pretty funnyCan't understand how anyone has been conned by financial "fair play".
UEFA and the regulations themselves are the bad guys here.
Manchester City banned from CL for 2 seasons and fined 30 million euros | CAS - Ban lifted, fined 10 million
- Thread starter roonster09
- Start date
pretty funnyCan't understand how anyone has been conned by financial "fair play".
UEFA and the regulations themselves are the bad guys here.
I don't know the full ins and outs of it like most of us so to say who was right and wrong in this is very difficult.
What is clear though is that City were nowhere of note prior to the takeover and within 4 years, they had one of the best sides in Europe and were even spending ridiculous amounts on average players when they can't fill their stadium. They don't have the global might of Liverpool or Man Utd so the wages and transfer fees that they throw around are coming from somewhere and it was up to UEFA to prove whether it was legitimate or not.
All that said, if UEFA couldn't prove the point, then that's on them and their lawyers. They should really take a long hard look at where FFP goes from here, as right now, it seems dead in the water.
The ramifications of todays verdict are huge and the City takeover that we were all told FFP was brought in to prevent, will now continue at pace. I don't think it's any coincidence that talk of the supposed takeover of Newcastle died down with City's European future up in the air. I think now that City have been cleared, it paves the way for the Saudis to come in and complete their takeover.
What is clear though is that City were nowhere of note prior to the takeover and within 4 years, they had one of the best sides in Europe and were even spending ridiculous amounts on average players when they can't fill their stadium. They don't have the global might of Liverpool or Man Utd so the wages and transfer fees that they throw around are coming from somewhere and it was up to UEFA to prove whether it was legitimate or not.
All that said, if UEFA couldn't prove the point, then that's on them and their lawyers. They should really take a long hard look at where FFP goes from here, as right now, it seems dead in the water.
The ramifications of todays verdict are huge and the City takeover that we were all told FFP was brought in to prevent, will now continue at pace. I don't think it's any coincidence that talk of the supposed takeover of Newcastle died down with City's European future up in the air. I think now that City have been cleared, it paves the way for the Saudis to come in and complete their takeover.
I am sure they will not appeal the fine for not cooperating.
UEFA have come out of this looking worse (and more incompetent) than anyone, given that they didn't seem to understand their own rules, especially the time bar ones.
They 100% knew about it. City raised it at CAS in the first appeal for one. Plus, the lawyers involved in the CFCB are very senior experienced European lawyers, so there’s no way they missed it. Clearly, they either thought that they could make a compelling enough case that persuaded CAS to overlook the time-barred aspect (that would have to be based on proving deception by City I believe in reaching the earlier settlements), or decided they had to bring a case they expected to lose anyway due to political pressure.
UEFA knew this case was a loser. They have a team some of the best & most expensive lawyers available. To think that these lawyers would have missed the fact that the City infractions were time barred is laughable.
UEFA have never really had a problem with City's spending. They let them choose their own punishment for their first offence. I don't particularly think that UEFA were too concerned when the new emails documenting further financial irregularities come to light.
A large reason for bringing the case would have been the emails from City mocking the death of a UEFA official (there has been no club apology to the victims family) There were also other emails wishing death on other UEFA officials. You also had City threatening to bankrupt UEFA & the fans booing at CL games.
In the end UEFA had just had enough of City. They knew they couldn't win the FFP case against them. The only option available to them was to damage the clubs reputation.
How so?
Happy new year!
As they tried to get them banned I would imagine they will.
God bless. Now get them off their perch.
yeah I think that will be the case... I wonder how UEFA officials will react if they get a City Vs PSG champions league final and have to clap them and give them medals at the end
He must've said it. Maybe in the embargoed part.
For City I don't know but Al Khelaifi is part of the UEFA executive committee. So I don't think that PSG and City should be mixed.
A bertie at work keeps shouting "Court of arbitration champions you'll never sing that"
Deserve an apology according to Pep despite them being found guilty still of breaking rules, just not being able to be found guilty of breaking more rules even though they did. Makes sense.
Salary cap would be useless.
The brown envelope brigade would simply ramp up their game.
The brown envelope brigade would simply ramp up their game.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Jose does have a point.
If you are not guilty, you're not guilty, why even get a fine?
It would take more than a salary cap to stop you lot if you wanted de Jong or de Ligt. You’d employ your favourite trick of telling them they were coming to Manchester and they’d think it was United. Worked before. If that failed, the offshore account/brown envelope would fix it. They don’t go to City because of the Shaun Goater heritage.
The fine is unrelated to the outcome. City supposedly stopped cooperating with UEFA because they believed they were going through an unfair investigation not based on facts. The club appealed to CAS much earlier in the process about this but it was rejected on the basis there was no judgement yet to appeal against. Josè will be Josè though, as you know.
“However, considering i) the financial resources of MCFC; ii) the importance of the cooperation of clubs in investigations conducted by the CFCB, because of its limited investigative means; and iii) MCFC’s disregard of such principle and its obstruction of the investigations, the CAS Panel found that a significant fine should be imposed on MCFC and considered it appropriate to reduce UEFA’s initial fine by 2/3, i.e. to the amount of EUR 10 million.”
https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/CAS_Media_Release_6785_Decision.pdf
He does not have a point, and like many who comment on the matter, he has no grasp of even the basic details. UEFA charged City for disguising equity funding as sponsorship and failing to cooperate with the investigation. CAS rejected the former claim. Straight away, that means the punishment must be lesser than originally handed down, agreed? It’s the main charge dismissed. However, they accepted the latter charge, and deemed a smaller fine to be an appropriate punishment. So City were found guilty by CAS of a lesser charge (Mourinho clearly has not read the very short verdict released), but were cleared on the claims of more egregious breaches.
United haven’t finished above City since 2013. The two players you mention were 16 and 13 the last time it happened.
And.....?
Zzzz.. good effort.
Its for the history they'd go. You know how Liverpool won all those titles before Klopp and post Dalglish because all the best players in the world signed for the prestige.
If we're not involved in it next season, I'd rather Liverpool win #20 than City at this stage, to be honest. At least they're a proper footballing club.
Even if you are not convicted, it does not mean that you are innocent.
Beyond that, I have a hard time understanding why players want to play for a club like PSG or City, where one can suspect that one's salary comes from questionable places, and that your club probably does not comply with the common rules of fair play, even if they do not get a verdict. They could have earned millions a week in several big clubs in Europe, but still choose to represent a club where your salary might come from dirty oil money.
Although I hate Liverpool more than any other club, I still have more respect for them than City or PSG
Beyond that, I have a hard time understanding why players want to play for a club like PSG or City, where one can suspect that one's salary comes from questionable places, and that your club probably does not comply with the common rules of fair play, even if they do not get a verdict. They could have earned millions a week in several big clubs in Europe, but still choose to represent a club where your salary might come from dirty oil money.
Although I hate Liverpool more than any other club, I still have more respect for them than City or PSG
You're aware that most of the charges were time barred and hence you got away on that technicality, right? The judges said you can't be punished because your alleged wrongdoing was beyond the statute of limitations, they didn't actually clear you of those charges. And they were time barred because you refused to cooperate when you should have, hence your fine.
If UEFA were less inept, you'd be in trouble. Congratulations on your great escape, but you were not innocent - just not guilty. There's a difference.
Exactly. I hate when people make that stupid argument that FFP is anti-competitive. PSG and City have won several titles between them under it so how would removing it help competition?
10 million fine is a monstruous joke. 100 would have been reasonable and an statement. Filthy filthy corrupt Oilchester City.
I confess, I like Pep, I hoped we'd get him as our manager. But he needs to shut the feck up about others needing to apologise to his cheating club.
In sport, as in life, there are always people who will do whatever it takes to win. In sport Ben Johnson cheated his way to an olympic gold. Lance Armstong cheated his way to 7 TDF titles. I personally don't understand it. If i'm playing competitive sport it never crosses my mind to cheat as i know that my conscience would tell me that the win was tainted in turn making it worthless. I don't for 1 minute think that when Johnson & Armstrong stood on their respective podiums they thought they were anything but winners. They would view me as a chump for sticking to the rules whereas i view them as cheats for breaking them.
NO. Just no.
How is entrenching the same clubs at the top of football forever "fair play" ?
They could actually make football fair, if they wanted to. The rules just pander to entrenched vested interests, old money clubs.
Posted earlier in thread also, can't be bothered to quote myself.
Ive been of that opinion for a few years now tbh. I rather a proper team win it, even if its our biggest rivals. Atleast they did things the right way under the same rules as us and have matched us for which i say fair play. A financially doped team is like rooting for a guy on steroids going to a Natural Bodybuilding competition. Makes no sense to me
I think you're spot on there. Some people are ok with doing anything possible to win. its more about winning for them than it is about enjoying the nature of competition. The later is some one who enjoys hard competition but respects the rules and is of the mentality "may the better man win" whilst people who only care about winning are more likely to seek each and all advantage they can get which can be legal or illegal.
In regards to players, with all due respect i think they have no idea. Football players aren't the sharpest tools in the shed, they probably have no idea how any of it works. What they see is massive pay checks and a team that is one of the best in the world (as is the case for both city and psg) and thats about it.
Before FFP was introduced, the collective deficit of European top clubs was over 1 billion euros. In the last reporting period, they were overall running at a profit.
This narrative that FFP has been introduced to protect the "big boys" is ridiculous and peddled by sports "journalists" and fans (those 2 categories often being muddled). FFP were a sound set of rules introduced to ensure progressive and organic growth of clubs based on their actual revenues and size, and to avoid clubs overspending or being overly reliant on one owner rather than a solid structure.
But a conspiracy theory is more fun, you're right.