BlueMoonz1977
Well-Known Member
So basically what UEFA are peddling is, one rule for one, one rule for another
See you in court dickheads
See you in court dickheads
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
AC Milan & FFP - Update p10
- Thread starter Prestwich_Blue
- Start date
Sir peace frog
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 18,362
- Location
- stalking the canals and rivers
- Team supported
- Manchester City Football Club
Repeat offenders ? Investing in a club ? An offence? eufa if they agree to it have shot themselves in the bollox, can't have one rule for one, and city should get this splashed all over the place
UEFA didn't agree to settle (yet).
It is just Milan AC hoping for getting a longer time to reach balance in their books.
The whole article says that other italian clubs would not tolerate a softer stance of UEFA towards Milan AC and that CFCB members want to punish them (while UEFA bosses would like to settle the issue).
As usual, different lobbies at play at UEFA.
What is more important in that whole story is Elliot will not go forward and appeal to CAS or justice courts, as they threatened previously.
I'm a bit disappointed because they used to fight legal battles whenever they felt necessary and no matter who the opponent was. It is a win for FFP and UEFA.
It is just Milan AC hoping for getting a longer time to reach balance in their books.
The whole article says that other italian clubs would not tolerate a softer stance of UEFA towards Milan AC and that CFCB members want to punish them (while UEFA bosses would like to settle the issue).
As usual, different lobbies at play at UEFA.
What is more important in that whole story is Elliot will not go forward and appeal to CAS or justice courts, as they threatened previously.
I'm a bit disappointed because they used to fight legal battles whenever they felt necessary and no matter who the opponent was. It is a win for FFP and UEFA.
M18CTID
Well-Known Member
UEFA didn't agree to settle (yet).
It is just Milan AC hoping for getting a longer time to reach balance in their books.
The whole article says that other italian clubs would not tolerate a softer stance of UEFA towards Milan AC and that CFCB members want to punish them (while UEFA bosses would like to settle the issue).
As usual, different lobbies at play at UEFA.
What is more important in that whole story is Elliot will not go forward and appeal to CAS or justice courts, as they threatened previously.
I'm a bit disappointed because they used to fight legal battles whenever they felt necessary and no matter who the opponent was. It is a win for FFP and UEFA.
I'n not sure why they're not taking it up with CAS but could it be that AC Milan are on far rockier ground than City and PSG and that they know they wouldn't win if they appealed to CAS? I know they won last year when appealing but it feels like their ownership model is still a very risky one and the alarm bells are ringing at UEFA as a result.
Either way, the AC Milan case is a wholly different one with different dynamics to it than the City and PSG cases
Milan AC is a terrible case. Nothing compared to PSG and City.I'n not sure why they're not taking it up with CAS but could it be that AC Milan are on far rockier ground than City and PSG and that they know they wouldn't win if they appealed to CAS? I know they won last year when appealing but it feels like their ownership model is still a very risky one and the alarm bells are ringing at UEFA as a result.
Either way, the AC Milan case is a wholly different one with different dynamics to it than the City and PSG cases
They were banned from CL originally because their owner was dodgy and couldn't prove his solvability.
When Elliot took over, CAS ruled in their favor because Elliot has a lot of money and can provide the necessary funds.
However, they have a very big problem in term of break even rule. They tried to spend PSG or City level of money while they don't have the revenues for it, be it TV rights or inflated or not sponsorships.
It is impossible for them to balance the account as PSG did by selling bench players.
All they can realistically get is bargaining for a softer stance from UEFA if they don't go to courts.
FFP will fleece them.
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
Milan AC is a terrible case. Nothing compared to PSG and City.
They were banned from CL originally because their owner was dodgy and couldn't prove his solvability.
When Elliot took over, CAS ruled in their favor because Elliot has a lot of money and can provide the necessary funds.
However, they have a very big problem in term of break even rule. They tried to spend PSG or City level of money while they don't have the revenues for it, be it TV rights or inflated or not sponsorships.
It is impossible for them to balance the account as PSG did by selling bench players.
All they can realistically get is bargaining for a softer stance from UEFA if they don't go to courts.
FFP will fleece them.
I can tell you know that FFP will not fleece AC Milan and the rules will be changed yet again, almost overnight to allow them to spend whatever it takes.
Oh, they seem pretty hellbent on it.I can tell you know that FFP will not fleece AC Milan and the rules will be changed yet again, almost overnight to allow them to spend whatever it takes.
If i have to be totally honest, i think the Football Leaks gave a boost to the hardline part of FFP CFCB.
Their bosses were accused of collusion with PSG and City owners.
And they want to show they will punish and hard.
Hence, the previous ban for Milan and without a doubt the incoming ban for City.
The lobby that wants to punish is every day cheered by the the media, Tebas, cartel presidents.
This is why i really think, there should be a mechanism that sanctions rival clubs for trying to influence an investigation against another competitor.
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
Oh, they seem pretty hellbent on it.
If i have to be totally honest, i think the Football Leaks gave a boost to the hardline part of FFP CFCB.
Their bosses were accused of collusion with PSG and City owners.
And they want to show they will punish and hard.
Hence, the previous ban for Milan and without a doubt the incoming ban for City.
The lobby that wants to punish is every day cheered by the the media, Tebas, cartel presidents.
This is why i really think, there should be a mechanism that sanctions rival clubs for trying to influence an investigation against another competitor.
They risk the ultimate in that a breakaway competition will be set up and financially it will be so lucrative the rest will also want in.
Not really.They risk the ultimate in that a breakaway competition will be set up and financially it will be so lucrative the rest will also want in.
The big cartel clubs are the historical clubs and have most of the fans and sponsors following. They can threaten to break away because they are united and powerful in this industry.
City and PSG owners may be powerful, in general, but let's say City tries to unilaterally break away. You would have trouble to get your new competition accepted, as even the new Champions League format is contested by the Federations. FA could tell City they will face punishment in the PL (ban or TV rights withdrawal).
I think City (and the Saudis) tried to set up their organization with FIFA, spearheaded by SoftBank. But so far, the UEFA format has the favor of the clubs (ECA).
https://www.ft.com/content/3a9acf48-3dc3-11e8-b7e0-52972418fec4
City may play beautiful football and PSG may have international superstars but the industry will follow the most influencial clubs. You need to have the backing of powerful institutions like UEFA or FIFA.
JULES
Well-Known Member
ffs you lot, … if its in Switzerland,.....it is corrupt, always was, always will be