It's practical impossible to do that anymore.
BBC Sport: La Liga asks Uefa to investigate Man City's financial fair play
- Thread starter #07
- Start date
Perhaps, but that doesn't justify what PSG and City's owners have done.
Indeed.
Who was the last club to earn their way into the circle instead of buying their way in?
Why does it need justifying? It is what it is, same happened to Chelsea. It's better for football that there's more teams challenging for the best players and the Champions League.
Yep. It's getting rather tedious having to point this out time and time again. City fans more than pretty much any other set of fans recognise what a rich benefactor has done for their club so that's a wholly inaccurate statement to make. There's even a banner paid for by the fans that is a permanent fixture in the stadium thanking him. A more accurate statement would be that some fans of some other clubs are in complete denial as to what benefactor investment has done for their clubs in the past. That's not just aimed at United fans by the way, far from it.
It could actually be United.
Well not to me it doesn't. It's to the "selfish" fans in the post I originally quoted, who apparently want to maintain a "status quo" of certain teams when that's not necessarily the case.
What acrobatics? New investors get a new business and inject money in it to achieve their goals, things don't get simpler than that. Only the arbitrary measures imposed by FFP create some more convoluted accounting.
There's no middle ground in club football, either you're the shark who buys the best players or you're poached and get eaten by the bigger fish.
It's not everyone's ambition to be a perpetual victim.
Atletico?
Arguably Dortmund although not a super club they're in a tier just below. Dortmund were always one of the most supported teams in Germany though and they play in an 80,000 capacity stadium, it would be far, far harder for smaller teams to build up like Dortmund have.
Atletico and Dormund have been huge clubs, winning at home and in europe for decades.
Both are doing incredibly well to hang on at the top against all the big spenders, no doubt about that.
1. Understood.
2. Is it forbidden by the law to have a club owned by a foreign state? The political and economic elites tend to promote a wild globalized capitalism.
3. Good news. I'm just bored of seeing the same teams winning the same trophies. I even prefer them to acquire a French club like Lyon.
Last edited:
Yeah I hate these plastic petrol clubs as much as anyone but I love seeing La Liga squirm. They've been poaching everyone else's top players for years and the moment it happens to the victim mentality sets in.
1. Like any company, a clubs with a poor management is generally punished. Part of the game.
2. Do you think Chelsea has destroyed the British football and academies?
3. I don't know what dodgy means for you. I see legal transactions between friends
#Network4.1. Very odd reasoning. Academies have 2 functions: strengthen the senior squad and generate money. Where is the problem?
4.2. Also, PSG isn't a club that "steals children" who aren't under contract contrary to clubs like Barcelona, Arsenal, Dortmund... Contrary to Chelsea or City maybe, PSG doesn't have 50 pro players with an aggressive youth policy
5. Sure, it's more challenging and respectable to win something when you have less means.
- Clubs like Atletico can deliver top results simply: it shows the big clubs can't capture all the talented players. Also, 20% of Atletico is owned by a Chinese bilionaire.
- Leicester shows success isn't always guaranteed for rich clubs
5 - Does anyone remember that goal Aguero scored back in May 2012? I wonder.1. Like any company, a clubs with a poor management is generally punished. Part of the game.
2. Do you think Chelsea has destroyed the British football and academies?
3. I don't know what dodgy means for you. I see legal transactions between friends
4.1. Very odd reasoning. Academies have 2 functions: strengthen the senior squad and generate money. Where is the problem?
4.2. Also, PSG isn't a club that "steals children" who aren't under contract contrary to clubs like Barcelona, Arsenal, Dortmund... Contrary to Chelsea or City maybe, PSG doesn't have 50 pro players with an aggressive youth policy
5. Sure, it's more challenging and respectable to win something when you have less means.
- Clubs like Atletico can deliver top results simply: it shows the big clubs can't capture all the talented players. Also, 20% of Atletico is owned by a Chinese bilionaire.
- Leicester shows success isn't always guaranteed for rich clubs
Atletico Madrid but iirc they used third party ownership a lot in order to sign players like Falcao, which could be seen as buying their way in. Anyway, you need money to compete at the top, you need it to sign and keep good players.
Those iberian clubs still partake in shady deals and third party owners, mainly players from south america
2. In the post that I answered in the morning you named fear of the Arabs or repulsion to Paris and previously the mafia who wants to control football, Spanish institutions that believe they are the gods of football. Amnesiac, arrogant or ignorant. In the end it seems like we're stealing you.
And since you didn´t win the champions the fear is unfounded and since we can add the best local talents (in the case of Madrid) we shouldn´t worry about a new reality. It seems that we are conspiring to not let you grow
There are many teams that have been founded 100 years ago, but that does not mean that we have to give green light to everything they do, even if they deserve good players
3. the state funding, or "business men investing money to develop a business" which sounds better is really the only thing that bothers me, and actually I didn´t know quite clearly your opinion. Let´s see if Putin can buy the team of my city
Real have the commercial revenue to back up that kind of spending, they're not the most valuable club int the world for whatever number of years for no reason.
2. I never suggested "fear of the Arabs". Let's say that American investors would generate less animosity.2. In the post that I answered in the morning you named fear of the Arabs or repulsion to Paris and previously the mafia who wants to control football, Spanish institutions that believe they are the gods of football. Amnesiac, arrogant or ignorant. In the end it seems like we're stealing you.
And since you didn´t win the champions the fear is unfounded and since we can add the best local talents (in the case of Madrid) we shouldn´t worry about a new reality. It seems that we are conspiring not to let you grow
There are many teams that have been founded 100 years ago, but that does not mean that we have to give green light to everything they do, even if they deserve good players
3. the state funding, or "business men investing money to develop a business" which sounds better is really the only thing that bothers me, and actually I didn´t know quite clearly your opinion. Let´s see if Putin can buy the team of my city
Conspiracy is generally something hidden. Each club defends its own interests.
3. Putin can buy your rival Atletico
And I hope QPR cease to exist for gifting you the league in those 2 minutes.
Nope, we won the league the night Ferguson tried to play for a 0-0 draw at the Etihad.
You believe what you want. You know for a fact that you would not have won it if the Bolton game hadn't finished before your game.
I wasn't being genuinely serious, Utd's performance that night was cowardly but ultimately the season is decided over 38 games. However, I have a funny feeling you actually believe what you are saying..
As if anyone doesn't think that you were handed that "Agueroooooo moment" by a team of unprofessional wankers at QPR who knew they were safe.
People actually take the 'financial doping' term seriously? Its like a kid crying to his parents that another kid gets more toys than him.
I'm sure most ignore the fact that 'financial doping' has injected huge amounts of money into the game and made the sport more successful, especially the premiere league. A huge draw of the PL is that it is competitive in every position; without Chelsea and City being funded by billionaires the league as a product would be much worse.
The best thing to happen to Seria A in recent years is Chinese investors coming in; the league is slowly dying and was in need of some investment.
I'm sure most ignore the fact that 'financial doping' has injected huge amounts of money into the game and made the sport more successful, especially the premiere league. A huge draw of the PL is that it is competitive in every position; without Chelsea and City being funded by billionaires the league as a product would be much worse.
The best thing to happen to Seria A in recent years is Chinese investors coming in; the league is slowly dying and was in need of some investment.
I was curious after your post saying that you didn't want there to be any competition to Utd, so they could win all the trophies. I think your last couple of posts confirm it. Congratulations on being a City fan who's been undercover for the last 15 years. You've done a great job!
The thing is there are only a certain number of spaces at the table/circle. There was an era where Sunderland were that club and other eras with other clubs things change. Things will naturally change and people think that whoever is there now will always be there but is not necessarily the case. It's just that we were not around when the top clubs of the time were dominating. Even the clubs that are in the circle now are competing with each other as there is only 1-2 competitions of a significant stature to compete for, 1 domestic and one inter continental.
Its the nature of the beast you will always reach a threshold which means that there are only enough pieces of the pie to go round the "Top table". There is no scenario where you can have everyone at the same level as that would be a complete contradiction to having a competition or league table in the first place. It would be wrong to punish clubs for being successful and doing the right things but when they are getting around the rules to try and monopolize which is the issue at the moment. Anything other than enforcing the current rules of spending a certain % of your revenue would be artificial competition arbitration for me which is at least as bad as living with the fact that some clubs have historicaoly been sucssfull even before the massive TV revenue deals of recent years.
In any case, isn't all this null and void now considering the TV money is going to clubs who would never have seen the kind of money they are seeing right now. This TV money is the actual enabler for clubs to try and work their way up. It's up to them to keep hold of their players and build something should they so wish now that they are more empowered to do so more than ever or at least are better equipped to do financially at least. Ironically this TV revenue deal is mainly down to the very clubs in that circle due to their success.
Nah that's not true mate. Trust me, I've seen that goal so many times
only a couple of QPR's attackers realised they were safe, Mackie definitely did. But all the defending players were unaware, you only have to look at the desperation by Taiwo, Derry and Kenny to stop the goal. Onuoha said that after Aguero scored Mackie went round telling the others that they were safe. If you see it the news on the QPR bench is as City begin the attack, there is no way it could have been communicated to the defence and midfield who were camped in their half and focusing on the game.Not all QPR's players knew that match had ended from what I could gather. Their fans and bench were celebrating. Jamie Mackie, when you look back at the footage, looked like he got the message so possibly switched off. But in the build up to the goal, their defenders certainly didn't seem to know or at least didn't look like they had downed tools. Dzeko's goal was a softer goal to concede IMO.
As he says, titles are decided over 38 games and not as a result of 1 or 2 players momentarily switching off for a few seconds. Surely unprofessionalism could just as easily be applied to United drawing 4-4 against Everton 3 weeks earlier, despite Evra hitting the post with around 10 minutes to go when it was 4-2. That's the game where the title race was well and truly blown wide open, judging by the amount of pints that ended up hitting the ceiling of the Walkabout bar in Wolverhampton after Pienaar scored and again after the final whistle went.
I haven't actually seen it once since that dreadful day.Nah that's not true mate. Trust me, I've seen that goal so many times
I have no interest to revisit that game or what happened, we can all just believe what we want.
It's very telling that you feel entitled to greenlight or not the business of other clubs. I guess the Spanish and other managers complaining to UEFA share that sense of entitlement and fear losing the ability to rule European football.2. In the post that I answered in the morning you named fear of the Arabs or repulsion to Paris and previously the mafia who wants to control football, Spanish institutions that believe they are the gods of football. Amnesiac, arrogant or ignorant. In the end it seems like we're stealing you.
And since you didn´t win the champions the fear is unfounded and since we can add the best local talents (in the case of Madrid) we shouldn´t worry about a new reality. It seems that we are conspiring to not let you grow
There are many teams that have been founded 100 years ago, but that does not mean that we have to give green light to everything they do, even if they deserve good players
3. the state funding, or "business men investing money to develop a business" which sounds better is really the only thing that bothers me, and actually I didn´t know quite clearly your opinion. Let´s see if Putin can buy the team of my city
If UEFA confirms that State funds are fine then the debate is over.The doubts about FFP are not coming only from la liga or spanish.
As someone wrote here if the complaint was coming from somewhere else people would focus in the message instead the messenger.
Personally I think Tebas is attacking PSG because they paid the clause without a previous agreement with Barsa.
In Manchester City case the presence of Girona in Primera probably created fear and distrust.
But the UEFA knows where the money comes from, in fact everyone knows, the UEFA actually studied two deals directly coming from the Qatar Tourism Authority which is literally part of Qatar's government.
They opened an investigation 1 day after the end of the transfer market so maybe they saw something wrong.
Even if they know( the origin of money) It would be good a public statament to confirm the validity ,since the money spent is a big precedent
The QTA deal has already been approved by UEFA, it was only considered over the market a few years ago but is monitored closely since then. Nothing new to see here, only the account balance to be calculated. Unless UEFA dismisses precedents because of lobbying.
As for Tebas he must feel like a crusader fighting a holy war to defend the Spanish pride invested in the two megaclubs, the "traditional" clubs are simply defending their interests and trying to protect themselves against competition. Other people feel uneasy about the recent transfers but it's mostly another layer of disgust about the amount of money in football that they weren't used to yet and the established order being shaken up being uncomfortable.
It has already been investigated, that's why the UEFA reduced by half in 2012, they also said that after looking into it the new deal from 2016 was fine because reflecting the standing of PSG in world football. If the UEFA change their position after that, then you have to question their impartiality.
Well,in that case I have been blind about City,PSG and what was coming.I knew their power but didn't expect the spending of PSG or City ease to form a new team.
The accounts won't show anything wrong.
I guess that is time to look for more Vinicius or players in the last year of contract.
Don't you worry, look at the players PSG signed, they all scream "money". Plenty of players will sign for Real Madrid, Barcelona, United and the others instead of PSG and City because history also plays its role.
I'm also confident that the PSG accounts will hold up. What is absurd is to think they can spend as much every year, the amortization of the Neymar and Mbappé deals won't go away and the clubs can't simply pump a few hundred millions into transfers anytime they like. Except if the commercial contracts explode and the turnover reaches €700-800m.