UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST

[Nicholas van Whatsisface]

I really hate to end up defending Miguel fuckjng Delaney of all people but that list does show one thing very clearly, which is that PSGs Neymar purchase massively inflated the transfer market.

Neymar and Mbappe speak for themselves, Coutinho and Dembele were Barcelona panic spending and Griezmann was a continuation of that. Joao Felix was Atleti spending that money and the reason an 18 year old with 1 good year went for 120m was because people wanted the next Mbappe.

Van Dijk and Alisson both went for their world record fees because Barcelona paid so much for Coutinho and Maguire cost 80m because of VVD resetting the value of centre backs.


So I think he is absolutely right to say PSGs 2018 inflated the transfer market considerably.

Now the thing you've taken offence to is that he said City could compete.....but that's not really wrong. City haven't chosen to compete but we could have. A lot of the transfers involving other clubs (liverpool, atletico) are really them spending PSGs initial 400m they dumped into the market.

We have it from decent sources that City would have spent the money on Mbappe and we tried to get Messi in 2017 which would have been a world record fee.

City haven't competed with the top 10 transfer fees, but that's different to jot being able to. We are able to and it's only a matter of time before we make a top 3 or top 5 transfer IMO.

Not quite mate. My issues were with his assertion that the clubs outside of PSG, United and City need the protection of the regulations to allow them to compete - his 'this is why FFP is necessary' line - and his tenuous conflation of City with this same issue.

My point was that these poor, penniless urchins like Real Madrid, Barcelona and Liverpool are perfectly happy to compete at the top end of the market (indeed they've been the ones driving the market up historically, before PSG started grandstanding with Neymar and Mbappe) - so FFP palpably isn't working if that's its objective, and neither is this apparent strategy on the part of PSG to dramatically price out any other club from the market outside of the three named.

And in addition, the facts just don't bear out that somehow City is forcing these clubs to overpay. That was the point I was trying to make.

Clearly PSG inflated the market - I would never question that. One look at the table tells you all you need on that point. My issue is that the top clubs clearly don't need protecting from City - we aren't the ones driving the market up like this. They're doing a perfectly good job of that without us!

Delaney just can't help himself in making this about City, because he's blinded by a clear agenda against the club - even when the facts clearly don't support his agenda.

 

[The Preacher]

Idioms, oxymorons and now we have our good friend the homonym.

What about a bit of zeugma?

Ok, I’ll take my coat and my leave!

 

[aguero93:20]

What about a bit of zeugma?

Ok, I’ll take my coat and my leave!

That's wrecked the thread and my head.

 

[domalino]

Not quite mate. What I was challenging was his assertion that the clubs outside of PSG, United and City need the protection of the regulations to allow them to compete - his 'this is why FFP is necessary' line, and his tenuous conflation of City with this same issue.

My point was that these poor urchins like Real Madrid, Barcelona and Liverpool are perfectly happy to compete at the top end of the market, so FFP palpably isn't working if that's its objective.

The facts just don't bear out that somehow City is forcing these clubs to overpay. That was the point I was trying to make.

Clearly PSG inflated the market - I would never question that. One look at the table tells you all you need on that point. My issue is that the top clubs clearly don't need protecting from City - we aren't the ones driving the market up like this. They're doing a perfectly good job of that without us.

Delaney just can't help himself in making this about City, because he's blinded by a clear agenda against the club - even when the facts clearly don't support his agenda.

If City had unrestricted spending and Mansour had the mood (maybe after being cleared of wrongdoing and dismantling FFP) then our rivals would be fucked. Unless they got bought out themselves, theres no way they could compete if the owners wanted to make it that way. Wolves might be our closest competitor.

Football probably does need some sort of financial control if you want a relatively even playing field and for the finances to spin out of control. I actually dont think many people would disagree with that if they detached it from the fact that FFP wasnt about that, it was about specifically hampering us.

The problem with people like Delaney is that he will die on a hill defending FFP, a form of financial control rotten from its inception and never aimed at ensuring the things he says he wants.

If someone sensible actually came up with a financial system where no one was allowed to out spend the rest 5 to 1 evety year but also new owners could raise their clubs to the top table, I think most of us would be ok with it.

 

[Nibler13]

Not quite mate. My issues were with his assertion that the clubs outside of PSG, United and City need the protection of the regulations to allow them to compete - his 'this is why FFP is necessary' line - and his tenuous conflation of City with this same issue.

My point was that these poor, penniless urchins like Real Madrid, Barcelona and Liverpool are perfectly happy to compete at the top end of the market (indeed they've been the ones driving the market up historically, before PSG started grandstanding with Neymar and Mbappe) - so FFP palpably isn't working if that's its objective, and neither is this apparent strategy on the part of PSG to dramatically price out any other club from the market outside of the three named.

The facts just don't bear out that somehow City is forcing these clubs to overpay. That was the point I was trying to make.

Clearly PSG inflated the market - I would never question that. One look at the table tells you all you need on that point. My issue is that the top clubs clearly don't need protecting from City - we aren't the ones driving the market up like this. They're doing a perfectly good job of that without us!

Delaney just can't help himself in making this about City, because he's blinded by a clear agenda against the club - even when the facts clearly don't support his agenda.

Also, while true PSG inflated the market w/ Neymar and Mbappe...at least Neymar was considered a top 5 player worldwide at thh time, and Mbappe was as close as it came to a sure thing to enter that level of player. So high prices were paid, but for incredible talent. Couldnt you argue Barca spending what they did on Coutinho and Dembele did more damage then PSG paying for Neymar, as nobody would have considered either player even close to Neymar/Mbappe level of talent? (I could be looking back incorrectly, it is possible Dembele was that highly thought of, but def not Coutinho).

 

[bluemoon32]

Uefa are cnuts...
Sorry, just getting the thread back on track after the boffins had taken over

 

[Onholiday(somemightsay)]

This is like the time everyone knew Pep's next club would be City, yet our enemies refused to believe or entertain it, insisting United was always his ambition.

It is only when he was officially unveiled, the horrible reality saw penny drop.

It will be the same with our Uefa battle, I sincerely believe that.

When this is all done, the sober reality when our evidence becomes public, will leave them all remembering again they underestimated our club (again).

 

[BlueMoonz1977]

We're not asking the right question here – it should be how were PSG able to afford Neymar and Mbappe, and why aren't they up before the dock?

This is completely separate discussion but they could do it because they got a 100m a year sponsorship from Qatar and the UEFA investigator allowed it despite objections of the rest of the panel.

Then when the chief judge of the AC found out and forced a new investigation, CAS ruled UEFA had run out of time with their own regulations only allowing 10 days between verdict and reopening.

let’s not forget this was the same Yves Leterme who ordered the investigation. Hired a company to value the sponsorship which came in at around £7m. PSG hires their own and got it valued at £100m

leterme then decided to approve the PSG valuation at £100m.

funny how I think he is also on the board of the qutari tourism board

 

[kaz7]

This was my first post on page 1,do i get a prize?

When are they going to stop flogging this dead horse,take them to court this time,no more mr nice guy

 

[Nicholas van Whatsisface]

If City had unrestricted spending and Mansour had the mood (maybe after being cleared of wrongdoing and dismantling FFP) then our rivals would be fucked. Unless they got bought out themselves, theres no way they could compete if the owners wanted to make it that way. Wolves might be our closest competitor.

Football probably does need some sort of financial control if you want a relatively even playing field and for the finances to spin out of control. I actually dont think many people would disagree with that if they detached it from the fact that FFP wasnt about that, it was about specifically hampering us.

That's pure conjecture though. You may be right, but our owners' stated desire to see a self-sustaining model suggests we would always have our self-imposed limits.

And I think we're talking crossed purposes. My point is that clubs like Real Madrid, Barcelona and Liverpool clearly don't need protecting from anyone, never mind City - they're quite happy to grossly inflate the market all by themselves. FFP is plainly ineffective if this is the point. As you say - it's designed to lock in those self-same clubs, and to keep out any competition outside of the G14.

Delaney didn't say that though - he said it was to protect these clubs from PSG, United and City. Which a typically ill-informed, agenda-driven load of drivel from a talentless reporter with no interest in exploring the facts behind any of the positions he takes.

 

[domalino]

funny how I think he is also on the board of the qutari tourism board

You just made that bit up, didn't you?

 

[aguero93:20]

Uefa are cnuts...
Sorry, just getting the thread back on track after the boffins had taken over

About time.

 

[chesterbells]

Hmm, over 2000 pages.
I hope one by-product of all this is that the thread will overtake that godawful bre**t thread by the time Madrid comes around.

 

[aguero93:20]

Hmm, over 2000 pages.
I hope one by-product of all this is that the thread will overtake that godawful bre**t thread by the time Madrid comes around.

Not a hope, that's the 7th or 8th incarnation of the Brexit thread and all were at least 1000 pages long.

 

[journolud]

I say in Part 2 of my articles that we don't know if we were at the hearing but every AC states that under Article 20 "Written observations 1 The CFCB chairman invites the defendant to submit its written observations within a suitable time limit. 2 After the submission of the written observations, no further documents may be submitted to the adjudicatory chamber by the defendant, except in exceptional circumstances and with the consent of the CFCB chairman."

Article 21 deals with hearings.

So are we happy that our 200 page document was submitted within the agreed time scale or is this unknown? If I’ve understood correctly if we tried to submit it after the submission date they would be within their rights not to consider it. The club wouldn’t have made a schoolboy error by getting it in late, would they?

 

[MillionMilesAway]

If City had unrestricted spending and Mansour had the mood (maybe after being cleared of wrongdoing and dismantling FFP) then our rivals would be fucked. Unless they got bought out themselves, theres no way they could compete if the owners wanted to make it that way. Wolves might be our closest competitor.

Football probably does need some sort of financial control if you want a relatively even playing field and for the finances to spin out of control. I actually dont think many people would disagree with that if they detached it from the fact that FFP wasnt about that, it was about specifically hampering us.

The problem with people like Delaney is that he will die on a hill defending FFP, a form of financial control rotten from its inception and never aimed at ensuring the things he says he wants.

If someone sensible actually came up with a financial system where no one was allowed to out spend the rest 5 to 1 evety year but also new owners could raise their clubs to the top table, I think most of us would be ok with it.

I think this is fair. Financial controls of some sort are a good thing; FFP as is is twisted, which you and Nicholas van Whatsisface seem to agree on.

And I agree, I think City would have bought a 100M player without thinking too hard. It may have come down to PSG, City and similar coming to an agreement of who they would chase or avoid, but I don't think money would have stopped anything.

 

[Ballet-on-ice]

I play a little game now where I leave this thread for 20 minutes or so and then refresh it and guess how many extra pages there are.

I'm living the dream.

 

[domalino]

That's pure conjecture though. You may be right, but our owners' stated desire to see a self-sustaining model suggests we would always have our self-imposed limits.

And I think we're talking crossed purposes. My point is that clubs like Real Madrid, Barcelona and Liverpool clearly don't need protecting from anyone, never mind City - they're quite happy to grossly inflate the market all by themselves. FFP is plainly ineffective if this is the point. As you say - it's designed to lock in those self-same clubs, and to keep out any competition outside of the G14.

Delaney didn't say that though - he said it was to protect these clubs from PSG, United and City. Which a typically ill-informed, agenda-driven load of drivel from a talentless reporter with no interest in exploring the facts behind any of the positions he takes.

Ok so even if Mansour didn't want to do it, someone else would. The Saudi's, Jeff Bezos, whoever would sooner rather than later fancy doing a modern version of Abramovic but with 10x the cash.

And in that situation member owned clubs like Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern and even a City dedicated to being self sufficient, would be dead in the water competitively.

So when the talentless reporter in question says clubs need some protection, he's not completely wrong, he's just wrong that FFP is an acceptable form of that.

The other thing of course is he disagrees with your position (rightly or wrongly) that Abu Dhabi wouldn't start spending insane amounts without regulation.

 

[KS55]

What about a bit of zeugma?

Ok, I’ll take my coat and my leave!

Ah, good old zeugma, not as exciting as epanalepsis. You may not find that in the dictionary as it is a transliteration of a greek figure of speech similar to paraprosdokian.

 

[Nicholas van Whatsisface]

Ok so even if Mansour didn't want to do it, someone else would. The Saudi's, Jeff Bezos, whoever would sooner rather than later fancy doing a modern version of Abramovic but with 10x the cash.

And in that situation member owned clubs like Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern and even a City dedicated to being self sufficient, would be dead in the water competitively.

So when the talentless reporter in question says clubs need some protection, he's not wrong, he's just wrong that FFP is an acceptable form of that.

And he’s wrong that there is anything in the clear facts in question here to suggest they need protecting from City. The reason he brought our club into a story which (on the face of it) very clearly has nothing to do with us, is because he can’t help himself in making everything that’s bad in football somehow about City.

So a story about Nasser al-Khelaifi’s alleged misconduct, and his apparent strategy to deliberately inflate the market at PSG, becomes an ill-conceived attempt to draw City into the narrative as part of the problem - when the facts just don’t support him.

That’s the very definition of an agenda - and that’s my point.

But I think we broadly agree with each other anyway, so let’s stop derailing the thread any further!