Jump to content
IGNORED

Probably won't happen but Man City FFP...?


Mr Popodopolous

Recommended Posts

This has been rolling along slowly for a while. Maybe things are about to get interesting.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/13/sports/manchester-city-champions-league-uefa.html

UEFA Investigators recommend a CL ban for Man City. Presumably PSG in a similar position so get them both out!

Would be fairly tricky to get it done for THIS upcoming season but 2020/21, could be a goer.

Now for the catch. The catch is that UEFA Investigators can recommend this and possibly rightly so...but they're not binding. Only recommendations it would seem, so.UEFA don't have to enforce it unless they see fit I guess.

Would be a major statement if it was enforced however.

Both Milan clubs especially AC surely in breach too- first offences don't tend to get a van but monitoring and restrictions whereas I suspect the two petro-clubs have breached more than that. They both got settlement agreements I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, billywedlock said:

I don't really have an issue with this, it is clubs spending money they don't have that worries me more. 

Red herring IMO.

While rules are there, why should clubs backed by sovereign States ie them and PSG be allowed to go round them. If the Milan clubs recidivists, ban then too- as per UEFA disciplinary procedures which aren't.

Other clubs have been banned. We've had to sell Reid etc- but especially Reid. Cheats should never prosper.

BTW, the reason I seem to draw a distinction between petro clubs and those from Milan is that UEFA seem to have disciplinary sliding scale ie bans seem to take time as distinct from EFL (in theory) rapid points deductions  Milan clubs still should be punished however, especially AC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why all the fawning over what a "wonderful" season Man City have had gets on my t1ts. They should have a wonderful season every season with the money they spend, year in year out. And all the plaudits to Liverpool for pushing them so close- they spent well over £150 million last summer, most of it on two players who don't start every week. What an achievement to come second! It distorts the competition and it trickles down to the championship all too easily

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, chipdawg said:

This is why all the fawning over what a "wonderful" season Man City have had gets on my t1ts. They should have a wonderful season every season with the money they spend, year in year out. And all the plaudits to Liverpool for pushing them so close- they spent well over £150 million last summer, most of it on two players who don't start every week. What an achievement to come second! It distorts the competition and it trickles down to the championship all too easily

Agree and disagree tbh.

A lot of money BUT very well managed and coached too. Liverpool's feels more organic and self-financed too, wonderful though the football of Man City in particular is. They both play great football and are 2 great sides though- the other question about the expenditure is it a team for now or for several years into the future, i.e. frontloading a lot of the spending? Believe Fulham had this in mind in summer 2018.

Man Utd have spent a bucketload post Ferguson- inflation partly driven by the likes of the petroclubs in particular, but not decisively. Either spent it wrongly in places, too top heavy in others, galacticos over team-building in others and post Van Gaal largely neglected or stalled their youth system. Arsenal spent more and more steadily, but in a less balanced manner. Chelsea in disarray but far from paupers- the big ones worthy of applause would be Tottenham in that top 6!

In Europe, PSG have spent more still but badly, top-heavy or importantly not had a winning culture, spirit, mentality that you need. Unsure any manager per se to blame and certainly not entirely, seems a problem on the European stage with that club- long may that continue- they've distorted their League horribly though.

Barcelona have started spending big on fees with mixed results, yet field a Vidal a few weeks off turning 32 at Anfield, vs such an intensive pressing side- poor decision. When younger, he would've been in his element but poor management despite spending big!

Back to here and it absolutely filters down to the Championship- parachute payments a big problem.

https://news.paddypower.com/football/2018/11/13/petroclubs/

The 2 petroclubs, on the non footballing side seem a bunch of pricks and those 2 clubs especially, would merit a hefty punishment and an ability to make it stick IMO. Then work way through but meaningful punishment of these 2 would be a gamechanger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Red herring IMO.

While rules are there, why should clubs backed by sovereign States ie them and PSG be allowed to go round them. If the Milan clubs recidivists, ban then too- as per UEFA disciplinary procedures which aren't.

Other clubs have been banned. We've had to sell Reid etc- but especially Reid. Cheats should never prosper.

BTW, the reason I seem to draw a distinction between petro clubs and those from Milan is that UEFA seem to have disciplinary sliding scale ie bans seem to take time as distinct from EFL (in theory) rapid points deductions  Milan clubs still should be punished however, especially AC.

Not only are clubs like PSG and Man City effectively state funded, but the strong suspicions exist that they have indulged in constructive accounting to get around ffp rules in order to use their wealth to gain an advantage over their rivals i.e. cheating.

While it could be argued that these effectively state funded clubs can afford their expenditure, the reason that ffp rules need to be applied properly to them is the effect their spending has on the rest of the teams. Man City can afford stellar spending each and every season because their owner can fund it with no problem. Unfortunately the majority of premier league clubs do not have access to this level of funding , but they are expected to, and and are trying to compete. 

The danger is that in trying to compete with mega wealthy clubs,  others will over commit themselves and potentially compromise that clubs future, especially if fortunes turn and they find themselves dropping out of the top flight e.g. Bolton.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, downendcity said:

Not only are clubs like PSG and Man City effectively state funded, but the strong suspicions exist that they have indulged in constructive accounting to get around ffp rules in order to use their wealth to gain an advantage over their rivals i.e. cheating.

 While it could be argued that these effectively state funded clubs can afford their expenditure, the reason that ffp rules need to be applied properly to them is the effect their spending has on the rest of the teams. Man City can afford stellar spending each and every season because their owner can fund it with no problem. Unfortunately the majority of premier league clubs do not have access to this level of funding , but they are expected to, and and are trying to compete. 

The danger is that in trying to compete with mega wealthy clubs,  others will over commit themselves and potentially compromise that clubs future, especially if fortunes turn and they find themselves dropping out of the top flight e.g. Bolton.

  

Agreed.

For those 2, owing to all of the breaches and combined with alleged distortions- I'd say one year ban for each season of breach-distortion. Seems fair and proportionate.

I would say that quite a lot of PL clubs have a problem with competing yes, but a lot haven't always spent the best either. As income grows, throwing money at it can be a tempting, easy...but often misguided solution. Spend big if needed but not to bankruptcy levels, but spend smart too- that's my hope for us this summer. However yes, it poses a big problem. The spending thing with a bit of nostalgia thrown in, the key reason I was supporting Ajax, smallest budget last 16 and will be broken up this summer. Smallest budget last 16 and probably similar to if not smaller than a number of Group stage clubs too.

Yes, the higher these mega wealthy clubs can drive things, the worse the risk for the bulk.

@Cambridge Batch Red Heard of the Maximum wage? We had it in this country for quite a while in football...heard of the Bosman ruling? While these systems were far from perfect and probably needed reform, they helped to maintain a semblance of competitive balance not solely driven by money. Especially Bosman if we are talking more modern times. Gate receipts split between home and away- these were not just organic, these were driven by choice- disingenuous to claim otherwise.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Agreed.

For those 2, owing to all of the breaches and combined with alleged distortions- I'd say one year ban for each season of breach-distortion. Seems fair and proportionate.

I would say that quite a lot of PL clubs have a problem with competing yes, but a lot haven't always spent the best either. As income grows, throwing money at it can be a tempting, easy...but often misguided solution. Spend big if needed but not to bankruptcy levels, but spend smart too- that's my hope for us this summer. However yes, it poses a big problem. The spending thing with a bit of nostalgia thrown in, the key reason I was supporting Ajax, smallest budget last 16 and will be broken up this summer. Smallest budget last 16 and probably similar to if not smaller than a number of Group stage clubs too.

Agreed, the higher these mega wealthy clubs can drive things, the worse the risk for the bulk.

Surely one of the knock on problems is that if Barca spent £150m on Coutinho, only because they have massive backing ( Qatari??) it immediately ramps up the comparative transfer values of every other, and lesser players. 

As a consequence, less wealthy clubs are seen to be "throwing money at it" because they are now having to spend £20/30m on ordinary players, that only 3/4 seasons ago would have cost £4/5m. Has has often been quoted on here in relation to Famara, that's what you get for £5m these days! 

I completely agree with you regarding Ajax, and am sure that many wanted them to get through because of the way they have gone about things. The shame is that they do not have the wealth to buy a team, but their team will be broken up because clubs with hyper wealth can be lazy in terms of youth development because they can go into the market and buy whatever players they want at pretty well any price.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, downendcity said:

Surely one of the knock on problems is that if Barca spent £150m on Coutinho, only because they have massive backing ( Qatari??) it immediately ramps up the comparative transfer values of every other, and lesser players. 

As a consequence, less wealthy clubs are seen to be "throwing money at it" because they are now having to spend £20/30m on ordinary players, that only 3/4 seasons ago would have cost £4/5m. Has has often been quoted on here in relation to Famara, that's what you get for £5m these days! 

I completely agree with you regarding Ajax, and am sure that many wanted them to get through because of the way they have gone about things. The shame is that they do not have the wealth to buy a team, but their team will be broken up because clubs with hyper wealth can be lazy in terms of youth development because they can go into the market and buy whatever players they want at pretty well any price.

 

Think Barcelona might have ended Qatar deal or vice versa- PR is all it is, PR and soft power these investments in high end UK and European clubs.  Barcelona were considering ending it due to social issues- apparently. Their shirts now sponsored by someone else.

Very fair point, big knock-on effect here. Ramps up the value and fee- investing in a world beating youth system and actually utilising it maybe another path- would probably take years to build up however. Top clubs need to 'win yesterday' as it were- very few have the patience to try and build it up now. A mix of the world beating youth and some stars could be a Plan C- still can be value in the market, though it gets increasingly difficult to find. The huge TV revenue also likely adds cost to English clubs as they know money spent more readily.

Exactly right. If I were them I would say De Jong off as arranged, likely De Ligt...external business for this season is now closed". Bet they won't though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Agree and disagree tbh.

A lot of money BUT very well managed and coached too. Liverpool's feels more organic and self-financed too, wonderful though the football of Man City in particular is. They both play great football and are 2 great sides though- the other question about the expenditure is it a team for now or for several years into the future, i.e. frontloading a lot of the spending? Believe Fulham had this in mind in summer 2018.

Man Utd have spent a bucketload post Ferguson- inflation partly driven by the likes of the petroclubs in particular, but not decisively. Either spent it wrongly in places, too top heavy in others, galacticos over team-building in others and post Van Gaal largely neglected or stalled their youth system. Arsenal spent more and more steadily, but in a less balanced manner. Chelsea in disarray but far from paupers- the big ones worthy of applause would be Tottenham in that top 6!

In Europe, PSG have spent more still but badly, top-heavy or importantly not had a winning culture, spirit, mentality that you need. Unsure any manager per se to blame and certainly not entirely, seems a problem on the European stage with that club- long may that continue- they've distorted their League horribly though.

Barcelona have started spending big on fees with mixed results, yet field a Vidal a few weeks off turning 32 at Anfield, vs such an intensive pressing side- poor decision. When younger, he would've been in his element but poor management despite spending big!

Back to here and it absolutely filters down to the Championship- parachute payments a big problem.

https://news.paddypower.com/football/2018/11/13/petroclubs/

The 2 petroclubs, on the non footballing side seem a bunch of pricks and those 2 clubs especially, would merit a hefty punishment and an ability to make it stick IMO. Then work way through but meaningful punishment of these 2 would be a gamechanger.

I am not arguing that Klopp and Guardiola aren't great managers or that the football they play isn't great, but that these things are celebrated as an achievement when really it should be the minimum expectation. As much as I hate them, I love watching Liverpool play (not so much Man City) but that doesn't mean I think they've achieved anything by playing the way they do.

Of the clubs you mention, undoubtedly Man Utd have been awful in the transfer market recently, but Liverpool have massively outspent them the last two seasons (goes without saying that City have too). Last summer Liverpool spent nearly 3 times what Utd did, though to be fair they are still enjoying the spoils of Coutinho.

PSG are basically Man City a few years ago, but in a much less competitive domestic league. If you think about how lucky Man City got in winning that first title (QPR players were told they were safe because their game was running behind the others and just gave up), they could just as easily be like PSG now; splurging on players and developing no culture. Guardiola is great at developing culture and a singular mentality, but that's so much easier when you have a blank cheque book to buy whoever you like.

Barcelona are currently on a downswing, undoubtedly. But really they're a different kettle of fish given their development of youth- something I suspect they'll move back towards to fix their ailments. City and to a lesser extent Liverpool, have great youth set ups but little desire to take any risks on youngsters. Foden looks likely to break out for City but who else is there? Sancho left because he wasn't being taken seriously as a footballer and who would argue with that decision? Alexander-Arnold has been great for Liverpool, but again; who else is banging on the door? Great young players on £20k a week to play development league football because they can afford (and are afforded the opportunity to) stockpile young players.

That article sums up how I feel about them, but it extends to most big clubs to be honest. They're owned by venture capitalists and billionaire Playboys. But my issue in this case more with the platitudes heaped upon them than the nature of the business. The media pile on to pump the tyres of the premier league 'product', when the actual fact of it is that whoever spends the most of the demagogue that happens to be in charge at the times fortune is who will probably win 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't expect UEFA to ban Man City or PSG. They simply have too much money to ban, and if UEFA try to do so I can see the next big transfer saga being how many millions both owners will spend on lawyers to absolutely crush UEFA.

Where things will get interesting is in the upcoming legal battles if the Turkish sides that have suffered FFP bans decide to kick off - something they've indicated would happen if UEFA were found to be sweeping these problems under the rug.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, EnderMB said:

I don't expect UEFA to ban Man City or PSG. They simply have too much money to ban, and if UEFA try to do so I can see the next big transfer saga being how many millions both owners will spend on lawyers to absolutely crush UEFA.

Where things will get interesting is in the upcoming legal battles if the Turkish sides that have suffered FFP bans decide to kick off - something they've indicated would happen if UEFA were found to be sweeping these problems under the rug.

I've a feeling the European Courts might uphold FFP, so it doesn't matter how good the lawyers are on one level. In the European Courts, the CAS or perhaps even the Swiss courts...these would be where it would be ultimately decided. If European Court gave a special exemption to FFP for social good or something like that, then for UEFA competitions at least it would be case closed!

The Turkish clubs cases will be an interesting to watch- they are a top 10- middle ranking League. Rich enough owners to take it to courts unlike say Bulgarian League, but no superstars so UEFA in their mind see it as easier to brush off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Maesknoll Red said:

They were fined £49M a couple of years ago, obviously a drop in the ocean, then you look at Bolton.....

...and indeed, got given 2/3 of it back for good behaviour or somesuch!

Those 2 petro-clubs and AC Milan- and because of claims of state aid why not, Real Madrid should all be banned IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, though the rumour is no ban applied, Man City's bid to get the case kicked out- always an ambitious attempt- has failed for now.

CAS ruled it inadmissible as no ruling has yet taken place.

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/man-city-ffp-cas-champions-league-uefa-court-of-arbitration-for-sport-a9204206.html

No change at this stage basically- tried to get the case, the investigation thrown out and CAS said no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...