Manchester City facing Financial Fair Play sanctions

Brightonian said:
Agreed. Doesn't change the fact that you stated RVP's salary, what City offered him and what United are offering now to keep him as if they were facts that you knew, whereas in fact they were pure speculation, and you've just admitted that none of us have a clue about any of those things. Yes, you can make your assumptions, but they're no basis for any kind of argument.
Click to expand...

Interestingly you didn't have a gripe with the person who stated he could have made more money at City as if it was a fact but decided to focus on me arguing that wasn't the case.

I never said we don't have any clue, we just don't have the actual numbers. Yaya Toure's reported wages were often taken as fact on here despite evidence to the contrary. You're basically saying we cannot dispute any matter in football without having the undisputed facts that very few people on a football forum will have access to or be legitimately informed on.
 
BobbyManc said:
But City were on the verge of bankruptcy prior to Mansour's takeover. City will be in a much healthier financial position in a few years than prior to the takeover. Same for Chelsea. How is that bad for football? Or would it have been better if City did collapse as that way we wouldn't have challenged the established clubs? Point is, it's all well and good saying 'what if the owners lose interest etc.' but FFP does not deal with that issue.
Click to expand...

No agree its great City are booming I like the challenge and its up to United to fire back. But I would worry if I was a City fan as if the owners sell up it could mean extinction for the club. FFP is not going to stop anything Bobby there will always be a way around it. Changing contracts sponsorships stadium rights etc
 
Mrs Smoker said:
Well, there is something about that...

Yeah, the number mentioned is not a fact, but it's something that's easy to believe in.
Click to expand...

1. Misleading headline. Wenger never mentions the £300,000 figure or even that City offered higher wages.

2. It isn't easy to believe. Would City have offered RVP more than what Yaya Toure, Sergio Aguero, Carlos Tevez, David Silva etc. were on?
 
BobbyManc said:
1. Misleading headline. Wenger never mentions the £300,000 figure or even that City offered higher wages.

2. It isn't easy to believe. Would City have offered RVP more than what Yaya Toure, Sergio Aguero, Carlos Tevez, David Silva etc. were on?
Click to expand...

1. That's why I said it's not a fact.

2. Yeah, I believe so. Same or higher, that was after all, Robin Van Persie, top scorer in Premier League. Amazing player.
 
Mrs Smoker said:
1. That's why I said it's not a fact.

2. Yeah, I believe so. Same or higher, that was after all, Robin Van Persie, top scorer in Premier League. Amazing player.
Click to expand...

Van Persie was and isn't good enough to justify disrupting the morale of key established players at the club. The club could only really make an exception for someone like Messi or Ronaldo. The article you posted is absolutely worthless though other than Wenger confirming City were interested. Everyone knows that though. Like I said, the fact we signed Garcia, Sinclair and Rodwell suggests to me we were not prepared to offer anyone ridiculous wages that summer.
 
At that time, he was better than all four players you mentioned and I have no problem believing City would easily pay him as much or more than others.
 
Mrs Smoker said:
At that time, he was better than all four players you mentioned and I have no problem believing City would easily pay him as much or more than others.
Click to expand...

Well you can believe whatever you want to suit your agenda. Quite simply, however, it is extremely unlikely City would have offered to make RVP our highest paid player. Maybe joint with someone like Yaya but he is not good enough to warrant potentially disrupting the team's morale. To believe we would have made RVP our highest paid player you have to believe City effectively valued him as more valuable than a combination of Toure, Aguero, Silva, Kompany etc.

He was the league's best striker, not Messi or Ronaldo.
 
BobbyManc said:
To believe we would have made RVP our highest paid player you have to believe City effectively valued him as more valuable than a combination of Toure, Aguero, Silva, Kompany etc.
Click to expand...

Why would I have to believe such a thing? And that would be first potential disruption of team's morale?
 
Mrs Smoker said:
Why would I have to believe such a thing? And that would be first potential disruption of team's morale?
Click to expand...

Because as I have said, the second RVP becomes our highest paid player we then would find the agents of several other players wanting to know when they can expect a pay-rise in accordance to what RVP earns. Not to mention it then provides leeway to agents in negotiations over wages regarding new contracts or signing new players. And all that when we already had Aguero, Tevez and Dzeko up-front. Ok, the latter two aren't as good, but we wouldn't break our wage ceiling unless we desperately needed them or they were a Messi or Ronaldo.
 
BobbyManc said:
Well if we can only debate things in football that we know and are certain of it would be a pretty dull thing, no?

I think it is a reasonable assumption to make that Van Persie is one of United's highest paid players. I also think it is reasonable to state he earns a minimum of 180k a week. I also think it is reasonable to state that City would not have offered Van Persie anything considerably more than what he earns at United.
Click to expand...

If we're dealing with assumptions, then I'm pretty sure it's safe to say VP would have been offered more at City.

How much more, who knows, but it'll most likely have been more.
 
I'm not why RVP has featured so predominantly since the 'If City and United offer the same wages, everybody would choose United!' discussion - one player doesn't determine the rule, and both clubs have moved on since 2 years ago. Some players would choose United, some would choose City, I only disagreed with the original statement that 99% of players would choose United (which I'm sure the majority on here will agree is a biased view from the original poster of that opinion). The wages that players are actually on is pure guess work, and nobody really knows what terms a player would be offered from either club - but gone are the days that City have to offer absurd wages to turn heads or to compete for players with the top clubs in England.
 
Manchester Dan said:
I'm sorry but arguing that City are better placed to win trophies in the next few years than United is not a wind up, it's definitely up for discussion and a reasonable statement to make. Congrats though, you are the first person to call me a WUM here, not bad after nearly 600 posts as a City fan on a United forum!

Your Juve point is completely irrelevant by the way, because at no point did I ever say 'United will struggle to sign players' (I don't think that you'll struggle at all) - what I did say was that not every player would choose United over City right now if they were offered the same wages, which was the point originally suggested, and a completely different point to the one you're trying to argue. You big WUM, you.
Click to expand...

Fair enough if you really believe what you're saying, seemed to me it was aimed at making City appear to be a better destination than United. I'm sure you'd like to think so, but from what I've seen, all things being equal, players would rather go to clubs with tradition, and large fan bases.
 
gooDevil said:
Fair enough if you really believe what you're saying, seemed to me it was aimed at making City appear to be a better destination than United. I'm sure you'd like to think so, but from what I've seen, all things being equal, players would rather go to clubs with tradition, and large fan bases.
Click to expand...

Isn't that simply because those are the clubs who typically can offer the most money as well?
 
BobbyManc said:
Isn't that simply because those are the clubs who typically can offer the most money as well?
Click to expand...

Well it's not all down to money is it.

Ask any Liverpool fan about Suarez and how he absolutely isn't going anywhere ever.
 
Wow you'd think United were relegated last season by reading this page.

The reason why City would pay RVP more than their other players is the same reason they can sign any other player and that's because those said players would NEVER go to City if it wasn't for the money.
 
Harte,
wright (3rd keeper)
Richards,
clichy is homegrown due to his time at arsenal
boyata counts as homegrown
rodwell
Barry
millner
Sinclair

They wont have any trouble with finding enough homegrown players
 
sun_tzu said:
Harte,
wright (3rd keeper)
Richards,
clichy is homegrown due to his time at arsenal
boyata counts as homegrown
rodwell
Barry
millner
Sinclair

They wont have any trouble with finding enough homegrown players
Click to expand...
Some of those players could be leaving and they would have to have at least 5 of them on the bench if they need 8. That would restrict them somewhat.
 
sun_tzu said:
Harte,
wright (3rd keeper)
Richards,
clichy is homegrown due to his time at arsenal
boyata counts as homegrown
rodwell
Barry
millner
Sinclair

They wont have any trouble with finding enough homegrown players
Click to expand...

Probably true. It's a pretty embarrassing set of players to be filling the quota with though. Just one player who's in their best XI. Only three who ever get anywhere near it.
 
sun_tzu said:
Harte,
wright (3rd keeper)
Richards,
clichy is homegrown due to his time at arsenal
boyata counts as homegrown
rodwell
Barry
millner
Sinclair

They wont have any trouble with finding enough homegrown players
Click to expand...
Most of those players will be leaving this summer. Especially, Richards, Sinclair, Barry and even Milner.
 
sun_tzu said:
They will only let the ones under contract go if they can get homegrown players to replace them... And given that most of them are squad players that should be easy enough
Click to expand...
I doubt it will be easy, who are they going to replace them with.
 
Surely if they get away with just 5 home grown players that's grounds for other clubs to appeal?
 
For anybody vaguely interesting about the view on FFP from within the club, the Khaldoon Al Mubarak (Chairman) annual interview has been uploaded on to the City website and he speaks directly about it for a couple of minutes from 09:45 in part 2 - it's nothing earth shattering but he touches on a few things - always comes across as a class act to be fair to him. In the mix he confirms the club will report break-even results this year, and profit next year to pass FFP under the current settlement outlined, and in the future beyond that. He obviously feels the club are done as far as FFP punishments go now.
 
Daily Mail have watched the above interview and invented a 'swipe at United' because he mentions that we operate with no debt.

Amazing journalism. :lol:
 
BobbyManc said:
To be fair, I think he was clearly having a dig at United.
Click to expand...
To be fair UEFA said themselves ffp was to stop clubs going into debt to chase success and like it or not city have no debt
UEFA also stupidly said on their website that ffp was designed to stop hyper wage inflation which I think will completly feck them when the bosman lawyer gets them in court... (is that next year?)
 
Plugsy said:
Surely if they get away with just 5 home grown players that's grounds for other clubs to appeal?
Click to expand...

I think there is a 10-day period where the clubs can appeal. If City are allowed to only register 5 home grown players I can imagine City and UEFA have agreed to say nothing official on the matter until after the 10-day period.
 
sun_tzu said:
To be fair UEFA said themselves ffp was to stop clubs going into debt to chase success and like it or not city have no debt
UEFA also stupidly said on their website that ffp was designed to stop hyper wage inflation which I think will completly feck them when the bosman lawyer gets them in court... (is that next year?)
Click to expand...

The EC has already indicated that it sees little merit in that case. It's not even likely that they'll accept that Striani has proven interest to bring the case. The battle's already been lost, all but officially. So good luck with that prediction.
 
BobbyManc said:
I think there is a 10-day period where the clubs can appeal. If City are allowed to only register 5 home grown players I can imagine City and UEFA have agreed to say nothing official on the matter until after the 10-day period.
Click to expand...
There's no way thy would get away with that. How can clubs appeal something they don't know about?
 
BobbyManc said:
I think there is a 10-day period where the clubs can appeal. If City are allowed to only register 5 home grown players I can imagine City and UEFA have agreed to say nothing official on the matter until after the 10-day period.
Click to expand...

You can't quietly whisper something to someone and announce the 10 day period for appeal of others begins then. They'd evoke the ire and wrath of many of Europe's top clubs and UEFA may want to do many things but piss them off isn't one.
 
City and PSG likely to avoid having reduced player quotas as UEFA try and agree sanctions for overspending

FIFPro Europe President Bobby Barnes hopes UEFA can avoid cutting player quotas for Manchester City and PSG as the sports governing body tries to agree sanctions for overspending.

'The last thing we want is for players to miss the Champions League,' Barnes said on Saturday, calling for 'maybe a staged or phased version of the punishment.'

A UEFA panel's sanctions for overspending include cutting senior player quotas for Man City and PSG to 21 from 25 in next season's competition.

That is intended to force clubs to promote home-trained young talent instead of relying so much on expensively bought players. Some elite players could be left ineligible to play in UEFA competitions.

Still, Barnes sees room for negotiation because UEFA has not yet specified how many homegrown players must be included in the 21.

'If there is a discussion to be had with UEFA then FIFPro would like to be involved in it,' the former West Ham United and England youth player said. 'With the best will in the world, players are not responsible for the financial running of the football club.'

Squad limits were among wideranging penalties announced this month for nine European clubs, including fines of 60 million euros ($82 million) for the champions of England and France.

It was unclear if Man City and PSG must still select at least eight homegrown players - including four trained at the club, and four more within its home country - or be allowed as few as five.

UEFA said in a statement to the AP that it will give detail 'in the coming days how it will apply the homegrown player element of the sanctions settlements.'

Any relaxation on squad limit rules is likely to irritate many in the 200-member European Club Association, who have curbed spending to meet UEFA's demands.

The ECA, like FIFPro, has been a key stakeholder in UEFA's lengthy introduction of the new rules.
Barnes stressed that FIFPro 'totally supports' the project.

'We understand something has to be done,' he said. 'I would like to think that if it happens in a phased way, it gives people an opportunity to get used to it and adjust.'

Barnes said FIFPro also wants UEFA to look at relaxing rules on suspensions for yellow cards that forced Real Madrid midfielder Xabi Alonso to miss his team's 4-1 extra-time win over Atletico Madrid on Saturday.

The Real Madrid midfielder's one-match ban was triggered by receiving his third yellow card of the competition in the semifinals, the second leg against Bayern Munich.

UEFA operates different rules in its European Championship finals tournament. Yellow cards are wiped from disciplinary records after the quarterfinals to ensure no player misses the final for a yellow card offense.

FIFA has the same system at the World Cup.



Is it just me, cause I still don't 100% understand it fully, or has it gone from 50mil fine + Reduced player quota to only having to pay 16mil of that fine and now potentially not having a reduced player quota too.

So, a 16mil fine?

Hardly a deterrent if it is just that..

But like I said I still don't 100% fully understand it so..
 
They've bottled it already? I honestly expected it to take longer. I wonder if there have been any sharp increases in the balances of the bank account of the people who have to make such a decision, paid in from banks in the Manchester and Paris regions.
 
Richard Cranium said:
They've bottled it already? I honestly expected it to take longer. I wonder if there have been any sharp increases in the balances of the bank account of the people who have to make such a decision, paid in from banks in the Manchester and Paris regions.
Click to expand...
I suspect the payments would have been in cash from big Brown envelopes via Abu dabi / quatar
 
It is looking increasingly like FFP is an elaborate plan orchestrated by UEFA to ensure they 'get their end' from this enormous influx of oil money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.