Football Leaks/Der Spiegel articles

[aguero93:20]

That is just too messy, it's possible by the time this is all done and dusted EU law won't apply to us anyway. Then there is the fact we could go down that route and start proceedings challenging a law only to be told to do one as it doesn't apply to no EU businesses.

I've never really thought about this until now but how does the Bosman rule affect non EU club's? Can a Russian team for example still demand payment for a player out of contract or have UEFA appiled the rule to all UEFA nations? Assuming it's the latter then I assume once Brexit is complete British football will just agree to follow EU law. As I said above it's too messy with too many unknowns. Also Pep has said in just about every press conference that we will accept the punishment if we're found guilty.

UEFA have to conform to EU law in EU countries and they have to apply their own regulations evenly and consistently across every member association. So EU law will still be relevant with regards football after Brexit, whatever shape it takes. It's also very unlikely that the UK will do anything but retain the IASB laws and the competition laws from EU legislature.

 

[Canyouseethesky]

UEFA have to conform to EU law in EU countries and they have to apply their own regulations evenly and consistently across every member association. So EU law will still be relevant with regards football after Brexit, whatever shape it takes. It's also very unlikely that the UK will do anything but retain the IASB laws and the competition laws from EU legislature.

I get all that what I'm questioning is the right for a non EU business to challenge EU law. What the fuck has it got to do with you would seem the obvious answer if any company outside the EU challenged one of its rules. I suppose we could do it under the guise of Girona or something like that but as i said previously going down a route that could be ineligible in a few months could be problematic.

 

[aguero93:20]

I get all that what I'm questioning is the right for a non EU business to challenge EU law. What the fuck has it got to do with you would seem the obvious answer if any company outside the EU challenged one of its rules. I suppose we could do it under the guise of Girona or something like that but as i said previously going down a route that could be ineligible in a few months could be problematic.

It wouldn't need to be challenged under EU rules, it could be challenged under UK ones. UEFA are a competition organiser working across several legal spheres, any regulations they bring in have to conform to the law in all of those spheres as everyone has to operate under the same regulations.

 

[Canyouseethesky]

It wouldn't need to be challenged under EU rules, it could be challenged under UK ones. UEFA are a competition organiser working across several legal spheres, any regulations they bring in have to conform to the law in all of those spheres as everyone has to operate under the same regulations.

Listen I don't know enough about it to continue with this conversation but I doubt you are right. I can't see UEFA abiding by the local employment laws in Azerbaijan for example, also my original response was in relation to a proposal to challenge FFP under EU law. As with the FC Sion case if it was challenged at local level (UK courts) UEFA would just ignore the outcome.

 

[aguero93:20]

Listen I don't know enough about it to continue with this conversation but I doubt you are right. I can't see UEFA abiding by the local employment laws in Azerbaijan for example, also my original response was in relation to a proposal to challenge FFP under EU law. As with the FC Sion case if it was challenged at local level (UK courts) UEFA would just ignore the outcome.

The EU have the highest standard of employment law, so by drawing up regulations that conform to EU regulations they're in a position to satisfy all the others. There's no point in them even noticing Azerbaijani employment law as satisfying it doesn't mean you'll satisfy the law in the more developed countries. EU law also reaches well outside the borders of the EU.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

The EU have the highest standard of employment law, so by drawing up regulations that conform to EU regulations they're in a position to satisfy all the others. There's no point in them even noticing Azerbaijani employment law as satisfying it doesn't mean you'll satisfy the law in the more developed countries. EU law also reaches well outside the borders of the EU.

I'd have thought that anyone involved in a UEFA competition has by default agreed to abide by UEFA rules, under whatever legal system that may carry - in this case, EU law. Any appeal under law against those rules would therefore end up at the ECJ as the highest authority for the rules.

 

[aguero93:20]

I'd have thought that anyone involved in a UEFA competition has by default agreed to abide by UEFA rules, under whatever legal system that may carry - in this case, EU law. Any appeal under law against those rules would therefore end up at the ECJ as the highest authority for the rules.

Not necessarily. But it FFPR is ruled illegal by one country that UEFA operates in then they can't apply it in that country. Also if there's standards matching between the UK and EU in future (highly likely) then a defeat in the UK courts would almost certainly make a defeat in the ECJ a formality and vice versa.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Not necessarily. But it FFPR is ruled illegal by one country that UEFA operates in then they can't apply it in that country. Also if there's standards matching between the UK and EU in future (highly likely) then a defeat in the UK courts would almost certainly make a defeat in the ECJ a formality and vice versa.

The second part definitely.

I see your point on the first part, although I think that's a different way of looking at the same thing, probably by me not managing to be clear. I think if a club is in UEFA competition, then they will have agreed to the terms of the competition - as I see it, that includes FFP monitoring.
Objecting to those rules in court is what could bring the house of cards down for the reason in the second point, because someone somewhere will have to make a judgement on hte legality of it.

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

The reference to "EU law" and possible problems after Brexit is is a concern about nothing in fact. The UK is as committed to free enterprise as any European state and in common with them has, at least since the war, seen investment as the only way to sustained economic growth. MacMillan's government made great efforts to attract foreign investment and companies to Britain and Margaret Thatcher's government succeeded in attracting foreign investment to revive the car industry in Britain, but this has never been a party political issue. The early 60s also saw very heavy fines handed out to airlines which had acted as a cartel to try and ruin Freddie Laker's plans for cheap flights. The problem is that in the UK levels of investment have been lower than in our major rivals, so UK law will certainly do nothing to prevent inward investment at all. We all know that Sheikh Mansour has powerful friends in Westminster. In or out of the EU courts in the UK are unlikely to be any more sympathetic to UEFA's regulations than the ECJ

 

[I'm no cynic but...]

Damn all those managers [Mancini, Pellegrini and Pep] who had the sheer audacity to win trophies for our club. If we had retained Hughes and won nothing then we we would never have heard of FFP as it would never have been conjured up at all.