City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)

[FanchesterCity]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Apologies on that my friend.

Please educate me, so UEFA are nothing to do with FIFA, is that your point ?

I am aware that Mr Blatter and Mr Platini are currently at loggerheads but I assumed that involved the presidency of FIFA.
Certainly when corruption allegations were headline news prior to World Cup my understanding was that both UEFA and FIFA were part of the same organisation.

No problem mate. Yes, UEFA not FIFA, are responsible for running the Champions League and the Europa League.
FFP is a UEFA intiative.

Platini would certainly like Blatter's job at FIFA and he is also a senior figure within that organisation.

UEFA is a confederation that, in theory, is subservient to FIFA.
It does however, like the other confederations, have jurisdiction for competitions that it organises.

Similarly the FA has jurisdiction for the competitions that it organises.

The problems between FIFA and UEFA arise because of the size of UEFA compared to the other confederations.

The problem within UEFA is the power held by the former G14 clubs.

All the organisations mentioned are corrupt and the level of corruption increase as you go up the food chain.

You have it in one.

I think a lot of people tend to see it as corrupt from the top down, but I think it's the other way around.
Clubs (like the G14) are the ones scrambling for the money, and they exert influence upwards to their respective associations and confederations, and UEFA then exerts it's influence within FIFA.

UEFA looks good BECAUSE of the G14, and both UEFA and the G14 know it. UEFA like to proclaim the Champions League as their jewel in the crown, but the G14 know it shines with them in it... and it will only continue to shine as long as they like the revenue split and decisions UEFA makes. Imagine if UEFA decided to scrap the seeding in CL. There would be total uproar - because it simply doesn't suit the G14.

 

[FanchesterCity]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

The whole thing should have been dealt with in court. By our reluctance to take it that far, we have allowed ourselves to become sitting ducks and, as the last few pages of intellectual offerings have indicated, no-one can safely say what these restrictions are or what they mean.

City aren't interested in fairness any more than other clubs are. We are interested in what's best for us. If that means being the 'right side' of UEFA, and sucking up to them to gain entry into the elite, then that is what we'll do. Of course, there are limits to this, but so far we'll go along with their game because it's the path of least resistance.

As it stands now, the world thinks 'well done UEFA on clamping down' but they also think 'City will fall into line'. That's ok.
If we went to court we'd have the world thinking we are buying a legal win with expensive lawyers AND that we are still not falling into line.
The cost of FFP compliance (so far) is a lot less than the cost of fighting it in court. Money isn't the object with City, we know this... IMAGE is, and that's why it's best to play their game.

 

[Deleted member 58619]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

We should fuck FFP, totally fucken corrupt

City should assist a lower division team to challenge FFP
We provide the knowledge and the lawyers to fight our case indirectly.

Winds me up knowing the scum are going to be able to spend what they want but we have to adhere to these made up bullshit rules.

Anti-competition at its finest, corrupt bastards.

They can't compete fairly so they have to cheat, SCUM pricks

 

[I'm no cynic but...]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

The whole thing should have been dealt with in court. By our reluctance to take it that far, we have allowed ourselves to become sitting ducks and, as the last few pages of intellectual offerings have indicated, no-one can safely say what these restrictions are or what they mean.

City aren't interested in fairness any more than other clubs are. We are interested in what's best for us. If that means being the 'right side' of UEFA, and sucking up to them to gain entry into the elite, then that is what we'll do. Of course, there are limits to this, but so far we'll go along with their game because it's the path of least resistance.

As it stands now, the world thinks 'well done UEFA on clamping down' but they also think 'City will fall into line'. That's ok.
If we went to court we'd have the world thinking we are buying a legal win with expensive lawyers AND that we are still not falling into line.
The cost of FFP compliance (so far) is a lot less than the cost of fighting it in court. Money isn't the object with City, we know this... IMAGE is, and that's why it's best to play their game.

OK, I'll accept the image thing, but it still doesn't clarify what the punishments mean to us. As Wild Wild tells us, there is a lot of GUESSING involved, and I just hope that any guessing by City is 100% in agreement with any guessing by UEFA because there are a lot of people on here who are far more intelligent than me and they are at odds with each other over what these punishments are and how they will be administered.

 

[FanchesterCity]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

We should fuck FFP, totally fucken corrupt

City should assist a lower division team to challenge FFP
We provide the knowledge and the lawyers to fight our case indirectly.

Winds me up knowing the scum are going to be able to spend what they want but we have to adhere to these made up bullshit rules.

Anti-competition at its finest, corrupt bastards.

They can't compete fairly so they have to cheat, SCUM pricks

We can't assist a lower division team because they aren't in CL
The G14 won't be challenging it, because it suits them - the are the rich boys who are trying to stop us.
The smaller clubs won't be challenging it because they'd rather get rid of us too, because we are the one pushing them out!

 

[SilverFox2]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

@ Wilf Wild

Many thanks for that detail and your spin on the culture within them which it is difficult to disagree with.
Just to be clear, so that I can try to understand the legal possibilities, in which country is UEFA registered and is it a a non-profit organisation like FIFA ?

 

[FanchesterCity]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

The whole thing should have been dealt with in court. By our reluctance to take it that far, we have allowed ourselves to become sitting ducks and, as the last few pages of intellectual offerings have indicated, no-one can safely say what these restrictions are or what they mean.

City aren't interested in fairness any more than other clubs are. We are interested in what's best for us. If that means being the 'right side' of UEFA, and sucking up to them to gain entry into the elite, then that is what we'll do. Of course, there are limits to this, but so far we'll go along with their game because it's the path of least resistance.

As it stands now, the world thinks 'well done UEFA on clamping down' but they also think 'City will fall into line'. That's ok.
If we went to court we'd have the world thinking we are buying a legal win with expensive lawyers AND that we are still not falling into line.
The cost of FFP compliance (so far) is a lot less than the cost of fighting it in court. Money isn't the object with City, we know this... IMAGE is, and that's why it's best to play their game.

OK, I'll accept the image thing, but it still doesn't clarify what the punishments mean to us. As Wild Wild tells us, there is a lot of GUESSING involved, and I just hope that any guessing by City is 100% in agreement with any guessing by UEFA because there are a lot of people on here who are far more intelligent than me and they are at odds with each other over what these punishments are and how they will be administered.

I think the 'at odds' with each other stems from a) not trusting UEFA and b) what the punishments will be if UEFA did start pulling stunts on us.

UEFA's actual sanctions are pretty clear, but as you say it's more about when and how they become applied that's causing the debate. Their documents are awfully vague and City themselves haven't been much clearer.

It seems we're really just debating best and worst case scenarios for each sanction UEFA imposes and that can't be right. There should really be much debate, it should be clear.

 

[dctid]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Why city would publically stipulate exactly what the restrictions are is beyond me. Its good they dont why do we want to give every other club this information.

The club officlals be they legal or owners or both will know and thats all the matters.

Thr biggest issue for me is how the restrictions are now hitting us in the transfer market - rags / le arse / pool / chelski are going to be spending north of £80M nett. Next seasson is going to be fantastic but a right bun fight and yes we will get top 4 min and win something

 

[FanchesterCity]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Why city would publically stipulate exactly what the restrictions are is beyond me. Its good they dont why do we want to give every other club this information.

The club officlals be they legal or owners or both will know and thats all the matters.

Thr biggest issue for me is how the restrictions are now hitting us in the transfer market - rags / le arse / pool / chelski are going to be spending north of £80M nett. Next seasson is going to be fantastic but a right bun fight and yes we will get top 4 min and win something

The problem with the secrecy is that that is how the G14 operate - cutting deals behind closed doors with UEFA. How do we know that the terms PSG have been given are the same as ours?

Obviously it might favour us in this instance to keep things secret (we don't know), but in the wider scheme of things if UEFA wants to be considered as fair, it has to be much more open about how it's deciding things and what sanctions it's REALLY imposing.

Imagine if UEFA said "we'd had a little sit down with United, and we've reached a compromise about their spending... and we've agreed they can only spend 50m" - it's right that we understand HOW that figure was reached and precisely over what period it applies - so that when they do the same thing with another club, they have to apply the same rules.

You can't have a system that cuts deals behind closed doors and expect to be seen as a fair organisation (even if you ARE being fair).

And if UEFA try to shaft us again?... they can claim their interpretation of an agreement vs our interpretation. If it's out in the open, it's much more open to a common interpretation that's harder for them to wriggle out of.

If it was about private business operations, then absolutely that should remain private, but this is sanctions and the application of them, and should be as clear as day to the entire world.

 

[dctid]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Why city would publically stipulate exactly what the restrictions are is beyond me. Its good they dont why do we want to give every other club this information.

The club officlals be they legal or owners or both will know and thats all the matters.

Thr biggest issue for me is how the restrictions are now hitting us in the transfer market - rags / le arse / pool / chelski are going to be spending north of £80M nett. Next seasson is going to be fantastic but a right bun fight and yes we will get top 4 min and win something

The problem with the secrecy is that that is how the G14 operate - cutting deals behind closed doors with UEFA. How do we know that the terms PSG have been given are the same as ours?

Obviously it might favour us in this instance to keep things secret (we don't know), but in the wider scheme of things if UEFA wants to be considered as fair, it has to be much more open about how it's deciding things and what sanctions it's REALLY imposing.

Imagine if UEFA said "we'd had a little sit down with United, and we've reached a compromise about their spending... and we've agreed they can only spend 50m" - it's right that we understand HOW that figure was reached and precisely over what period it applies - so that when they do the same thing with another club, they have to apply the same rules.

You can't have a system that cuts deals behind closed doors and expect to be seen as a fair organisation (even if you ARE being fair).

And if UEFA try to shaft us again?... they can claim their interpretation of an agreement vs our interpretation. If it's out in the open, it's much more open to a common interpretation that's harder for them to wriggle out of.

If it was about private business operations, then absolutely that should remain private, but this is sanctions and the application of them, and should be as clear as day to the entire world.

Secrecy will be both sides i really do not think that clubs will want an open system its not all one way. I think it almost certain that once sanctions have been agreed and accepted that there will be an NDA in place because the next problem for UEFA would be what if club x felt that the sanctions were too leniant then that club could take UEFA to court - unlikely but possible

And yes of course UEFA will try and shaft us again