Cost Controls Vote- 2 clubs oppose it...

[Northern Cottager]

I dont understand why we would be against putting tighter controls on what a club can spend on wage increases etc...

The 20 Premier League clubs have agreed, in principle, to introduce radical new cost controls.

There are two main proposals on the table - a break even rule and a cap on the amount clubs can increase their wage bills by each season.

Club chief executives have now been asked to produce detailed plans for exactly how these proposals will work.

These rules would mark a major change for the clubs, which made cumulative losses of £361m in 2010-11.

Champions Manchester City, for example, made a £97.9m loss in their latest set of results, which were revealed last Friday.

City and Fulham are the only clubs opposed to any spending controls, BBC Sport understands. However, any new Premier League rule requires the approval of only 14 of the 20 clubs in order to be introduced.

With the Premier League's new three-year television deals expected to break through the £5bn barrier from 2013, momentum is growing to find a way of preventing the majority of that cash going straight to players and agents.

There have now been six meetings of top-flight chairmen where cost controls have been discussed without any concrete decisions being made.

The next meeting will be on 6 February.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20773526?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Surely tighter controls mean we are in with more a fighting chance of catching up to the top teams?

[Airfix]

But if the controls had always existed, we'd still be in the bottom two divisions, surely?

[Rupert]

I suspect tighter controls would hit the smaller teams a lot harder than bigger ones. The likes of Man U, City, Arsenal, etc, earn a lot more than us from all sources, so if they are limited to spending a percentage of their income, they will still comfortably outspend us minnows.