How UEFA shifted the goalposts on FFP. The definitive story.

Prestwich_Blue

Well-Known Member
Joined
26 Jan 2006
Messages
57,493
Location
Wherever I lay my hat that's my home
I've finally got round to writing this definitive piece on the above, having been accused by a certain journalist of bullshitting and producing no proof about this.

It's very long (over 3.5k words) and goes into quite a bit of detail but it was the only way to prove beyond doubt what happened in 2013 and (to tie in with the Der Spiegel Football Leaks story) why we were so keen to get an extra few million onto the books. I'd be grateful for any feedback.

https://boltfromtheblue.live/2018/11/18/how-uefa-shifted-the-goalposts-to-shaft-man-city/
 
Last edited:
I've finally got round to writing this definitive piece on the above, having been accused by a certain journalist of bullshitting and producing no proof about this.

I't's very long (over 3.5k words) and goes into quite a bit of detail but it was the only way to prove beyond doubt what happened in 2013 and (to tie in with the Der Spiegel Football Leaks story) why we were so keen to get an extra few million onto the books. I'd be grateful for any feedback.

https://boltfromtheblue.live/2018/11/18/how-uefa-shifted-the-goalposts-to-shaft-man-city/
Getting a train up to Newcastle on Monday so I’ll have plenty of time to read it mate, cheers for spending your time putting it together.
 
Colin -- great read as always. Just an amazing amount of work. Best perspective on the goalpost move we've discussed for years here ever. Thank you.

Two questions -- personally, do you think UEFA actually altered the calc to "shaft" City or was the change truly a way to clarify the confusion over what period the pre-2010 wages could be applied to the deficit? The title presumes you think the former, I assume because UEFA was under pressure from the hegemony clubs to "do something", but having read this analysis it almost seems as if it really was more of a clarification. The second question is do you believe -- given PWC's report and the settlement -- UEFA is likely not to re-open the alleged sponsorship inflation to re-punish City?
 
Colin -- great read as always. Just an amazing amount of work. Best perspective on the goalpost move we've discussed for years here ever. Thank you.

Two questions -- personally, do you think UEFA actually altered the calc to "shaft" City or was the change truly a way to clarify the confusion over what period the pre-2010 wages could be applied to the deficit? The title presumes you think the former, I assume because UEFA was under pressure from the hegemony clubs to "do something", but having read this analysis it almost seems as if it really was more of a clarification. The second question is do you believe -- given PWC's report and the settlement -- UEFA is likely not to re-open the alleged sponsorship inflation to re-punish City?
The title wasn't mine.

You could read the change either way but the timing was a bit suspicious if you're looking for a conspiracy. But it also made the test a bit more logical as you could have passed the 2011 test and failed the 2013 test, as we did, but not the other way round. If you passed the later one then you would also have passed the earlier one.

Had we passed the test and escaped sanctions, can you imagine what the outcry would have been like after those stories came out 2 weeks ago? UEFA would almost certainly have to go back to it, which I'm sure neither side wanted. But does it really matter if we failed by ten, twenty, thirty million more than we did? I doubt it.
 
The title wasn't mine.

You could read the change either way but the timing was a bit suspicious if you're looking for a conspiracy. But it also made the test a bit more logical as you could have passed the 2011 test and failed the 2013 test, as we did, but not the other way round. If you passed the later one then you would also have passed the earlier one.

Had we passed the test and escaped sanctions, can you imagine what the outcry would have been like after those stories came out 2 weeks ago? UEFA would almost certainly have to go back to it, which I'm sure neither side wanted. But does it really matter if we failed by ten, twenty, thirty million more than we did? I doubt it.

Ah, the old "editorial fish hook" at the top, eh? I know it well.

Thanks again for this. It's a great help to understanding a very complicated situation. I have simplified this issue in football for myself by merely asking the rhetorical, "Should we make venture capital illegal in the business world then? No more funding companies that aren't profitable from the get-go?" and also noting what seems far more obvious to me -- that it's leverage that kills companies, not spending above revenue, and FFP not addressing this at the outset always seemed like the proof that there was a hegemonial agenda.
 
Thank you very much for writing this definitive explanation. It is extremely impressive.

I am thinking it is really quite sad that Der Spiegel were not able to figure this out, given the big investment they have made into the football leaks/FFP topic. As far as I can see you did not use any secret sources of information. It was all there. And despite that Spiegel choose the easy route of rehashing old information in the most sensationalistic way, making themselves into a tool of the Kartell, who came up with the FFP rules to protect themselves in the first place. I used to have some respect for Der Spiegel as one of the great news magazines in Germany, but their handling of the football leaks story really just makes me sad. What has journalism become? You did everything they should have done mate !
 
A long but very interesting read. It did as you said on the tin lid, put it all in a concise digestible package. I know it was digestible because i got it and financial contract talk tends to kill me off quick.

Very well laid out Colin, a good read and i hope the journo in question has a good read of it.
 
PB mvp imho . No smoking gun to nail Eufa, though but a big FO to gill and co. Much appreciated as always
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.