Manchester City risk of getting CL banned

Discussion in 'Football Forum' started by meamth, May 15, 2019.

  1. May 18, 2019

    mwake New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2019
    Messages:
    21
    Supports:
    Liverpool
    Why doesn't the PL back up ufea with FFP rules? Surely the principles of FFP are also beneficial to the domestic game. If you break the FFP rules not only should you face the threat of a ban in CL but a 3, 6, or 9 PL point deduction based on the severity. This would mean that City and other big clubs wouldn't be able to intimidate ufea or try to undermine FFP and it would increase the importance and consequences of towing the line.
  2. May 19, 2019

    andyox Full Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2018
    Messages:
    464
    Supports:
    Manchester City
    The PL brought in its own FFP rules in 2013. They’re slightly different to UEFA, with a bigger focus on wages, but the overall concept is the same in linking spending to revenue.
  3. May 19, 2019

    Yakuza_devils Full Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2016
    Messages:
    418
    I really doubt UEFA and FA can/willing to do anything about it. Most likely, the palms are already greased and large browns envelopes were given out.

    The Sheikh also has a team of top lawyers in the world threatening to sue people left, right and center if anyone dare to mess with them in their financial doping.
  4. May 19, 2019

    calodo2003 Full Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2014
    Messages:
    1,378
    Location:
    Florida
    It’s the Big Tobacco defense, they can potentially tie it up in court until the nation-state & all its money goes home.
  5. May 19, 2019

    Tincanalley Turns player names into a crappy conversation

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2011
    Messages:
    6,311
    Location:
    Ireland
    Fair point.
  6. May 19, 2019

    Full bodied red Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2014
    Messages:
    1,763
    Location:
    The Var, France

    Sorry confusing Emirates / Etihad, etc - had a bloody good lunch with friends yesterday and should have hung on a couple of hours before posting. Anyway....

    I was simply pointing out the rumoured reasons for the current situation - may be right, may be wrong, but coming from good sources.

    Whatever the rights and wrongs about some of the financial deals which have happened at your club, I think you're just being ( rightly, in my opinion ) included in a wider attempt by EUFA to stop financial doping PSG-style. Too late I think - you can't undo what's already happened at City and PSG - but maybe EUFA have finally become embarrassed by their own lack of actions and, let's face it, strange decisions in the past about financial doping and general corruption in European football.

    I don't think there's been any Italain style corruption at City, so financial doping it must be for you to be under the microscope although the microscope isn't really necessary.
  7. May 19, 2019

    WRicko New Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    79
    Supports:
    Manchester City
    I am not questioning the source we know they want to ban us

    What I am saying is they are breaking their own rules. Etihad not related party or inflated (the two are connected and inseparable) Now they see the emails they want it to be. Whats more UEFA rules on related parties are copied from international standards and common to multiple countries

    Also the rules about limiting investment are probably in breach of EU and UK competition law.

    Financial doping is just meaningless phrase

    Not sure what corruption has got to do with it other than perhaps corruption at UEFA and both actual and (not connected to city) and corruption in terms of the big clubs trying to keep the small clubs small via FFP or perhaps the rewriting of the FFP rules in order to punish city by forcing them to miss certain targets in order to miss certain wage exemptions
  8. May 19, 2019

    Slysi17 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2015
    Messages:
    128
    It's laughable Man City fans are trying to justify their club cheating their way to the top. There is even fecking evidence that Manchester City are financial doping. I personally hate the way they have bought premier league titles etc. I hope UEFA ban them but won't happen.
  9. May 19, 2019

    Dumbstar Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14,424
    Location:
    Viva Karius!
    Supports:
    Liverpool
    Their arguments are reminiscent of our Suarez defence all those years ago (for which all of us are ashamed btw :(). Its a natural defence reaction from City fans.
  10. May 19, 2019

    ExecutionerWasp001 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2019
    Messages:
    109
    UEFA don't have to ban them, they can though still make sure they don't win the CL. They've been trying to get PSG for financial breaches for years without success. They had some big decisions go against them in CL matches in recent years. If they don't get them 1 way they'll get them the other.

    I don't subscribe to the notion that they'll buy UEFA off. If they could have they would have done it by now. These constant allegations are incredibly damaging to Mansour & his cronies. He is trying to break away from his countries image of corruption. This business is only dragging him further into the mire.

    I think the football governing bodies want both the owners of PSG & City out of the game as they are essentially bad for business. We have had the press release from the PSG owner declaring he has lost interest due to the constant bad publicity. The governing bodies are now turning their attention towards City.
  11. May 19, 2019

    Full bodied red Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2014
    Messages:
    1,763
    Location:
    The Var, France

    Agreed - Financial Doping is a phrase put around by other clubs / teams / leagues / etc who, let's face it, were once jealous but are now more angry than jealous that this situation has been allowed to develop but would still love to have the almost limitless resources that PSG and City have....But that doesn't hide the fact that everything PSG and yourselves have achieved the past few years is based on having almost limitless cash and is distorting genuine competition in the EPL and Ligue 1 but also has a knock on effect throughout other leagues and countries and somewhere there is probably one of those thousands of cash receipts that transgresses, somehow and somewhere, EUFA's FFP rules in some way or another.

    It might only be a tiny infraction, but if you have, then this time EUFA will probably jump all over you and give out some sort of 'punishment' which is way too severe for the actual infraction, but is making up for previous infractions which were either ignored or not properly dealt with by EUFA in the past.

    As I hope I made clear last time, I think PSG are the real target, but their's and your own ownership structure and finances are just too similar for you not to get caught up in this which is perhaps a pain in the arse for yourselves, but has to be good for the rest of football.

    The only real alternative - but which is never going to happen, of course - is NFL / NBA / MLB style paycaps on player squads which then allows clubs with smaller incomes to compete with the richer clubs when it comes to signing and paying 'star' players.

    I argued earlier on - the ' best ' punishment for City and PSG is a sort of transfer ban for maybe three or four years with a very low overall spending limit which would then nullify the huge financial advantages which, each year, lets them spend £ 100 million+ in transfer fees plus unmatchable wages just for bench warmers and squad players....

    In fact, come to think of it that might then be an example to ourselves and stop us offering stupid contracts to our own overpaid duffers like Sanchez and Pogba and Jones, etc.
  12. May 19, 2019

    WRicko New Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    79
    Supports:
    Manchester City
    I dont know if your ignoring my comments on purpose despite trying to debate with me or if you dont understand FFP or if I am not being clear

    Let me restate it again we did not cannot have broken their rules its not a tiny infraction as you call it their is no infraction what so ever

    Etihad is not a related party its therefore not connected to cities ownership and therefore not inflated it cannot be because of the first party non related party deals cannot be inflated. Chevreolet could pay you a billion £ a year it still wouldnt be inflated.

    Etihad is not a related not just according to city but according to independent auditors UEFA the tax man the law etc etc Dont believe me check the accounts check who signed them off check UEFA original ruling 5 years a go

    We could argue that that is wrong or right but it is what it is

    These emails wont show the sheiks bank details or those of Etihad or its owners or even cities they dont show any change in ownership on any of the parties involved. Who owns what is a matter of public record anyway
  13. May 19, 2019

    Thunderhead Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2016
    Messages:
    2,214
    Supports:
    City
    Should be a salary cap, FPP doesn't work but really clamping down on salaries would IMO

    And the salary cap should be something like the current average of the PL, not something stupid like £250m, which I'd image is around £160m which would be fair to teams who want to invest and challenge, with FPP and the money in the CL the teams there are already £50m+ better off in revenue before a ball is kicked
  14. May 19, 2019

    Full bodied red Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2014
    Messages:
    1,763
    Location:
    The Var, France
    Not ignoring, no....And not deliberately trying to provoke you....

    Just pointing out the realities and the significance of what your club might now have to face but which too many City fans choose to dismiss as unfair and false accusations.

    The real kicker, though, is the allegation that Mansour personally gave cash to Etihad to be laundered by Etihad giving it to City as sponsorship, rather than Mansour giving the cash to City himself, to get round the FFP rules.

    If....and if....that one turns out to be true, or can be proven to be true, the bubble would explode, not just burst.

    Fortunately for Mansour and City, there's absolutely no way anyone in Abu Dhabi will allow EUFA or its agents to check one single financial transaction passing through an Abu Dhabi bank account so that allegation and suspicion is always going to be there and believed by everyone else in football.

    Good Luck - at some stage City and PSG are most probably going to need it.
  15. May 19, 2019

    adexkola Arsenal supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    35,414
    Location:
    The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
    Supports:
    orderly disembarking on planes
    I don't think there should be a hard salary cap. PL players do deserve to get a majority of the revenue they generate.

    There should be a soft salary/transfer cap. More of a tax after you exceed a certain threshold. If you spend 150M quid on a player, you have to pay an additional 50M in "luxury tax", which is spread out in the league. Just an example.
  16. May 19, 2019

    AaronRedDevil Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2018
    Messages:
    1,540
    Football rules are like that mother who counts to 3 but never follows up on her threat.
  17. May 19, 2019

    Tincanalley Turns player names into a crappy conversation

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2011
    Messages:
    6,311
    Location:
    Ireland
    Not a bit of it (bolded text). Financial doping could mean, for example, that most of your income is not derived from football or football related activities. It by extension - means that the function of a premiership club as a cover to polish up the dirty human rights image of a nation state namely Abu Dhabi, by the strategy of spending vast amounts of that nation state's wealth on an English football club, is questionable. Its not good for the game, ergo, the joke that the FA cup final was turned into. Ergo, the awqward questions raised to Pep yesterday. It means that covering up the true source of income (and appear to follow the rulebook) might be necessary to pay out covert monies (if the reports in Der Spiegel are true). It means they allegedly set up a “closed payment loop” in which ADUG paid a third party to pay City for the image rights to their players. Just for starters?
  18. May 19, 2019

    WRicko New Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    79
    Supports:
    Manchester City
    You are ignoring because I am pointing out that by UEFAs own definition they cannot punish us because by their own definition and rules Etihad is not related party or inflated.

    Let me ask you this Do you think these emails show a change in ownership ? Do you think its a matter of public record who own city or Etihad ? Do you think they show Etihad or the sheiks bank details / transaction history ?

    If there has been no change ownership of city or Etihad and ownership of both is matter of public record and only related parties can inflated sponsorship (Legally this is true) (Would chevrolet over pay you on purpose ? ) How and why would a non related party over pay for a dealand if UEFA deemed city and Etihad neither related parties nor inflated then how and why can UEFA change there mind Have UEFA changed there rules ? Is that even legal ? especially given related party is international standard definition. Given that it is such why no investigation in the UK into city or its independent auditor by the government / tax man ?
  19. May 19, 2019

    nore1975 Full Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2014
    Messages:
    343
    Supports:
    Liverpool
    I can't see it happening. When Rangers fell foul of financial fair play in Scotland it was brought to light by HMRC. City is more or less owned by the UAE. The fact that their 'achievements' are tainted by allegations of financial doping must be humiliating.
  20. May 19, 2019

    Full bodied red Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2014
    Messages:
    1,763
    Location:
    The Var, France

    Keep on believing and protesting your innocence. It'll make you feel better.

    And just for info....External Auditors confirm compliance with accounting standards of the country where the legal entity being audited is registered or incorporated and HMRC determine only your tax liability and only in the UK. Neither auditors nor HMRC are in the slightest bit interested in compliance with EUFA FFP.
  21. May 19, 2019

    marukomu The Gatekeeper

    Come on UEFA. 'Huawei' them.
  22. May 20, 2019

    andyox Full Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2018
    Messages:
    464
    Supports:
    Manchester City
    Read the definition of "related party" in Annex X Section F of UEFA's FFP Regulations. Then read the definition of "related party" in IAS 24 of the IFRS. You'll notice they're word for word the same because UEFA sensibly just copied the internationally accepted accounting definition of related party.

    City's audited accounts, using IAS 24, state that the Etihad sponsorship is not a related party transaction. UEFA, using a definition of related party that is word for word the same, came to the same conclusion. It's why City's Etihad sponsorship was never subject to a fair market value revision like PSG's QTA sponsorship was.

    But clearly that's not the focus of this current UEFA re-adjudication of our 2014 punishment. The question is not whether Etihad is a related party (it's not), it's whether City have cheated the system and misled UEFA by having a different AD entity pay Etihad's sponsorship obligations on Etihad's behalf. City say this is not true, but the leaked emails published by Der Spiegel may suggest otherwise (although we don't know the full context of the relevant email exchange).
  23. May 20, 2019

    SquishyMcSquish Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2018
    Messages:
    6,778
    Supports:
    Tottenham
    It's absolutely pathetic. Their fans are an utter joke and a pack of sellouts, nothing more or less.

    They're blatantly cheating and not even really trying to hide it, and all the money is dirty from the start regardless. Absolute cesspool of a club and people are expected to respect their achievements on the pitch?

    Nobody should respect a team backed by tyrants who use the football club to shield their disgusting regime. They're a propaganda tool, an absolute farce and they shame the Premier League.

    Their fans will defend them till the end because they've sold their souls, you can't really chat shit about the devil when you're in bed with him.

    I suggest anyone who hasn't already goes and watches the 'Men Behind City' documentary, pretty much shows you the extent of the scumbaggery they've associated themselves with. It's pure evil, no more or less. Of course they're corrupt, like what the feck does anyone expect? These people have no respect for fair play or rules, if they can't buy somebody they'll brutalise them. This UEFA investigation is likely simply the tip of the iceberg when it comes to that club.

    I'm not a huge fan of UEFA but if they were to ban City I think they'd deserve applause from throughout the footballing world for taking a stand against the biggest disease currently eating its way in to the footballing world: the sugar daddy clubs, mostly owned by properly evil, horrible people and purely used as a tool to deflect from how awful they are. The end game should be to remove such owners from the game entirely, but it won't happen because our government and associations are all too happy to accept their dirty money.

    Nothing they win is relevant or real, it never will be.
  24. May 20, 2019

    Full bodied red Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2014
    Messages:
    1,763
    Location:
    The Var, France
    Yes - I know and understand ( and at the time also GAPP & GASS, SSAP, etc, etc, but that was quite a few years ago now ) IAS 24 as part of IFRS - my own company has a multitude of potentially related parties and related party transactions which i have to answer for and sign off on each year.

    The issue now, as I see it and understand it, is that having successfully fought off EUFA on the Etihad Sponsorship once, evidence is now emerging that it wasn't exclusively Etihad's money that was used for the sponsorship, and neither the External Auditors nor HMRC would have had the authority and requirement to have been able to trace that cash as it circulated around different banks in the Middle East and offshore, if Etihad didn't have the status of Related Party per IAS 24.

    That's what I'm trying to get at - that maybe Mansour deliberately set out to ' cheat ' FFP rules. The Qataris were simply too dumb ( or honest ! ) in the way they structured their Sposorship deal with PSG.

    As the Managing Partner of our own Auditors once told us - Al Capone was never convicted of violent crime, just Tax Fraud and non-compliance.
  25. May 20, 2019

    TMDaines Full Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2014
    Messages:
    3,523
  26. May 20, 2019

    rotherham_red Full Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2005
    Messages:
    4,604
    Indeed. For me personally, I think it would be the breaking point and I'd have to regretfully walk away from it. It's one thing being owned by ravenous venture capitalists, but being the plaything of a despotic regime is quite another.
  27. May 20, 2019

    Mike Smalling New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2018
    Messages:
    339
    Good read. It also summarizes quite well, why many United fans (including myself) feel almost indifferent to City winning every game and hauling in trophies. It's all been bought and paid for. Contrast that with Liverpool this season, whose achievements come from clever business in the transfer market and good coaching. Had they won the league, that feat would have been entirely different.

    On the issue of Saudi Arabian ownership, I would be very much against it. In a way, it would tarnish the club forever to be associated with such a brutal and medieval regime.
  28. May 20, 2019

    Dumbstar Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14,424
    Location:
    Viva Karius!
    Supports:
    Liverpool
    We already know Utd fans are massive WMD. :D

    I thank you. :p
  29. May 20, 2019

    Infra-red Full Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2010
    Messages:
    7,667
    Location:
    left wing
    Good piece. Explains succinctly why, when it comes to City, nobody really cares.

    I expect that City's titles will one day come to be viewed in much the same way as Lance Armstrong's Tour wins.
  30. May 20, 2019

    FujiVice Full Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2013
    Messages:
    5,500
    Its crazy/hilarious how Man City are perceived. 198 points and a domestic treble, and nobody seems to mind. United fans especially dont seem to fussed. They arent really Manchester City. They're a default club, used to win trophies using hundreds of millions of pounds. Its like being angry at the guy Leatherface originally killed because he's wearing his skin while he murders people. They're sexy to luck at, but you wouldnt invite them to meet your parent, would you?

    Liverpool and Spurs have made it to a Champions League final and Leicester won the league recently. Their achievements arent really that notable in the grand scheme of things. Especially with all this legal stuff hanging above their head. Come back when you have won the title with a team consisting of Phil Jones in the holding midfield role and a Danny Wellbeck scoring one league goal all year.
  31. May 20, 2019

    andyox Full Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2018
    Messages:
    464
    Supports:
    Manchester City
    Yes true, although why would HMRC etc. get involved in this? Manchester City presumably received the money in full from Etihad, so why would they need to go beyond that? Where Etihad sourced the money is a different question (potentially a different AD entity), but I can't see how it's relevant to HMRC, and I can't see how UEFA would possibly go about "auditing" the money trail? Etihad's accounts aren't public and they're hardly going to open them for UEFA.

    I said in an earlier post, but Etihad's sponsorship was undoubtedly higher than market value when we signed it, given our status at the time. That was 10 years ago, and things have now changed considerably. I'd imagine we could get a non-UAE sponsor(s) to cover the shirt for a similar amount. It might be in everyone's interests, reputationally, for us to part ways. Not sure about changing the stadium sponsorship at this point, because the name is quite engrained now, so it might be hard to attract a different sponsor for that,
  32. May 20, 2019

    Horace Pinker New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2019
    Messages:
    17
    Supports:
    Manchester City
    I don't think we will face any sanctions from uefa tbh. It defeats the whole purpose of FFP. Some people think it was set up to protect clubs (Bolton says hi) most of my fellow City fans think it was set up to do us and psg over. It's main purpose was and always will be to make sure no more clubs can ever join the party. The biggest fear of the old guard is not 2 clubs competing with them... it's 10. no ffp =

    Eveton.
    Real Betis
    Leeds
    Fortuna Dusseldorf
    Aston Villa
    Newcastle
    Bilboa
    sampdoria
    1860
    Hertha
    Fenebache
    Lazio
    Genoa
    Sunderland

    and probably 20 others and none of the old guard or City or psg fo that matter want them getting super rich owners and competing for leagues and CL's.

    City know this so will threaten uefa (like they did in the statement). Uefa and the old elite won't risk bring down ffp and City and psg know we closed the drawbridge behind us. The only hope for the cartel clubs would have been a euro league but premier league clubs don't need it and it's worthless without us. So some compromise or more likely CAS throwing it out (think those leaks were accidental?) seems the most likely imo.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 20, 2019
  33. May 21, 2019

    ExecutionerWasp001 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2019
    Messages:
    109
    I'm not ashamed to say that FFP was a stitch up by the Cartel. I don't think it was to stop investment in clubs though. It was more to stop the corrupt states like Abu Dhabi & Qatar becoming embroiled in the game.

    The Euro league plans are a problem for City & PSG as the big clubs will use this as leverage to have action taken against you. If sanctions are not imposed on City & PSG then the big clubs will threaten to break away. A Euro League is more valuable without both City & PSG. Whichever way it goes it doesn't end well for you.

    If you are not sanctioned then you will be able to carry on as you are. All this will leave you though is a bigger share in a declining market as all the major players will have deserted. If you are sanctioned then the days of big spending are over as you will only be able to spend independently generated revenue. This would likely leave you to fall outside the top 6 at least.
  34. May 21, 2019

    BobbyManc Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2012
    Messages:
    6,426
    Location:
    The Wall
    Supports:
    Man City
    That's completely untrue. Any "Euro League" would undoubtedly involve both City and PSG, as all leaked plans of such a proposal have documented.
  35. May 21, 2019

    macheda14 Full Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,248
    Location:
    Manchester
    It's in the handbook
  36. May 21, 2019

    adexkola Arsenal supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    35,414
    Location:
    The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
    Supports:
    orderly disembarking on planes
    He trips over himself trying to set City and Chelsea apart.

    Does he really think fans of non-top 6 clubs see Manchester United and Manchester City as different case studies in terms of how they've managed to maintain their dominance over the years? Does he or anyone else think money wasn't a major factor? It's something that's baffled me ever since I started following the sport.
  37. May 21, 2019

    SER19 Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2008
    Messages:
    7,333
    Most sane people recognise the difference between United money and city money. They also recognise that while United clearly were lucky to be the top team at the emergence of sky that the single greatest factor in sustained success was Alex Ferguson. Like it or not, after Ferguson United suffered a natural decline despite spending way more. They left the door open for several well managed and non cheating clubs to take their place. We haven't been remotely competitive for 6 years in the league. You're living in absolute dreamland trying to say Uniteds success in origin and longevity is the same as city pumping more than a billion at every decent player and manager going until it clicked. United are a wealthy club and have an advantage as a result. But they are nothing like City.

    You're taking a single factor 'money' and framing it as an all encompassing question. 'does he or anyone else think money wasn't a major factor'. Eh, no. Nobody thinks it wasn't. But that's still a separate issue to city and their cheating and spending
  38. May 21, 2019

    adexkola Arsenal supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    35,414
    Location:
    The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
    Supports:
    orderly disembarking on planes
    There is a strong correlation between money spent and where you finish in the table. SAF was amazing for us, and we've struggled to stay on top since due to incompetent leadership. But I reiterate, the number 1 factor is money.

    My original post is related to the article I quoted, where he's saying City's success was a given due to their spending. Um, when has that not been the case?
  39. May 21, 2019

    SteveJ all-round nice guy, aka Uncle Joe Kardashian Scout

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Messages:
    57,399
    Location:
    The 'Stupid Questions' thread
    Manchester City and PSG should be thrown out of Europe, says La Liga president
    https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-city-psg-kicked-out-europe-la-liga-president
  40. May 21, 2019

    TMDaines Full Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2014
    Messages:
    3,523
    I don’t know anyone, non-partisan, who fails to distinguish between clubs who acquired their wealth through good management and decision making, i.e. United, now Spurs, and those who are being financially doped. Most can even differentiate between those who are sugar daddied by a wealthy individual who treats them as a personal project, and those who are bankrolled to help achieve the legitimisation of a dictatorship.