Guilty people plead innocence so they have a chance of getting away with breaking the law. And sometimes they do, unfortunately. Same reason FFP will be challenged.
Manchester City facing Financial Fair Play sanctions
- Thread starter PlayerOne
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Guilty people plead innocence so they have a chance of getting away with breaking the law. And sometimes they do, unfortunately. Same reason FFP will be challenged.
Apparently City will have to prove that the scouting details or whatever it was exactly was worth the £24m. Provided they do that it is allowed, as far as I'm aware.
I'm not sure how much scouting they have done that benefits Man City Ladies though. Good luck explaining that one.
This could get very messy yet...
If Pellegrini is tactically inept, Moyes must be tactically retarded on the nahealai Tactical Aptitude Scale
Moyes is more advanced and clued-in in terms of tactical awareness than Pellegrini is. Ask any City and they'll tell you: he only plays the same way every week, no matter the opposition. It's amateur hour over there this season.
Moyes, for all his disappointments, has at least changed it up with us and has looked some but tactically aware: 4-3-3, 4-2-3-1, 4-4-2, 4-5-1, 4-1-4-1... at least he's being progressive.
Pellegrini has his fair share of weaknesses, I won't deny that, but c'mon, you cannot honestly believe what you've written.
Moyes has had a nightmare this season in all technical aspects of the game, pretty much.
Being good tactically goes far deeper than just playing numerous formations, it's what the players are instructed to do in those formations that matter. 4-4-2 for example can be played in so many different ways. The wingers tuck in and fullbacks push up, one strikers drops deep to play a 5 in midfield when they lose the ball etc. Moyes, for all his failings at United was often very good at nullifying the opposition through good tactics.
You're missing the point. I'm not going to go into my opinion on the legal in's and out's - I don't know enough about the specifics and it will be insanely complicated, but the distinction between being invited and thrown out seems to me to be a misnomer.
Whilst you may be "invited" - the reality is that clubs finishing in qualifying positions are those who get the chance to enter. They are therefore differentiating between one club and others - all of whom gave fulfilled the qualifying criteria. The clubs not in will question the legal basis on which that differentiation is made.
Regardless - whether it is legitimate or not is largley irrelevant. The issue is not the result but the cost and consequences of the fight which precedes it.
Top clubs are no longer football clubs, they are businesses, and businesses will fight tooth and nail to protect income and reputation - and they have the deep pockets to do it.
Some on here are desperate to believe that some clubs will be turfed out. I don't think it will happen but I guess we'll see.
If UEFA take a hard line then fair enough, credit to them. But I hope they've done their homework and are fully prepared for what might follow. It could be groundbreaking stuff.
8) Has it happened that a club has been denied access to UEFA competitions because of FFP?
The UEFA club licensing system was introduced in the 2003/04 season. Since then 44 clubs which have directly sportingly qualified for either the UEFA Champions League or UEFA Europa League were not admitted because they did not fulfil the licensing criteria. Financial fair play has been introduced and added to the licensing criteria in 2011. Since then several clubs have been denied access to the UEFA competitions because they have not paid wages to players or fees to other clubs for transfers.
9) Is FFP in line with European law?
UEFA has been in permanent dialogue with the European Commission about financial fair play and has received continued support for this initiative. There is also a joint statement from the UEFA President and the EU commissioner for competition, emphasising the consistency between the rules and objectives of financial fair play and the policy aims of the EU commission in the field of state aid.
From http://www.uefa.com/community/news/newsid=2064391.html
I'm not sure what your point is. You have your opinion and that's fine, but it doesn't make mine any less valid.
UEFA (as anyone drafting rules and regulations) will obviously try to ensure the rules are compliant when they put them together.
But whether they stand up to legal scrutiny or not will only be known if and when they are challenged.
This sort of thing frequently happens when the tax authorities change the law. Often it is challenged by some extremely clever and highly paid QC who has found a loophole. It's why "tax avoidance" by rich people is so common. The tax man tells you it's all legit - but that doesn't put anyone off.
The points I make still stand.
Clubs may take a transfer ban, or massive fine - but not being in the CL threatens the club. I therefore think they would do all they can to prevent it happening.
As I said above - the clubs may challenge this and lose. But the fall out from challenging it could be highly significant and it would be a high stakes battle for all parties.
I hope UEFA take a hard line - I just doubt they will. It's trouble nobody needs or probably wants.
If they fudge it they still have all the top sides in, don't have to deal with any legal battles and everyone wins.
Not the scouting itself but I presume the scouting system we use, it isn't restricted to information on players. The club wouldn't have done it if it was obviously bullshit, they'll have an explanation.
I don't know what your problem is.
Nowhere have I said that punished clubs would not legally challenge. I agree that they probably will, but it will be the thrashings of a hanging man.
As I said, guilty people plead innocent, what have they got to lose?
The court they will be using is a mechanism, of an organisation that has aided UEFA in putting together these rules, to ensure they comply with the law.
You say above that you doubt clubs will be banned, and I gave you a quote that states the licensing system UEFA uses to enforce bans (amongst other things), has seen 44 clubs excluded from UEFA competions already, and several of those are under the 2011 FFP regulations.
If you wish to ignore this, there's not much more I can say to convince you that, banning is a real possibility.
Finally, these rules have been agreed by the clubs (unanimously), football associations and the European commission.
It may be a that we will see a long drawn out legal challenge by a club (made with little expectation of success), but UEFA stated from the start that they are prepared for that.
In all honesty, there is unlikely to be a sufficient volume of challenges to be of significant irritation to them.
I'm not trying to make things fit an agenda. It is just my interpretation of how things are progressing.
Maybe the ultimate punishment will not be the first sanction used in some club's cases, but for others it might.
These rules have not just been enforced, the clubs have all had an agreed period for adjustment.
What do you mean by your scouting system? I have a feeling a lot of bullshit will be peddled by teams to pass FFP.
I'm not sure but I'd guess there is more to scouting than simply sending a guy to watch some Brazilian kid and getting a report. There will be a whole database, software, methods and systems - intellectual property.
I have no problem. I clearly just have a different opinion to you.
You seem to be suggesting that clubs will just roll over and accept severe, and for the club itself, potentially catastrophic punishments - which I disagree with.
Not being in the CL could have a massive effect on these clubs from a financial point of view. No CL income makes it even harder to meet the regulations given their exposure in regard to large contracts. It's a snowball effect, which could lead clubs to be ruined financially. Given the characters involved in these clubs I don't think they will take it lying down.
You vastly underestimate the complexity of these issues. And they don't have to use the Court who have advised UEFA on this matter. We're all part of the EU, nothing stopping City trooping off to London for an Order from the High Court. Litigation is often undertaken cross border and its hugely complicated and time consuming.
As it is I'm stepping out here. We'll see what happens, my bet UEFA will not exclude any clubs.
£24 million you daft twat!
How could Man City Ladies, Melbourne Heart and New York City FC possibly justify spending that much on scouting?
How could any club justify spending £27.5m on Marouane Fellaini?
And thanks for that needless insult. If it's a dodgy deal UEFA will deal with it, until then it might be a good idea to quit crying.
I'm not crying mate, I'm laughing at your silliness.
Please explain to me how these 3 clubs can justify spending £24m on "scouting" in one season. What do you think their combined revenues are right now, let alone squad cost? How much do you think the squads of Melbourne Hearts and Man City ladies are worth?
You clearly know you've lost the argument though bringing Fellaini into it for some reason
Here is what the article says.
It sounds completely absurd when you think about it. Why do you need to sell information to another club that you own?
It sounds completely absurd when you think about it. Why do you need to sell information to another club that you own?
That's completely normal in business. If we want to use a resource within our parent company we have to pay for it.
The amount is absurd though.
I'm not crying mate, I'm laughing at your silliness.
Please explain to me how these 3 clubs can justify spending £24m on "scouting" in one season. What do you think their combined revenues are right now, let alone squad cost? How much do you think the squads of Melbourne Hearts and Man City ladies are worth?
You clearly know you've lost the argument though bringing Fellaini into it for some reason
No. Fellaini is relevant. United valued him at 27.5 million. Others might not pay £15m for him. The reasoning is, UEFA cannot say how much City's scouting intellectual property is worth. They could only act if it is clearly inflated.
Funny how you called me a daft twat saying it was £24m when it is actually £22.5m.
I forgot you were much more intelligent that the people City employ. Obviously they have employed complete idiots who on a whim thought lets just sell this scouting stuff for a ridiculous price and hope for the best.
It will have been carefully considered and they will be much more informed than you and I over whether it is acceptable to UEFA.
Okay, again I'll ask you, how do you think those 3 clubs could possibly justify spending £24m on "scouting" in one season?
£22.5m/£24m it's still cloud-cuckoo land.
I don't have to justify it, that's up to the club, and I'm sure they have already prepared a suitable answer for it.
City's income also included £47m from selling "intellectual property", including £22m-worth to related City companies. It isn't restricted solely to scouting either.
You'd be hard pushed to value scouting information at more than what those teams combined have probably spent on transfers in their entire existance though.
'I'm going to pay you £24 million for this information that helps me scout a player worth 100k'. I can't see UEFA buying it.
£22m from 3 clubs whose combined revenue is probably far less than 1/2 that? I can't find the figures for Melbourne Heart but the league as a whole made a revenue of £50m last season (according to Wiki) with the average revenue of each club being about £5m. And I can't imagine Man City Ladies are raking it in (unless they have a ridiculous overpriced sponsorship deal from some random Abu Dhabi Company
). New York City aren't even fully up and running yet, they will start playing in 2015. That's the only place I can see them justifying it but I'd love to know what exactly MCFC has that is worth so much to NCFC. I mean that's 1/3rd of Newcastle United's entire turnover last year. Maybe they sold the rights to use the colour blue for £10m .But you're right, I'm sure it's all entirely above board!
Not only that, it has implications other than FFP rules. It would seem to constitute money-laundering.£22m from 3 clubs whose combined revenue is probably far less than 1/2 that? I can't find the figures for Melbourne Heart but the league as a whole made a revenue of £50m last season (according to Wiki) with the average revenue of each club being about £5m. And I can't imagine Man City Ladies are raking it in (unless they have a ridiculous overpriced sponsorship deal from some random Abu Dhabi Company
But you're right, I'm sure it's all entirely above board!
£22m from 3 clubs whose combined revenue is probably far less than 1/2 that? I can't find the figures for Melbourne Heart but the league as a whole made a revenue of £50m last season (according to Wiki) with the average revenue of each club being about £5m. And I can't imagine Man City Ladies are raking it in (unless they have a ridiculous overpriced sponsorship deal from some random Abu Dhabi Company
But you're right, I'm sure it's all entirely above board!
Ok. We'll just have to wait and see what UEFA's verdict is.
Going a bit far there mate. I'm no expert but I don't see how it constitutes money laundering unless they are doing this to avoid taxes or something, which I highly doubt.
No. It wouldn't.
I dunno mate. I seem to remember hearing something about moving money between companies being restricted. Not my field of expertise at all.
I'll have to wait and see if any experts chip in, or how it pans out.
It sounds like this was the last resort, when they'd saturated the places hidden their liabilities.
You said:
"In all honesty, there is unlikely to be a sufficient volume of challenges to be of significant irritation to them"
My point (pretty much all of my point) is that if teams are kicked out, the potential repercussions fir them are so significant that they will challenge the decision and could make life difficult for UEFA - certainly enough to be an "irritation".
As you keep replying to my posts pointing out where I'm wrong, I assumed you disagreed. If not, I'm not sure what the point of all of this is.
And - "wasting your time"? Get over yourself.
You keep explaining that it will be challenged in court, as if I have said it won't.
UEFA expect it to be, and say they are prepared for it.
They are not penalising everyone. And of those charged, not all will challenge it, so no biggie.
Where have I argued that it won't be challenged? Show me.
I merely state that I think that when they do, it will be pointless, and tried to explain why I think that.
You have found an aegument where there isn't one.
UEFA expect it to be, and say they are prepared for it.
They are not penalising everyone. And of those charged, not all will challenge it, so no biggie.
Where have I argued that it won't be challenged? Show me.
I merely state that I think that when they do, it will be pointless, and tried to explain why I think that.
You have found an aegument where there isn't one.
I'm not here to "argue". Clearly we are at cross purposes and you don't actually disagree broadly with what I'm saying.
What I will say, as a parting point, is that in my opinion the view that UEFA are happy to fight these clubs may be correct. Fair play to them if so.
I personally disagree that they will be that keen to stop teams competing in the CL, largely because of the potential scale of any battle and how unsavoury it could get. I think people underestimate just how nasty that could get for everyone involved.
I think UEFA have to punish these clubs for these rules to have any purchase, and I do think those punishments will be significant.
I don't believe anyone will be prevented from playing in the CL. As above, I think it's trouble nobody needs, or wants. I suppose time will tell.
UEFA are just going to issue fines and use this as a cash cow aren't they.
They stopped a team from playing in the CL last year, Fenerbache. Granted it was for different reasons but it's an example as to how using the rule book to ban a club from any competition they like is a piece of piss. That case went to the CAS but doing this to enforce its rules is something I can't see UEFA cowering from
...Is exactly how I see it.
£5million fine for both City and PSG.
"Pleasure doing business with you, chaps."