Allowing the owner to pay the fine and not count it towards further FFP calculations does dampen the punishment considerably. But its still a good start.
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.
Wonder if they will offer Rio a contract...
So, UEFA created a problem and are now attempting to solve that problem by creating an even bigger problem.
They're just going to destroy football sooner or later. But hey, at least Real Madrid, Bayern München and Manchester United are happy. That's all what matters, apparently.
They're just going to destroy football sooner or later. But hey, at least Real Madrid, Bayern München and Manchester United are happy. That's all what matters, apparently.
City fan I assume?
To be fair, FFP does point towards keeping the big clubs at the top, I won't deny that.
On the flip side though, every club knew the rules, City decided to ignore them
See what you mean. But as Dortmund and Atletico Madrid show you can get up the latter, even without a rich russian. And you even can have rich owners. The point is that you earn your place.
And Im fine with that. In parts cause in this way my Bayern are the richest guys around. We will make over 500 million this season, can use the stadium money(30 million) for the first time for transfers and are de facto debt free(the paying will continue till 2015) Love it!!
No, I'm a United fan. I just resent that we, along with every other big club, are apparently too cowardly to fight our rivals on the pitch so we intend to destroy them via other means (United, as far as I'm aware, have been a huge supporter of FFP from the start).
UEFA caused the problem: you simply cannot compete with the biggest, richest clubs anymore, mainly because of the Champions League, because of the immense financial rewards of the competition and the commercial exposure it afforded to its biggest clubs.
The only way to break into the cosy elite and stay there without losing your best players every year is by spending outrageous amounts of money in a short time. Now UEFA take even this avenue away without actually fixing the real problem: the lack of competitiveness and the ever-growing advantages of the established elite. It summarises their incompetence, really. And their pandering to the football aristocrats.
And those who still cite Borussia Dortmund: yes. The second biggest club in the country with Europe's strongest economy keeps losing its best players year after year. Hardly a good advertisement for how smaller clubs can compete with the big boys.
End of the day we all want this mess sorted out but there is no magic wand they can wave. When this kind of money is involved these guys didn't become that rich being mugs and aren't gonna let UEFA call all the shots. Also FFP wasn't just bought in to stop these rich owners, bought in to stop the smaller clubs running into issues as well.
I'm not even sure these FFP sanctions would be held up in a court of law, so you have to tread carefully. If City & PSG accept this and agree to sort their act out then they have to be given the chance. Not ideal but these things will take time to sort out, won't happen overnight.
If they really hold up those fines it's a good thing. I just think it will probably be softened after an appeal like it usually happens.
Ah ok. I do agree to an extent. It does really seem like a plan to keep the cream at the top so to speak, but it is frustrating to see clubs come in with billionaire owners and suddenly become a super power.
Arsenal are a perfect example. Always gone about their business the right way. City come in, take Adebayor, Nasri and Clichy.
Look at the knock on effect there. Without City, Arsenal would be in a considerably stronger position. These players, along with RVP, may not have wanted to leave (All IFs and Buts I know). It has ruined Arsenals prospects as a club.
Tottenham, very similar. The only difference is the poor decisions. Always been about the top 4. Been in and out of it from time to time. Imagine no City. Them and Everton could have had more stints in the CL, bringing in more money etc.
Not singling out City as a club. I do agree, that without a billionaire Owner, City would never been anywhere near the top 4 now, let alone a league winning team, but, if you took them out of the equation, teams like Everton, Arsenal, Liverpool and Tottenham could have all benefited from it.
The idea that the CL creates an in attainable gap between the teams is ridiculous as seen by us and Liverpool.
FFP is fantastic.
FFP is fantastic.
The new sanctions of squad size and wage restrictions look good. It means UEFA is really taking it seriously. While punishments were purely financial, you could see clubs ignoring these. however when they affect the ability of the team to win the trophies, they're likely to be taken more seriously.
That would count under point 3 - income from a related party or above market value.
ummm I have my doubts about it. Can't see the tweet on office laptop but from discussion here seems it is about whether fine will be accounted for. It doesn't make sense to not account that fine in financials. Otherwise, it is just case of UEFA trying to make money from rich clubs every year.
Last edited:
Yes, but they can pass if they show they're moving in the right direction. It was £100M two years ago, £50M last year. I reckon if they showed losses of around £20M or less they'd be okay.
However that assumes UEFA believe all their income is legit.
Yes, they could have benefited. Not to the extent to seriously challenge United over the long-term - again, Borussia Dortmund are a perfect example of what happens to well-run 'second tier' clubs after a period of success, they get torn apart by the big boys; let's not forget that their best players over the past few years were bought up by Manchester United, Real Madrid and Bayern, not sugar daddy clubs - but the likes of Everton indeed could have done somewhat better, could have been like Valencia were in Spain for years. Leave Arsenal out of it though, they are the biggest club in one of Europe's richest cities with massive revenue: they would be in a far stronger position without FFP but that doesn't exactly demonstrate football's competitiveness.
My point is though that UEFA take away ANY chance whatsoever. If they get rid of sugar daddy clubs will Everton and Spurs benefit? Sure. Will they ever rise to the very top? No, because they will be constrained by their revenue streams and their commercial potential which you cannot increase without sustained success which is impossible to achieve without investment which is forbidden because of revenue issues... you see where I'm going with this. FFP has been an incredibly flawed idea from the very start for this very reason; it destroys sugar daddy clubs, yes, but will further harm the competitiveness in European football.
Don't get me wrong, I see the problem that only the traditional elite can compete with sugar daddy clubs and the gap between these and the other clubs is only growing as a result. But those other clubs can at least hope that they will also find a billionaire owner and join the party. It's a crap situation but UEFA's idea of a solution makes it worse because it makes no attempt to actually do anything about that particular gap.
Academy spending and stadium upgrades are NOT part of FFP. They could spend £10Bn on those things and not fail FFP, so it makes no difference.
Shouldn't the club pay the fine though? I know it's the owners who spend the money, but it's the club who should get punished.
You have to wonder what the fine is meant to accomplish other than line UEFA's pockets in this scenario.
My thinking too, where does the money go?
It it doesn't count towards the assessable profit/loss for future FFP evaluations then it accomplishes feck all except, as you say, giving UEFA their cut.
Certainly not to pay any taxes
They will invest it in good things like youth football and so on. Its a great chance to show off in the press.
And, like I said, UEFA is doing a great job here. Imo the bad image of UEFA in the British press has to do with the "island complex", anyone is against us, these continentals are mean to us and so on.
Their home-grown players as of the start of the season according to the Mirror, were
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/manchester-citys-25-man-premier-league-2252547
Boyata
Clichy
Hart
Lescott
Milner
Richards
Rodwell
Tchuimeni
Wright
Presumably you take one off and you have 1/5 of their CL sqaud?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/manchester-citys-25-man-premier-league-2252547
Boyata
Clichy
Hart
Lescott
Milner
Richards
Rodwell
Tchuimeni
Wright
Presumably you take one off and you have 1/5 of their CL sqaud?
Man city fined for breaking FFP rules £50,000,000. Fines for racism were: Serbia £65,000 Lazio £32,500 Porto £16,700. Ridiculous
Hope you're just highlighting the futile racism fines rather than saying the City fine is too large.
Clichy is home grown... Keh?
I'm not convinced by this, I think harder squad punishments would have hit these clubs harder.
I just hope UEFA stick to their guns.
I'm not convinced by this, I think harder squad punishments would have hit these clubs harder.
I just hope UEFA stick to their guns.
Are you serious?
The biggest effect on City will be with the homegrown players in the champions league since they'll still need 8 but now from a squad of only 21. If they expect to get these type of sanctions regularly I could see them making a move for Shaw or Barkley.
I am. What's the point fining £65000, £32,000, £16,700? It's wouldn't make a difference at all to the club. They wouldn't try avoid the incident again with these kind of fines. It isn't even a weekly salary for an individual player of theirs. Fines are supposed to hurt you so you don't repeat the offence. This fine will hurt City. They will now stop ignoring FFP and try to adapt in a way to play fairly. If the racism fines were of this magnitude then it would have done a lot to kick racism out of European football.
I can't. This'd set them back £70m? How's that going to help? They're in this position because they spend too much.
If you imposed £50m fines for racism you'd just get rival fans buying tickets and making monkey noises to cripple the team.
There simply aren't that many multi-billionaires out there to make wanting to be taken over by one a viable business model. There are probably only a hundred people alive with the money to do with City have done, and only a tiny fraction of those will be interested in running a football club and prepared to invest an appreciable amount of their fortune to doing so - you might be talking half a dozen people.
If you're worth £5Bn (which is not the same as having £5Bn in cash) you'd have to be very committed to liquidate 20% of your entire worth just to get your club to where City are now. This is for people with at least £10Bn or more and those people are few and far between. Abramovich, worth around £7Bn when he took over, wouldn't be rich enough for this particular game if he tried it now.
The reality is that not only will most clubs never be taken over, but now its almost impossible to make the jump to the top level of the game. A double whammy.
Over £50m I'm sure it would be proved they were rival fans. Plus clubs would be more on the case of hiring more stewards to kick these twats out.
Well I've read that Boyata, Lesott, Milner, Richards and Rodwell were all intending to leave this summer, but I guess we may see a change of plan. Perhaps they'll bring Barry back?
We should start a campaign for them.
This is only the first season of an ongoing new rule. It doesn't end today, it starts. Personally I thought in the first season we'd see suspended punishments and stern letters only, I'm surprised they've been as forthright as they have been.
As someone said earlier, maybe it's the attitudes of City and PSG. Other clubs, like Chelsea, have taken action to address it and to work within the structure of FFP. PSG and City seem to have laughed it off and fiddled the figures to bypass it. This must have pissed UEFA off.
I wonder what kind of sponsorship deal(s) they've wavered or reduced down to more reasonable figures. The stadium sponsorship must be one, and didn't I read about City selling scouting reports to its American affiliate or something similar?
I wonder what kind of sponsorship deal(s) they've wavered or reduced down to more reasonable figures. The stadium sponsorship must be one, and didn't I read about City selling scouting reports to its American affiliate or something similar?
Wtf?! Of course I am talking about the need for higher fines for clubs that facilitate racist behaviour!!
Indeed it is the fans to commit the racism crimes, it is the club that breaks FFP. Fining a club £50m for racism won't do feck all, because you'll still have fans doing stupid things, you can't weed that out completley, fining a club £50k for breaking FFP won't do feck all either because they'll just keep on breaking them and paying these fines until the end of times. £50k is what they pay an 18 year old a week these days to sit on the bench. No if you want City and PSG to feel the pain of breaking FFP than fines of £50m are more in order.
But these fines should count towards the next FFP assessment. It won't do to let the sheijk fill UEFA's pockets and then go on a spending agree again next year. If City and PSG don't stay within the limits, they get these kind of fines, it will force them to cut their spending because else they get another fine next year and another one until the Financial infrinigement becomes so bad UEFA will be able to take further action and also take them out of the CL or put transfer restrictions on them. But if they don't let those fines count, it will become a price to pay for infrining the rules and City, PSG etc will be albe to pay it and will pay it gladly.
Competition is very important in football in order to keep interest in the sport so it wouldn't make sense to completely hinder clubs who are able to challenge the top clubs. However, to completely leave City lone to spend freely is more dangerous to competition than the conduct of the other big clubs and therefore needs to be curbed. Football tends to go in cycles and a club maybe very strong for a while but inevitably, their team will fade after a period of time and the club will have to spend big money to regenerate it. No club, regardless of how rich can do that over night and all the time. Unless you are Man City or another sugar daddy club who have the resources to keep the 'boom' of their footballing cycle going forever if they wished without any consequence and this would make a mockery of competition.
FFP maybe a load of rubbish but it is necessary to put parameters in place in order to limit spending.
FFP maybe a load of rubbish but it is necessary to put parameters in place in order to limit spending.