AC Milan struck some kind of deal to only serve a 1 year ban, so think City could do the same, but still would be big for them and you wonder if players like Sterling, Sane, Jesus, Aguero and others would stay if it meant 1 season with no european football
AC Milan struck some kind of deal to only serve a 1 year ban, so think City could do the same, but still would be big for them and you wonder if players like Sterling, Sane, Jesus, Aguero and others would stay if it meant 1 season with no european football
They might be unhappy but unless their contract allows them to go with no European football they can whistle. The club might say go, though, if their income doesn’t match their wages.
But basically they bought this problem and I think it’s funny they’ve been caught.
AC Milan struck some kind of deal to only serve a 1 year ban, so think City could do the same, but still would be big for them and you wonder if players like Sterling, Sane, Jesus, Aguero and others would stay if it meant 1 season with no european football
They might be unhappy but unless their contract allows them to go with no European football they can whistle. The club might say go, though, if their income doesn’t match their wages.
But basically they bought this problem and I think it’s funny they’ve been caught.
These players can force transfers these days, you know how much power they have these days
Good news. City have admitted previous breaches and accepted a £49 million fine and a transfer cap back in 2014.
I'm quite sure that many European clubs and UEFA officials have it in for City (perhaps with good reason) but what really matters is not the odd investigative leak or procedural irregularity but the facts. What was actually going on at City during the period in question?
These bans often seem to be reduced on appeal but it remains to be seen as to what will happen in this case. Given the previous offences, however, I very much doubt that City will be competing in the Champions League next season.
As to Charlton, at least no one can accuse us of "financial doping" (per Arsène Wenger), given our nominal outlay for loans in the January window !
AC Milan struck some kind of deal to only serve a 1 year ban, so think City could do the same, but still would be big for them and you wonder if players like Sterling, Sane, Jesus, Aguero and others would stay if it meant 1 season with no european football
Sane was close to going last summer before his injury so i wouldn't be surprised to see him go.
Aguero has a contract until 2021 by which time he'll be 33. He'll probably go after that.
Sterling won't go anywhere, he's contracted for years and there's probably only Madrid and PSG who could afford him. Madrid are going to spend big on Mbappe in the next couple of years and PSG must be close to being in trouble with UEFA themselves.
Clueless on all this, are clubs not allowed to be gifted larges sums of money via sponsorship or whatever else . As long as clubs aren’t loaded with debt , why shouldn’t someone be allowed to spunk their dough on their team ?
Me too. Have no idea what it's all about really or the FFP stuff which seems very arbitrary as to which teams get sanctioned.
Well this instance came about because of the Der Spiegel investigation, which itself came from leaked (most probably hacked) emails. I’d quite like to know how they would get to the bottom of such cases without a third party getting those emails and giving them to a news organisation. Presumably that’s why they’ve not picked on PSG too.
The rules are clear, City are aware of the rules and seem to be knowingly breaking them. It’s fair to question the logic of the rules, but they should still be adhered to by every club for as long as they exist.
I don’t hate City (as said above their support base was admirably loyal during some very tough times) but I do have a dislike for the root of their owner’s money, their owner’s plan to launder his country’s image using football, and a team buying success so freely - and illegally - in order to achieve that goal.
Maybe it’s just me, but UEFA FFP rules are just a way to shut the door, to anyone upsetting the cosy group of clubs who think it’s their right to win things.
City moaning tha this case initiated by UEFA, prosecuted by UEFA and judged by UEFA. Well, it's their competition. If I were to invite you into my house, I would decide what you can or cannot do there and if you don't follow my wishes, you're out on your ear.........
AC Milan struck some kind of deal to only serve a 1 year ban, so think City could do the same, but still would be big for them and you wonder if players like Sterling, Sane, Jesus, Aguero and others would stay if it meant 1 season with no european football
Football, as a whole, needs to re look at FFP. Every competition has diffrent rules and diffrent objectives.
When it was first introduced, in Engalnd, as I understand it, it was ment to stop clubs like Leeds, Southampton, Leicester, Palace etc over spending and ending up in administration. To that aim it has been successful.
UEFA seems to be designed to stop "new money" breaking up the cosy club of "old money" with Chelsea, City and PSG deing firmly in thier sights. May be RBL are next?
I do, how ever, find it strange that a club that has qualified for the champions league for about the last ten seasons and trousered all that Premier league TV money still need to "cheat" to such an extent.
With my football head on it should be simple, spend what you earn, not a penny more. As it is in most walks of life.
However my world view says if you want to spaff your money on a football club, rugby club or any form of philanthropy knock yourself out, but don't expect anyone to give it back to you if you loose it.
Maybe it’s just me, but UEFA FFP rules are just a way to shut the door, to anyone upsetting the cosy group of clubs who think it’s their right to win things.
This will just result in a long drawn out fine. This is just a whole charade to make it look like there is some sort of regulation in place, when in reality, the amount of money in the game has just ripped the backside out of any sort of ethics, morality or decency in the top end of the game.
The sums of money in the game are so obscene, that regulation just gets in the way of it and ultimately, clubs don’t want any regulation anymore, much in the way big business doesn’t want regulation. This sort of thing for City is like when a bank fiddles with LIBOR. If they get caught, they accept the fine and short term hit, because it’s minuscule in the long term when it comes to their brand and their machine. And City know there won’t be a CL ban, because commercially, that would be bad for UEFA’s Champions League competition and the ridiculous superficial trough that it has become.
The game has gone so far down a certain route that it is irretrievable in terms of trying to bring back any sort of morality and decency when it comes to finance
also, note this sort of statement being thrown out by UEFA versus the sorts of ‘fines’, ‘punishments’ and statements being thrown out when clubs have supporters being outwardly racist. Get that in order before looking at this.
All of it is a load wank imo. City, UEFA and the state of the modern game at the top end
Worth noting that for all the money they've spent, City have reached 1 champions league semi final and PSG haven't reached any. So it's not as if they've come in and started dominating the champions league.
Let them get on with it i say, if their owners want to spend billions then so be it. City's owners have done wonders for the entire local area around the Etihad.
Worth noting that for all the money they've spent, City have reached 1 champions league semi final and PSG haven't reached any. So it's not as if they've come in and started dominating the champions league.
Let them get on with it i say, if their owners want to spend billions then so be it. City's owners have done wonders for the entire local area around the Etihad.
They (and others), have also inadvertently contributed to the downfall of the likes of Bury and other lower league clubs who are struggling financially because of the billions awash in the game.
Worth noting that for all the money they've spent, City have reached 1 champions league semi final and PSG haven't reached any. So it's not as if they've come in and started dominating the champions league.
Let them get on with it i say, if their owners want to spend billions then so be it. City's owners have done wonders for the entire local area around the Etihad.
They (and others), have also inadvertently contributed to the downfall of the likes of Bury and other lower league clubs who are struggling financially because of the billions awash in the game.
Absolutely haven’t, it’s not City Football Groups fault that Steve Dale is a feckless idiot who mortgaged the club to the hilt
Not sure that the financial fair play rules work at all.
They are designed to keep clubs with existing large foreign fan bases in their position without allowing other clubs to challenge that hegemony.
If the governing bodies were serious about financial doing they would introduce salary caps. All champions league teams would be forced to have a maximum wage bill for their whole squad and signing on payments, inclusion in Saracens style ‘outside the club’ equity participations would all count towards this limit.
Once my sons have grown up I'm not sure I'll bother with football. It is good for my boys - gives them purpose and a way of seeing the country - but ultimately it is nothing like the game I followed growing up in the late 80s and 90s as a kid.
City are a classic example. They are a mid size club and always will be. They may have invested in Longsight or whatever Mancunian suburb it is, but ultimately they have bought the titles in recent years. They are an embarrassment to the the working class folk who went every week to the Kippax (their east terrace).
This is a slightly 2020s-tinted view of the recent past though, isn't it? There have always been teams who have used their disproportionate financial muscle to win trophies. In the 1990s, Blackburn were buying the Premier League title. And it's worth remembering that Manchester City won the FA Cup before Charlton were founded.
Am I right in that FFP (in a nutshell) is that you can only spend a certain amount proportionate to annual revenue?
If so the game is rigged. The superclubs, Barca, Madrid, Man Utd, Liverpool. Milan and Juve have spent decades building global brands and will sell merchandise across the world in the millions each season even if they perform well below par.
They are then allowed to buy the world's best players solely on that premise whilst clubs like City who are hugely successful (obviously down to spending huge sums comparative to domestic rivals) are almost in a second tier of permissable signings in the CL?
Back to the domestic game how can English clubs ever compete with the big brand clubs by the same standard under FFP? E.g if our owners were to be minted and wanted to put £200m into buying the leagues would they be blocked from doing so because of our revenue whilst Man Utd and Liverpool allowed to?
Am I right in that FFP (in a nutshell) is that you can only spend a certain amount proportionate to annual revenue?
If so the game is rigged. The superclubs, Barca, Madrid, Man Utd, Liverpool. Milan and Juve have spent decades building global brands and will sell merchandise across the world in the millions each season even if they perform well below par.
They are then allowed to buy the world's best players solely on that premise whilst clubs like City who are hugely successful (obviously down to spending huge sums comparative to domestic rivals) are almost in a second tier of permissable signings in the CL?
Back to the domestic game how can English clubs ever compete with the big brand clubs by the same standard under FFP? E.g if our owners were to be minted and wanted to put £200m into buying the leagues would they be blocked from doing so because of our revenue whilst Man Utd and Liverpool allowed to?
Am I right in that FFP (in a nutshell) is that you can only spend a certain amount proportionate to annual revenue?
If so the game is rigged. The superclubs, Barca, Madrid, Man Utd, Liverpool. Milan and Juve have spent decades building global brands and will sell merchandise across the world in the millions each season even if they perform well below par.
They are then allowed to buy the world's best players solely on that premise whilst clubs like City who are hugely successful (obviously down to spending huge sums comparative to domestic rivals) are almost in a second tier of permissable signings in the CL?
Back to the domestic game how can English clubs ever compete with the big brand clubs by the same standard under FFP? E.g if our owners were to be minted and wanted to put £200m into buying the leagues would they be blocked from doing so because of our revenue whilst Man Utd and Liverpool allowed to?
Our owners would be blocked from putting £200m directly into the club but they could engineer a sham stadium naming rights/sponsorship deal to get around it. They'd be wise to avoid putting their plan down in writing or referencing it in any electronic communications though.
If they really wanted to level the playing field, it should've been a salary cap.
Clearly they just wanted to protect the old established clubs' long term futures when facing these State-backed new money clubs.
Add a League wide cap on spending too
i.e. Clubs can spend no more than £50m in the Premier League each year - Doesnt matter then if your richer than most, you still cant spend more than anyone else.
Make it adjustable per league which all teams agree on, stops one club from trying to go crazy with their spending and stops clubs buying promotion which would probably save the likes of Bury
Failure to adhere to those rules means instant relegation
Comments
The club might say go, though, if their income doesn’t match their wages.
I'm quite sure that many European clubs and UEFA officials have it in for City (perhaps with good reason) but what really matters is not the odd investigative leak or procedural irregularity but the facts. What was actually going on at City during the period in question?
These bans often seem to be reduced on appeal but it remains to be seen as to what will happen in this case. Given the previous offences, however, I very much doubt that City will be competing in the Champions League next season.
As to Charlton, at least no one can accuse us of "financial doping" (per Arsène Wenger), given our nominal outlay for loans in the January window !
Aguero has a contract until 2021 by which time he'll be 33. He'll probably go after that.
Sterling won't go anywhere, he's contracted for years and there's probably only Madrid and PSG who could afford him. Madrid are going to spend big on Mbappe in the next couple of years and PSG must be close to being in trouble with UEFA themselves.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/feb/14/leaked-emails-and-invoices-led-to-manchester-city-ban-from-champions-league-europe-uefa
Classy.
When it was first introduced, in Engalnd, as I understand it, it was ment to stop clubs like Leeds, Southampton, Leicester, Palace etc over spending and ending up in administration. To that aim it has been successful.
UEFA seems to be designed to stop "new money" breaking up the cosy club of "old money" with Chelsea, City and PSG deing firmly in thier sights. May be RBL are next?
I do, how ever, find it strange that a club that has qualified for the champions league for about the last ten seasons and trousered all that Premier league TV money still need to "cheat" to such an extent.
With my football head on it should be simple, spend what you earn, not a penny more. As it is in most walks of life.
However my world view says if you want to spaff your money on a football club, rugby club or any form of philanthropy knock yourself out, but don't expect anyone to give it back to you if you loose it.
It's got TWO parts to the chorus you bunch of morons!
also, note this sort of statement being thrown out by UEFA versus the sorts of ‘fines’, ‘punishments’ and statements being thrown out when clubs have supporters being outwardly racist. Get that in order before looking at this.
All of it is a load wank imo. City, UEFA and the state of the modern game at the top end
Let them get on with it i say, if their owners want to spend billions then so be it. City's owners have done wonders for the entire local area around the Etihad.
They are designed to keep clubs with existing large foreign fan bases in their position without allowing other clubs to challenge that hegemony.
If the governing bodies were serious about financial doing they would introduce salary caps. All champions league teams would be forced to have a maximum wage bill for their whole squad and signing on payments, inclusion in Saracens style ‘outside the club’ equity participations would all count towards this limit.
If so the game is rigged. The superclubs, Barca, Madrid, Man Utd, Liverpool. Milan and Juve have spent decades building global brands and will sell merchandise across the world in the millions each season even if they perform well below par.
They are then allowed to buy the world's best players solely on that premise whilst clubs like City who are hugely successful (obviously down to spending huge sums comparative to domestic rivals) are almost in a second tier of permissable signings in the CL?
Back to the domestic game how can English clubs ever compete with the big brand clubs by the same standard under FFP?
E.g if our owners were to be minted and wanted to put £200m into buying the leagues would they be blocked from doing so because of our revenue whilst Man Utd and Liverpool allowed to?
Clearly they just wanted to protect the old established clubs' long term futures when facing these State-backed new money clubs.
i.e. Clubs can spend no more than £50m in the Premier League each year - Doesnt matter then if your richer than most, you still cant spend more than anyone else.
Make it adjustable per league which all teams agree on, stops one club from trying to go crazy with their spending and stops clubs buying promotion which would probably save the likes of Bury
Failure to adhere to those rules means instant relegation