Manchester City and PSG breach Uefa FFP rules.

[fez]

So the sanctions are pretty much meaningless for City as it stands. They have built their squad to the point of it requiring maintenance rather than an overhaul and the 50m fine will be cut by £32.5m if they don't spend more than £50m net in this transfer window.

There is incentivising and then there is just pointlessness. The CL is probably worth 40m plus to a team including the reduced wages and transfer fees they will have to stump up for signings and the punishment for failing FFP is a small fraction of that.

 

[Tute]

My point is how is those teams especially Everton struggling to balance the books any better than a club that is spending money they have or Liverpool losing 90m but exempt from FFP until August.

Well, because they're exempt until August.

I understand your point, but if FIFA/UEFA want the FFP rules to have any teeth they need to punish teams accordingly. Man City knew that they would have to meet them well in advance, and they chose not to.

 

[FrankJH]

Not but it will be as clear cut if the clubs with a smaller fan base and income can't spend the money they actually have. No one can match Uniteds turnover, so you create a system where they win every year.

As I said, 60m or whatever to Everton will make a larger difference to that club rather than 60m to Utd, so Everton should get stronger comparatively.

Rooney went through Evertons youth system not uniteds My point being if United bought through another Scholes I would make his wages exempt from FFP. If they brought a player from Barnsley I would do the same. Encourage teams to have better youth set ups and hang on to them.

Read the WHOLE comment, dont just edit what suits your current arguement

It shouldnt matter where the youngster comes from as long as he comes through the youth system of a british club otherwise its blind luck where any particular player ends up.

So the sanctions are pretty much meaningless for City as it stands. They have built their squad to the point of it requiring maintenance rather than an overhaul and the 50m fine will be cut by £32.5m if they don't spend more than £50m net in this transfer window.
.

Squad reduction may take an impact - but the 21 players they can use have to include 8 home grown players from what I understand so this might be a challange.

Financially you are correct though the penalty payment is a slap on the wrist. If you include what they can spend in the window (before sales) might be a bit of a challange also (50m euros)

 

[Rofflay]

There are some real cracking posts in here about United having too much money well someone has to win and we happened to strike it rich even before Ferguson we were massive so blame it on luck and the rewards of winning. You cannot say United have earned money from anywhere dodgy and infact they have been robbed and not invested in to be truthful here.

But as for our neighbours £50 million is no where near enough to teach these cheats a lesson even though RM spent £1 billion to get a chance at the tenth cup and City spent the same only two clubs seem to be targeted. But i am fine with that if it starts to get the ball rolling and it will only help us as David Gill is on the board haha. Now you will have to watch us spend £150m with our biggest ever football kit deal and sell a lot of players so i hope you have a good supply of wipes handy when you watch us win the league and have a nice big break from football all season long after a tiresome world cup. Hopefully all them City players give it thier all and come home to a tiny and knackered squad!

 

[dannyjo22]

Read the WHOLE comment, dont just edit what suits your current arguement

It shouldnt matter where the youngster comes from as long as he comes through the youth system of a british club otherwise its blind luck where any particular player ends up.

I was joking.

Of course it should matter where the youngster comes from in the scenario I bought up. Otherwise it would get worse, the bigger teams would poach young players from a Southampton and not have them impact on their finances. If you really think it's blind luck where a youth player ends up you have no idea how these kids are scouted and coached.

 

[FrankJH]

Of course it should matter where the youngster comes from in the scenario I bought up. Otherwise it would get worse, the bigger teams would poach young players from a Southampton and not have them impact on their finances. If you really think it's blind luck where a youth player ends up you have no idea how these kids are scouted and coached.

Im saying its blind luck because at 7 or what ever even the best coaches can only have a gut feeling about how any single person will be like in 10-15 years time (even without taking into account injuries in the intervening time, and life in general)

Think of it from the kid's point of view (and their families) - they are always going to choose a local club at a young age, but depending on their skill they could rapidly outgrow that club (and potential for disrupting their whole family by having to move nearer to a bigger club) . There is little benefit initially for any club to pick this lad over a local one (or even a more developed player from abroad in the same age group)

The player always has the choice of potentially chosing a club possibly further down the league who might give him earlier chances in the 1st team or going with one of the huge clubs (and facing a potentially bigger challange to play in the 1st team).

As long as he is British it shouldnt matter who his 1st club was (inside the UK).

 

[Biz.Kid09]

UEFA gen sec has confirmed that FFP rule-breakers City/PSG will only need 5 home-grown players in 21-man CL squad not 8

Much more reasonable and will certainly be easier now to name the best possible squad we can.

 

[Robbo]

So basically no punishment at all then.

 

[Cosimo]

Much more reasonable and will certainly be easier now to name the best possible squad we can.

After pressure from the players' union FIFPro:

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...y-for-breaching-ffp-watered-down-9529251.html

 

[J-FRO]

So hang on, the usual rule is that you have to have 8 home grown players, but because they're have their squads trimmed down to a permissible size of 21 as part of their "punishment", the 8 home grown players rule is also being "proportionately" reduced as well?

That's bloody ridiculous. This is supposed to be punishment, not just making it a challenge for them.

"It came after a request from the players union FIFPro saying when you take these kind of sanctions and measures you cannot harm the players and the rights of a player who has a contract for the behaviour of the clubs.

"So we looked at it and it was felt appropriate there for the number to be proportionally reduced as well."

How is restricting the clubs ability to choose from a larger selection harming the rights of the player? It's harming the club, it's the clubs choice who they select for that squad so its the club who harms the players rights.

So stupid. UEFA doing a good job of keeping up with FIFA by making a mockery of itself.

 

[dmcg]

Doesn't surprise me and wouldn't be surprised if the joke money clubs gave Uefa officials some "gifts" like Fifa to relax the rules

 

[FrankJH]

What a complete **** up

Heres a slap on the wrist - oohhh did that hurt too much, ok then we will take it back and give you a little tickle instead

 

[J-FRO]

Kicked out of both European tournaments with a £20m fine payable in full before they are re-admitted and squad restrictions such as UEFA originally imposed.

It needs teeth if it's going to work.

And as Tute said, City and PSG both knew the FFP rules but still decided to breach them regardless.

EDIT: and by squad restrictions, I mean if they get back into Europe again not for their premier league season.

 

[this_is_gav]

I don't see the point of a fine, other than to line the pockets of UEFA. But yes, sporting penalties depending on the severity of their overspending, ranging from making them enter the first round of qualifying through to kicking them out of the tournament completely.

Ensuring they can't use a couple of fringe players who would be unlikely to play anyway will have no effect at all.

 

[MooMoo444]

UEFA in consistency shocker

 

[J-FRO]

Do you really think going for the 'nuclear option' is sensible, by any realistic stretch of the imagination? The point is that they have broken the rules, but not in a ridiculously egregious way... therefore penalties are reasonable, but not the most severe ones.

They could just go for a severe approach, but that'd be fraught with difficulties. Primarily because these extremely well off clubs could fight them through the adjudicatory chamber/CAS/the ECJ/etc. You also want clubs and UEFA to work together, rather than relying on some kind of adversarial system where there's conflict/no openness/etc, because you'd probably just get a process which is far more costly, without necessarily being any more effective.

I'd hardly call it a nuclear option. I thought UEFA's original intentions, or at least the way they sold FFP, was that there would be strict unforgiving consequences for failure to meet FFP. They gave clubs something like 3 years to get their finances in order, but City and PSG still fell short. They knew the rules and they decided to break them. UEFA had a legitimate aim in implementing FFP in which harsher penalties would have been justified. They aimed to make it fairer on smaller clubs who cannot afford to purchase luxurious players and pay excessive wages to get into the European competitions. Furthermore controlling the financial conduct of the clubs helps maintain economic stability by discouraging the smaller clubs from spending excessively to break into the elite.

If City and PSG knew the rules and they knew the legitimate aims and they appeal to the adjudicatory chamber, CAS etc then what would be their argument? They were not allowed to enter into a competition, who's entry criteria is at the discretion of UEFA, who in turn are trying to maintain fairness and financial stability in the sport. What leg would they have to stand on? "Oh it's not fair on our players who have worked hard to get into this competition." I don't buy it, but they sure as hell bought those players and paid their excessive wages causing them to be in that situation in the first place. It's their own bleeding fault.

And what would UEFA have to work together with them on? Advising them on how to get their finances in order? They're bankrolled by billionaires, I think they know how to handle their finances and clearly know how to show a flagrant disregard for the rules which everyone else seems capable of abiding by.

 

[div0]

They aimed to make it fairer on smaller clubs who cannot afford to purchase luxurious players and pay excessive wages to get into the European competitions.

Whilst I'm not in total disagreement with what you're saying, this statement just isn't true.

The concept of FFP would not make things fairer for small clubs, it just simply links spending to turnover. If anything it would likely just lead to the 'big' clubs staying big and the small clubs staying small.

 

[Burned_Alive]

Whatever rules they set need to be hard-lined, clear and consistently applied. Too much faffing about, just appears like they're trying to appease the clubs that have broken the rules.