss of proper perspective.

That is basically what I wanted to know. My concern was whether profitable transactions on the sales of players was taxed on the level of the individual transaction or whether it was just the overall profit for the club that was taxed. Also, whether prior year losses are carried over. Thank you.

10% Replays of recent Southampton games 10% Highlights and analysis of recent Southampton games 15% Documentaries about Southampton FC players of the past 5% Replays of the FA cup victory 10% Interview with current Southampton players and staff 20% Viewer call in shows about Southampton 25% Biographical films about religious Saints (but not limited to Catholic ones) 5% Documentary about Portsmouth's financial problems and recent history.

Thank you. That article was interesting, but as you recognized, does not clearly answer my question. The funny thing is that I basically know how the question would be answered under American law, but I couldn't direct someone to an easily understandable source for that information. I guess there was no reason to expect an easier answer in the UK. I did just find this which had some information. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3219853/How-clubs-navigate-financial-minefields-transfer-deadline-day.html

can anyone direct me to a source of information that would explain the tax consequences of profitable or unprofitable dealings in the football transfer market under UK law?

I am, but I'll post it on my blog once things are more settled. Your club's spending plans do raise some FFP issues.

So? It was our best result in over 30 years. That is still enough reason not to mope and complain.

By my calculations it should only require three more. Exactly what policy is the club supposed to change. Liebherr appears to want the club to operate within its own means and, presumably, is unwilling to kick in the 8 million pounds a year allowed under EUFA's financial fair play regulations--much less the 35 million allowed under the Premier Leagues rules. This means that there will never be a 100 million pound transfer kitty here. That is not really a policy that can be changed. (And I am skeptical that Everton will really put in 100 million pounds over and above what they get for Lukaku and Stones.) I vote both. This is an important point. If Everton really spends massively on players this summer they will raise their payroll significantly. Even assuming they can keep it under the Premier League payroll cap, this will be permanent increase. New players will expect to be paid more just because the players who are already they are getting paid more. Will their new rich partial owner keep putting in the money and will it be possible to keep things within the financial fair player rules? Maybe, but if I were an Everton fan I would be concerned in the long run. I cannot prove your unsupported claims wrong, but I suspect you cannot prove them correct. The turnover here is a result of doing well without being both a rich club and a regular champions league participant. Do you really thing a better negotiator would have gotten Clyne or Schneiderlin to sign new contracts? As for Koeman, we will have to see what happens, but if he really wants a 7 million pounds a year salary and a net spend of 100 million pounds this summer no one could keep him here because both of those are beyond the sustainable system Liebherr seems to want. That being said, I do not claim that Reed is perfect. But consider his likely reaction if he were arbitrarily demoted after producing such good results year and year under difficult circumstances. We would be looking for a replacement for him and people like you would be even more alarmed. The internet thinks she does have that kind of money, but under Financial Fair Play it is not allowed anymore anyway. I think you analysis of FFP is flawed. You are looking at it as something intended to provide a level playing field. If you want a level playing field adopt a North American style league with revenue sharing and no relegations. FFP was intended to prevent clubs from spending money they didn't have and going into receivership. It is working fine for that. We cannot catch up with Manchester united in spending not just because our owner doesn't want to spend the money, but because the rules no longer allow it. Causing English clubs to have less money by paying less attention to them will have no beneficial effect on the problem. If anything it will help the bigger clubs more than the rest because they have other ways to make money. Yes, but normally they get fired for not being good enough. That being said, Swansea lost Rodgers and Norwich lost Lambert when bigger clubs came a calling. We have had the "misfortune" of having ambitious younger managers do better than expected. That seems to be pretty rare.

Has a new Southampton manager ever been allowed to get rid of they players he doesn't want? I thought that the board selected managers who were good with our system and would use the players we had and seek new players that fit our system. Stones and Barkley, but not sure Stones will be doing much tapping up on behalf of Everton. Maybe Forster and Bertrand can tap up a few players for us.

You too do realize that none of this has actually happened and very little of it (except Wanyama and Pelle leaving) makes any sense.

Without overanalyzing, I would swap out Kompany who is unlikely to play due to injury, for Toby.

Also, the more potential assists you deliver the more chances you give yourself to get an actual assist.