BBC Sport: La Liga asks Uefa to investigate Man City's financial fair play

M18CTID said:
Anybody with a modicum of commonsense can see why La Liga are doing this, and it's all because PSG dared to buy Neymar from Barcelona and they're now acting like a bunch of slapped arses and lobbing accusations around without any supporting evidence.
Click to expand...

Much as I dislike City/PSG's steroid-boosted spending, you're right on this. They never complained before. Wonder what they think about national governments buying clubs' training facilities at grossly inflated prices?

M18CTID said:
Funny how no-one ever complains about Mike Ashley and Peter Coates sponsoring their own clubs - maybe for some, the fact they don't have brown skin and aren't Muslim has something to do with it.
Click to expand...

Not sure you can stand that up mate. If Newcastle or Stoke were blowing everyone out of the water financially they'd be getting stick as well.
 
I'm torn on this. I do agree it seems Barca and Real are spitting out their dummies but City were verging on ridiculous this summer.

They have these amazing new manager who's known for developing youth etc and they spent a huge amount of money and wanted to spend a huge amount more (Sanchez/Mbappe). This is made even worse as they do this every summer and ruin careers along the way.
 
Haven't read all the replies in the thread, but what about the viewpoint that all this money from city and psg is money coming into the game ( I know quite a bit goes to the agents etc)

For example Neymars money going to Rennes.
 
There's clearly a lot wrong in football, FIFA, UEFA all have had their fair share of bad headlines and in some cases, proven corruption.

The solution to this is very simple, make it a legal requirement that all PL teams make financial information public. A pipedream but it should make it easier to spot when clubs are breaching financial guidelines
 
Tom Van Persie said:
Erm I'm pretty sure a lot of people do. Mike Ashley is one of the most hated person in football.
Click to expand...

But nobody complains about him sponsoring his own club - apart from that stupid re-naming of the stadium that is - which is the point I was making.
 
 
I doubt City are in breach of spending rules after their last fiasco and the general paranoia that they have in relation to UEFA/FIFA being out to get them.
 
M18CTID said:
Anybody with a modicum of commonsense can see why La Liga are doing this, and it's all because PSG dared to buy Neymar from Barcelona and they're now acting like a bunch of slapped arses and lobbing accusations around without any supporting evidence.
Click to expand...
I'd also add PSG buying Mbappe to the list. Real and Barca united in hatred for the same club. They'll be using all the political power they have to try and force changes.
 
mav_9me said:
Haven't read all the replies in the thread, but what about the viewpoint that all this money from city and psg is money coming into the game ( I know quite a bit goes to the agents etc)

For example Neymars money going to Rennes.
Click to expand...

Rennes don't need money, their owner is properly rich and will always bankroll them.
 
M18CTID said:
Anybody with a modicum of commonsense can see why La Liga are doing this, and it's all because PSG dared to buy Neymar from Barcelona and they're now acting like a bunch of slapped arses and lobbing accusations around without any supporting evidence. Do you honestly believe that this complaint would've gone in if PSG hadn't bought Neymar? I wouldn't mind but what PSG do is nothing to do with City anyway and it's not like Qatar and Abu Dhabi are best of friends at the moment. Just because both clubs are owned by people from a similar part of the world doesn't mean they're 2 sides of the same coin. Funny how no-one ever complains about Mike Ashley and Peter Coates sponsoring their own clubs - maybe for some, the fact they don't have brown skin and aren't Muslim has something to do with it.

As for the numbers not adding up, how do you work that one out? Have you gone through City's accounts with a fine tooth comb? Perhaps we should get you and that muppet Tebas from La Liga to independently audit City's accounts in future seeing as though you both have so much inside knowledge of our finances:lol:
Click to expand...

Yeah, let's bring the race into it. Well done. This issue has nothing to do with where PSG/City owners are from but what they do. And it doesn't matter whether top Spanish clubs are hypocrites, we all are when it suits us, the question is whether they are in the right here, and they are.

It was bound to happen, sooner or later. The longer UEFA would ignore this nonsense, the more pissed of clubs would come demanding some action. This summer it's Neymar to PSG, next year they'll go after Messi/Pogba/Hazard, etc. I can understand United fans enjoying Real/Barca misery, still sore after the Ronaldo saga all those years ago, but they wouldn't be laughing when/if City or PSG come after Pogba next summer.

And to those suggesting the CL can't afford to lose PSG/City, you can't be serious. It's the other way around, they can't afford not to be in it. If the likes of Real, Barca, Bayern, MU, Juve, etc. join forces and threaten to walk away and create their own competition, UEFA will have no choice but to take some strict measures.
 
M18CTID said:
But nobody complains about him sponsoring his own club - apart from that stupid re-naming of the stadium that is - which is the point I was making.
Click to expand...

Did Newcastle qualify for EL/CL?
 
M18CTID said:
But nobody complains about him sponsoring his own club - apart from that stupid re-naming of the stadium that is - which is the point I was making.
Click to expand...
Classical Mechanic said:
Oil rich micro states using clubs for political currency is a different order of magnitude altogether.
Click to expand...
This. It's definitely an issue but nothing compared to what's going on at PSG and City. It doesn't matter what team you support, it's ruining football and you can't hide away from the facts.
 
M18CTID said:
The income of every club in the Premier League has increased exponentially over the past few years due to the new TV deal. City also banked more in Champions League TV and prize money than every other club in Europe when we reached the semi-finals of the CL 2 seasons ago. We also now have a bigger stadium with more corporate facilities and increased revenue from match day ticket sales and corporate hospitality. Much of the reason we failed FFP was as a result of the rolling losses from the previous 3 seasons when all these revenue streams were much lower. It's not just about "dodgy" sponsorship deals you know - incidentally, deals that have actually been ratified by UEFA as being fair market value. I'll also point out that while our net spend was well over £100 million this summer, we got far more players off the books than we brought in so the net spend figure doesn't tell anything like the full story because when you factor in the amortised costs our transfer activity was well within acceptable boundaries for FFP purposes so unless you know more than UEFA and think it's acceptable to ride roughshod over international accounting standards, I suggest you keep any accusations of corruption away from a public forum.
Click to expand...

Does the Emptihad ever sell out apart from the United game?
 
Tom Van Persie said:
This. It's definitely an issue but nothing compared to what's going on at PSG and City. It doesn't matter what team you support, it's ruining football and you can't hide away from the facts.
Click to expand...

Ruining football? Behave you tart:lol: If that's how you feel, I hope City continue to ruin football for many years to come
 
Why are people unhappy about this? Regardless of their motive, surely Real/Barca/La Liga pushing UEFA to look into PSG/City is good for us and the rest of the normal clubs?
 
Rajma said:
After just received a fresh deposit from Middle East expect nothing more.
Click to expand...
The problem is that it's very easy for state-backed clubs to beat FFP, as companies from their country have a vested interest in backing them through huge sponsorship deals.

Look at this, for example.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/footb...ys-new-80million-per-year-sponsorship-5290985

Is that contract really market value, going by the 'eyeballs' City get compared to other leading Premier League clubs?

I'm not saying there's anything underhand about it, just that clubs like City and PSG are being backed by an entire country so their commercial revenues will be artificially high. They don't even have to break the rules.
 
antihenry said:
Yeah, let's bring the race into it. Well done. This issue has nothing to do with where PSG/City owners are from but what they do. And it doesn't matter whether top Spanish clubs are hypocrites, we all are when it suits us, the question is whether they are in the right here, and they are.

It was bound to happen, sooner or later. The longer UEFA would ignore this nonsense, the more pissed of clubs would come demanding some action. This summer it's Neymar to PSG, next year they'll go after Messi/Pogba/Hazard, etc. I can understand United fans enjoying Real/Barca misery, still sore after the Ronaldo saga all those years ago, but they wouldn't be laughing when/if City or PSG come after Pogba next summer.

And to those suggesting the CL can't afford to lose PSG/City, you can't be serious. It's the other way around, they can't afford not to be in it. If the likes of Real, Barca, Bayern, MU, Juve, etc. join forces and threaten to walk away and create their own competition, UEFA will have no choice but to take some strict measures.
Click to expand...

Oh look, it's the sanctimonious Chelsea fan spouting his usual bollocks.
 
antihenry said:
Yeah, let's bring the race into it. Well done. This issue has nothing to do with where PSG/City owners are from but what they do. And it doesn't matter whether top Spanish clubs are hypocrites, we all are when it suits us, the question is whether they are in the right here, and they are.

It was bound to happen, sooner or later. The longer UEFA would ignore this nonsense, the more pissed of clubs would come demanding some action. This summer it's Neymar to PSG, next year they'll go after Messi/Pogba/Hazard, etc. I can understand United fans enjoying Real/Barca misery, still sore after the Ronaldo saga all those years ago, but they wouldn't be laughing when/if City or PSG come after Pogba next summer.

And to those suggesting the CL can't afford to lose PSG/City, you can't be serious. It's the other way around, they can't afford not to be in it. If the likes of Real, Barca, Bayern, MU, Juve, etc. join forces and threaten to walk away and create their own competition, UEFA will have no choice but to take some strict measures.
Click to expand...
Agree with all of this, great post.

PSG might be a loss but they don't have much of a global fanbase. Fans of United/RM/Barca/Liverpool/Bayern would still watch it even if Neymar wasn't there. City have a good local following but they're nowhere in international terms - my partner's family are from Barcelona and when you go there no-one talks about City.
 
B20 said:
Although it is funny and awkard to see how sour real and barca are about this, it doesn't make them wrong - this is what FFP was made to combat. Only positive to see some pressure being applied to enforce it.
Click to expand...

Been stated before in these threads, but that’s not the case. FFP was never meant to level the playing field among the so-called elite clubs, it was a measure to combat the trend of (usually much smaller) clubs going bankrupt as a result of spending beyond their means.

The sugar daddy clubs most people associate with that term nowadays are a different kettle altogether. They aren’t in danger of going bankrupt even if there’s precious little corelation between what the club itself generates (by normal standards) and the insane amounts they spend on transfers and salaries. Fecking City and PSG over (which has been done, modestly) is just a side effect of FFP, not the intention behind it.

Nevertheless, it would seem that FFP - regardless of its actual intention - is the only thing that keeps PSG from making a complete mockery of the game. The Neymar deal, transfer plus wages, is nowhere near stretching their owners' limit. They could easily afford adding multiple Neymars to PSG’s squad. And if there were no restrictions in place, they’d presumably do just that - or attempt to do so. Long term, that would - I don’t see how anyone can deny this - effectively demolish the competition through, well, splashing the cash. Only City among today’s “elite” would be able to offer them any resistance. The other top clubs would have to either rely on the very best, established players NOT opting for doubling or tripling (or whatever - to these people even insane outlays are a drop in the ocean) their income - or on constantly outsmarting PSG/City by securing less obvious targets/players one way or the other.

I get the argument that sugar daddy clubs have made it harder for the traditional aristocrats, thus contributing to competitions being more, well, competitive. In a sense that is true. But people - and there are plenty of them, it seems - who both praise the sugar daddy phenomenon AND stand firmly against FFP, well...I don’t get that. There’s only one logical outcome to letting the likes of PSG do as they please with regard to transfers/salaries. A “normal” football club may be a) owned by some rich fecker or other, willing to spend ridiculous amounts, relatively speaking, without getting anything back directly (like Roman back in the day) or b) capable of generating ridiculous amounts, relatively speaking, through pushing the brand (like United) - but with City and PSG we’re talking about owners who can bankroll a full XI of Neymars without thinking twice about it. It’s on a completely different scale to anything we’ve seen before.
 
Last edited:
Real Madrid and Barcelona. Two cheeks of the same arse for years. Now they fear that arse getting slapped and start whining.

Better they keep quiet else the powers that be start digging in their closets.
 
JohnnyKills said:
The problem is that it's very easy for state-backed clubs to beat FFP, as companies from their country have a vested interest in backing them through huge sponsorship deals.

Look at this, for example.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/footb...ys-new-80million-per-year-sponsorship-5290985

Is that contract really market value, going by the 'eyeballs' City get compared to other leading Premier League clubs?

I'm not saying there's anything underhand about it, just that clubs like City and PSG are being backed by an entire country so their commercial revenues will be artificially high. They don't even have to break the rules.
Click to expand...

That story was never verified about City re-negotiating the Etihad deal. As far as I can see, it's still around £40 million per annum for stadium, shirt, and campus sponsorship. If City went into the open market today and re-negotiated that deal then we could easily get more money for it so if anything it's under-valued these days.
 
JohnnyKills said:
The problem is that it's very easy for state-backed clubs to beat FFP, as companies from their country have a vested interest in backing them through huge sponsorship deals.

Look at this, for example.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/footb...ys-new-80million-per-year-sponsorship-5290985

Is that contract really market value, going by the 'eyeballs' City get compared to other leading Premier League clubs?

I'm not saying there's anything underhand about it, just that clubs like City and PSG are being backed by an entire country so their commercial revenues will be artificially high. They don't even have to break the rules.
Click to expand...

That's absolutely true and that should be the sole purpose and argument for investigation. Say, by excluding any sponsorship deals as a valid source of income that been signed for highly inflated rates when doing their FFP calculations is the only way to stop this nonsense IMO.
 
Rajma said:
That's absolutely true and that should be the sole purpose and argument for investigation. Say, by excluding any sponsorship deals as valid source of income that been signed for highly inflated rates when doing their FFP calculations is the only way to stop this nonsense IMO.
Click to expand...
There's no way you could stop that mate. It's perfectly legal and above-board. That's the problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.