Sums up exactly how I feel too.
I'd actually go further and kick them out of the football league completely. Why should any football league club have to give up their space to accommodate these corrupt Cnuts!
City and Financial Doping | Charged by PL with numerous FFP breaches
- Thread starter VanGaalEra
- 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.
Sums up exactly how I feel too.
I'd actually go further and kick them out of the football league completely. Why should any football league club have to give up their space to accommodate these corrupt Cnuts!
The parent company is not forbidden per se to spend its own money at all in any way shape or form as long as they follow local laws. They are however prohibited to do so if they want to participate in the competition.
Participation in the competition, comes with a set framework that all clubs participating are obligated to agree to to enter the competition, in this case the Premier League.
Want to spend frivilous amounts of money? Go ahed. You can however then not participate in the competition. UEFA is the governing body, all registered clubs in UEFA needs to act according to its laws. All clubs accept UEFAs authority by being part of the league system.
The local leagues are free to enact their own, harsher version of FFP, for example in the case of La Liga.
The FFP is there to ensure that clubs dont go under from being victims of frivilous owners who spend huge amounts of money only to leave the clubs high and dry, which has been the case with many clubs, for example Malaga who ended up being forced to release their entire first team squad due to a horrible foreign owner that spent money like a drunk sailor.
It is there not to prevent small teams from becoming big, but to prevent big and small teams from overreaching, unable to handle their financial obligations. The system isnt perfect, but its better than sacrificing a few clubs in the process to let everyone else spend freely. What do you imagine happens if a oil club gets told there is a no-limit of spend? Think £200m for a player is a lot? Try £400m for Mbappe on a 10 year contract. Player values for the elite clubs will reach a level of inflation that WILL cause clubs to go bankrupt the moment a investor needs to pull out,or we hit a new recession that impacts clubs finances like it did with Covid.
The courts cant choose to cancel FFP without having a legal framework to reference. It would require legislation from the government to be passed into law to do that.
Currently, there is nothing that stops a governing body of a sports assosication to enact its own rules that still comply with regular employment laws in relation to employees of a sport club under contract, which are slightly differenct from say someone who works as a taxi driver, or as a cashier re: employment protection etc.
Why would this disappear in four years time? Are City going to quietly move towards irrelevance in that time? This isn’t big news because it’s a surprise, it’s big news because people have expected it and it’s been proven true. People want a a punishment and will be no less hungry for that punishment in four years, especially if they continue their ways.
[/QUOTE]
“it’s been proven true” , “people want a punishment” , mmmhhh, I am used to that….. a legally passable way to do that would be to enforce the fit-and-proper gate against the AbuDhabis and make them sell their asset.
[/QUOTE]
“it’s been proven true” , “people want a punishment” , mmmhhh, I am used to that….. a legally passable way to do that would be to enforce the fit-and-proper gate against the AbuDhabis and make them sell their asset.
This isn't true, and you only have to look at the history of the policy and the mechanics by which it was introduced to see that. An inquest into domestic football governance was undertaken at the urging of football supporters, who had grown concerned about financial management within football after a couple of high profile cases highlighted issues. The report came back having vindicated these concerns, with significant financial risk-taking being noted and many clubs effectively gambling with their future as a result of the lack of financial regulation.
The PL policy was introduced via a vote, in which a majority of two thirds were needed to go ahead with implementation.
This evidently isn't true
. Some of your concerns with FFP are valid, it does play a part in solidifying the status quo, there's a reason why the traditionally big clubs were especially in favour. Equally though (and with all due respect), your lack of knowledge regarding the landscape that led to the policy, underpins your false belief FFP is this evil policy concocted solely to protect big clubs. There are better solutions to the problem of upwards mobility in football, than to make it a financial free for all.city’s tactics have always been to delay and object to any reasonable disclosure of information and documents. The process is an independent arbitration. I am not certain of the how the Court and private arbitration matters operate together in the UK but in Canada (also common law apart from the French bastards in quebec) allow parties to seek some direction from the Courts in private arbitration matters if there are procedural disputes re: choice of arbitrator, timelines, production issues, right to appeal etc. I would think that the city lawyers will seek to delay by using the Court to argue that the committee is biased and should be removed. Really not sure what else they could argue since the league has already used the Court to push for more documentary disclosure. It’s going to be a mess and the barristers and solicitors involved in this matter are going to be making filthy amounts of legal fees.
Anyone know if the 4 years predicted included city’s likely appeal?
The same fans that welcomed all this shit and were cocky for years, because of the successes they had due to their cheating? The same ones who spent their free time to defend the sportswashing project their teams has become? They deserve all this.
We get it, you’re a Juventus fan.
This evidently isn't true
Could you elaborate on the bolded part?
And unfortunate enough to have to check the fitness of a few accounting sheets as well.
The charges and the investigation are due to the fact that City did not supply the FA with the appropriate paperwork at the right time. If City supplied all the details openly and honestly and worked with the investigation it could be over in two or three months. Instead City will use high powered lawyers to stall, procrastinate and slow the process. That is their right.
But to set an example the FA can dock them 20 points until the investigation is complete for this season and subsequent seasons in order to encourage them to work with the process and not against it and deliver all the relevant information in a prompt manner.
Too much pandering to money and lawyers.
They deserved several relegations yes but no permanent expulsion. If Qatar come in and start using our club for something nefarious we would be powerless to stop it and won't deserve expulsion.
Why are people looking at this as FFP? It’s flat out fraud. These are criminal acts, not ‘whoopsie we spent too much money’.
Reporting and sentiment on this is divorced from reality.
Reporting and sentiment on this is divorced from reality.
Surely, there is a protocol during the investigation process that the governing body can instill some punitive measures? Such as temporary halt on transfers?
To, like you say, encourage the speed.
This isn’t an invalid argument, but the problem is they didn’t make that argument, they committed fraud rather than make the effort.
People seem to keep focusing on FFP. Rory Jennings, he Chelsea YouTuber was talking about how disgusting it was that teams in the PL were using their “filthy money” (and he wasn’t talking about how the money was earned … just that it was lots of money … and that money is filthy..,) to suck up all the talent from teams around Europe and it was evil.
This conflating of different things is the only thing I find annoying about this situation. Money isnt inherently bad; that’s stupid, and Marxist. The PL should in NO way feel bad for having more success and drawing more talent to it every year. That’s also dumb.
Madrid people in no way “felt bad” about the government manipulating property sales to sell/buyback land to Madrid for huge profits for tons of money .. and then took everyone’s best players.
I also get annoyed with the “living within their means” thing. We aren’t talking about a welfare house for war orphans. This is one of the biggest sports leagues in the world. Nobody asks Ferrari formula 1 teams if they are “living within their means”. The idea of treating football teams, like they are a cross between steady profit steel mills and community centers is just weird.
Real investment of real money should be encouraged. If you don’t want s nation-state or royal family to buy teams (which I would agree with), then don’t let them. It isn’t like people didn’t know.
The issue that should sink City here is that they have real partners and investors, including the league itself, that have s legal right to accurate information in making their own decisions, and City robbed them of that information through what appears to be intentional fraud. FFP isn’t even a league rule, it’s a multi league agreement. FRAUD is the law. The breaking of the actual law.
Thank you. I was beginning to think I was the only one that saw it. This is MUCH more serious than a rule break.
Amen. So weird people not understanding small teams trying to be big is why several clubs have folded.
Only thing here is that the Bosman rule fell under contract law which is a thing to do with employee and employer relationships, FFP doesnt quite concern that with the EU freedom laws.
As per wiki
I don't really see how City frauding their way through sports since they were founded by oil has anything to do with the EU getting involved this time around.
This has been mentioned very little in terms of punishment if found guilty, but I totally agree. I think they should be put in league two and stripped of trophies. It’s unprecedented cheating/accounting fraud.
I hear media and pundits saying relegation to the championship, but wouldn’t they just be back up in one season anyway?
Theyll probably lawyer out of it though.
Could always join the SPL.
They let Rangers back in.
They cannot just be relegated to the football league. From my understanding, the only way relegation is possible is if they are given a huge points deduction that makes it impossible to stay up. Let's say -75 points, then they most they could get was 39 points, but only if they won every single game and even that might not keep them up.
The PL and the Commission only have the power to expel them from the PL. At which point they would have to apply to the football league or another league for membership. They could decide to accept them, but also decided where they'd start off, so it could be the Championship or as low as the Northern Premier League or even lower - 9th, 10th, 11th tier. But that will never happen.
I mean Juventus just got a 15 point reduction for one incident, their first i believe? This is city's 3rd time being punished for FFP and they have a hundred charges. Say 20 points for it being a repeat offence, thats -2000 points. Maybe they'd have to work it off over multiple seasons, so next year they start at -1900 ponts (in the champoinship obviously)
I reckon that'd be fair
And yet clubs being on brink of bankruptcy were a regular thing before the FFP times and they didn't even need a massive pandemic excuse for it. Clubs becoming insolvent after their sugar daddies got bored were also a massive issue. Executives running their clubs into the ground absolutely was a legitimate problem before that.
Day by day there's more of a feeling City won't get off lightly. Sure I heard someone mention a former prominent person at City had also suggested this wasn't like the UEFA case and the consequences will be far more severe.
I mean Juventus just got a 15 point reduction for one incident, their first i believe? This is city's 3rd time being punished for FFP and they have a hundred charges. Say 20 points for it being a repeat offence, thats -2000 points. Maybe they'd have to work it off over multiple seasons, so next year they start at -1900 ponts (in the champoinship obviously)
I reckon that'd be fair
Opening a can of worms there.
Everybody who's not a Juve fan in Italy is just out to get them. They've never done anything wrong and this latest attack is just another attempt to bring down the biggest club in Italy because they're all jealous.
Absolutely. I doubt if he will be there next year.
Cheers. I hope they get punished properly and don’t get away with it this time.
Good point. The fact they decided not to do this ought to worry City.
You mean not worry City? if the case was slam dunk then you would think the PL will not be happy to wait however long it takes to get them punished.
With City not cooperating with them since 2018, I think this is why they are letting it run it's course. without seeing all of City's cards they don't really know what City has been cooking up since then. Plus this could just be a "hey look at us, we are doing more than UEFA did" and give them a comfortable points deduction in a season they will not win the league and a substantial fine.
If they get a points deduction. Would it happen next season? Juventus happened this season though didn’t it? I bet it’s just a fine they get, that will do nothing to them. Needs to be a serious punishment to stop it happening.
It’s not illegal. They’re a set of rules that the sport has implemented as a condition of playing in their competitions.
United have finished second to City as often as Liverpool have.
Interesting. So you don’t considering cheating to be cheating. Good for you I guess.
It is, but some weaker version of it might be true.
I am not at all a lawyer so I have no idea, but as a general statement "the FA/UEFA/FIFA can make its own rules" is for the most part true but not always. For instance, there's this thing about how City can't appeal to CAS if they get convicted. It's true that the rules say that, and that City have agreed to those rules, but it's not a given that those rules are enforceable because there are a lot of rules and regulations about contracts. In general people have the freedom of contract is pretty strong, so the FA and clubs have a lot of room to decide things between them, but there are limitations.
Specifically regarding FFP there are antitrust and competition stuff to take into consideration, I don't think it's 100 % given that it would stand up if challenged.
Here's a publication that argues that it is illegal, as an example. https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/eilr/vol29/iss4/4/
I haven't read it, and wouldn't have understood it if I had, and I don't mean is at an argument that it is illegal. Just that it's not prima facie ridiculous that it could be.
There are already many replies to your posts but I'll still summarize here. When you reply, you can quote multiple people on the same reply to reply to more than one person at a time
1. What you quoted isn't a law. You'd have to quote a specific law that you think is being broken. What you said there isn't a law, it's just a vague concept. Sports leagues already do exactly that. The NFL and NBA have salary caps that explicitly prevent "a property from its money on its company." And there are plenty of other examples of limiting that principle. For instance, tobacco advertising is banned/severely limited. That's preventing a company from spending its money. So you'd have to find very specific laws that you think are being violated.
2. Bosman is not a valid comparison because that dealt with contract law with specific provisions that were challenged. There is not a comparable example here.
3. FFP is not even relevant to the most strict violations which are, essentially fraud. Fraud is not legal. As some have mentioned, City might face legal challenges from other clubs that want to sue them.
Essentially, as @Tom Cato pointed out, the government would need to pass very specific laws (which do not currently exist to my knowledge but feel free to list them) for a court to cancel FFP. And even if that happened, it wouldn't make the fraud problem go away and just get City out of trouble here.
So do I.
But it probably won't be anywhere near as severe as what people would like to see.
gregory gauss competitive exclusion
The Jamaican track team had a HUGE issue with doping
I am going to make the below argument because City’s lawyers will want to make this a debate about the fairness and legitimacy of FFP. It’s a trap they want to draw commission members and public alike into. That can’t be allowed to happen.
Teams folded for many financial reasons related to debt and over borrowing well before this age of massively rich investors.
The problem with some teams is the owners who claimed to be big spenders … didn’t have the actual ability to do so. Even having a net worth doesn’t guarantee having the cash on hand necessary for major sorts ownership. OR, as was heavily the case in La Liga, you have the messiness of essentially public ownership and elected Presidents and directors. They get desperate for re election or overzealous lying about money that isn’t theirs and … bam, problems.
If they were worried about viability, they could simply require owners to certify their means of spending. That is not difficult to do. You could even require teams to put all the liquid cash of their ‘spend’ for each year in an escrow account by a certain date.
None of these issues necessitated making rules that income had to come from certain sources; only that it be “provable” you had the money you said you were spending.
But that is what we were told FFP was for: to make sure teams actually had the money to spend. But that isn’t what it does; it makes sure teams are only spending income related to things historic teams with massive fanbases would get income from.
Chelsea could have spent more money off the books; from what I understand if we had been willing to pay the massive under the table fees we could have had Haaland.
Two teams: one got creative with things like their “loan army” … which tons of players, teams and even countries benefitted from by the way (Bayern, you’re welcome for Musiala)… to close the gap on what they wanted to spend versus the money they brought in from “traditional” means.
The other committed legal accounting fraud. Criminal charges, to completely ignore the spending border.
I do not agree with FFP hindering outside investment to the degree it does, but that is an entirely separate issue from this particular case. FFP was only their “motive”.
It would be like two husbands hating their current wives: one gets a divorce, and one kills her. Neither wanted to be trapped in a marriage. The crime is the whole murder part. The crime is the Fraud.
Whatever the other penalties, the ownership group should face expulsion and forced sale just like Chelsea. OPEC+ is doing a LOT more to fund Russia in Ukraine than Roman ever did by originally making his money in Russia. And they broke sovereign laws if they committed the fraud.
I don't mean to take this thread wildly off topic but anyone who thinks Bolt wasn't doping is pretty naive. This is list of the mens all time records with the people caught doping crossed out
If you think the absolute elite, best of the beat, most talented people in the world who were doping couldn't manage 9.8 seconds, and there's a guy who's clean managing below 9.6, you're hopelessly naive
Juventus exploited a grey area that had no rules about it.
Serie A bending rules which limit the punishment to a fine (and for the other teams involved they asked for a fine) to make it a points deduction.
Without explaining how they came to pick the -15points when prosecutor asked for -9.
I dunno what it is but the more likely explanation is ESL since Juventus is shit since 2-3years
I don't mean to take this thread wildly off topic but anyone who thinks Bolt wasn't doping is pretty naive. This is list of the mens all time records with the people caught doping crossed out
If you think the absolute elite, best of the beat, most talented people in the world who were doping couldn't manage 9.8 seconds, and there's a guy who's clean managing below 9.6, you're hopelessly naive
It's widely assumed but not proven that he used PEDs, steroids etc. But never proven as he never failed a drugs test.
It's been widely assumed that City have been using some creative accounting and inflating sponsorships to get around FFP. But again it's not been proven yet.
Yeah I mean there were no rules about using influence and contacts to get preferential referees appointed.
Also there were no rules about over stating the market value of players to try and cover the losses accumulated by overpaying for one of the biggest players in the world.