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

[Kazzydeyna]

The Daily Telegraph is indeed the best laxative in the world - one little dose and it works on the entire population of a big city! Take a stride back and consider.

UEFA try and maintain the retain and transfer system in court when all legal opinion tells them they haven't a chance of winning. They lose and are warned football is not a special case. They try to limit the number of foreigners who can be in a club squad. They're told not even to bother going to court because it's clearly contrary to European law. They change the rules to insist on a quota of "home grown" players (as part of the club's "organic"growth?) and that hasn't a chance of standing up to a challenge. Now the masterminds at UEFA are trying to lay down rules for club finance, which is a bit difficult when they want to impose limits on shareholders' investment and the law says any agreement between competing parties to limit investment is prohibited. They're keeping a careful eye on sponsorship deals to prevent "financial doping" by owners, but they can't quite get hold of what a related parties deal is, preferring a definition of their own to the one in universal use in the world of commerce. There's more than a slight problem in understanding who is charged with the responsibility of deciding on the propriety of such deals. Not a great record of meddling.

In the sky blue corner, on the other hand, we have Sheikh Mansour, Etihad, Etisalat etc etc who have a proven (almost unrivalled) record of investment, growth and success.

And yet City fans blush, their heads sink into their shoulders and they panic at accusations of "cheating", "financial doping" from clubs who used investment from shareholders to buy trophies and then expanded their stadium and developed other revenue streams to perpetuate the success which they now claim is "fair", "paid for with their own money" and other such nonsense. And they are all massively in debt, but that isn't to be mentioned.

The European court will not be interested in taking action against a club in such robustly strong financial health, especially when the authorities taking the action are actually competing parties who entrusted the "rules" on which such action is based to other competing parties (as Platini's disarmingly honest comment to Martin Samuel - "it's what the clubs want" - actually signifies"). I think the road is leading to a very destructive suit against a cartel. Members of cartels can be fined up to 10% of their annual, world wide turnover.

I hope this is broken into nice easy chunks/paragraphs because some need to calm down. We have nothing to fear.

I have no idea who you are.

But I like you.

A lot.

Sense being spoken, all should take heed.

Cheers pal.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: City & FFP (updated)

This was asked on Talksport the other night, Adrian Durham didn't know so they got clarification. The reporter and back with this!
If arsenal finish 5th and WIN the fa cup 7th place in the league opens up to a Europa league spot.

That's correct this is because the Cup Winners (CW) spot is an auto group entry 5th (N5) is Play-Off (pre group) 6th (N6) is Qualifier 3 (pre-play-off) So Arse would get the CW and their league place would go down one league place

http://www.uefa.com/uefaeuropaleague/season=2014/accesslist/

There was a discussion on the Utd thread in General Forum about this and it seems that if Arsenal finish 5th, they go into Europa league based on league position and their FA Cup win (should it happen) would go to the FA Cup final losers, not to 7th place in the league.

That's correct as I understand it. 5th place always gets an EL place so Arsenal get it on that basis first. So even if they win the cup they qualify through league position. 6th place gets the second EL place as we won the League Cup. That means Hull get the third EL place, regardless of who wins the cup. The only circumstance it would go to 7th place is if Hull came 6th in the PL.

The only thing I'm not clear on is that the cup winners go straight into the group stage whereas the team finishing 5th go into a playoff. So if Arsenal finish 5th and win the cup, I'm not sure which they'd go into.

 

[Paul_Powers_Tash]

The Daily Telegraph is indeed the best laxative in the world - one little dose and it works on the entire population of a big city! Take a stride back and consider.

UEFA try and maintain the retain and transfer system in court when all legal opinion tells them they haven't a chance of winning. They lose and are warned football is not a special case. They try to limit the number of foreigners who can be in a club squad. They're told not even to bother going to court because it's clearly contrary to European law. They change the rules to insist on a quota of "home grown" players (as part of the club's "organic"growth?) and that hasn't a chance of standing up to a challenge. Now the masterminds at UEFA are trying to lay down rules for club finance, which is a bit difficult when they want to impose limits on shareholders' investment and the law says any agreement between competing parties to limit investment is prohibited. They're keeping a careful eye on sponsorship deals to prevent "financial doping" by owners, but they can't quite get hold of what a related parties deal is, preferring a definition of their own to the one in universal use in the world of commerce. There's more than a slight problem in understanding who is charged with the responsibility of deciding on the propriety of such deals. Not a great record of meddling.

In the sky blue corner, on the other hand, we have Sheikh Mansour, Etihad, Etisalat etc etc who have a proven (almost unrivalled) record of investment, growth and success.

And yet City fans blush, their heads sink into their shoulders and they panic at accusations of "cheating", "financial doping" from clubs who used investment from shareholders to buy trophies and then expanded their stadium and developed other revenue streams to perpetuate the success which they now claim is "fair", "paid for with their own money" and other such nonsense. And they are all massively in debt, but that isn't to be mentioned.

The European court will not be interested in taking action against a club in such robustly strong financial health, especially when the authorities taking the action are actually competing parties who entrusted the "rules" on which such action is based to other competing parties (as Platini's disarmingly honest comment to Martin Samuel - "it's what the clubs want" - actually signifies"). I think the road is leading to a very destructive suit against a cartel. Members of cartels can be fined up to 10% of their annual, world wide turnover.

I hope this is broken into nice easy chunks/paragraphs because some need to calm down. We have nothing to fear.

Completely agree. No doubt that we want to be seen as the good guys and play the game up to a point. I'd be amazed after the lengthy discussions between UEFA and City that UEFA are anything less than crystal clear exactly where that point is.

 

[laserblue]

The Daily Telegraph is indeed the best laxative in the world - one little dose and it works on the entire population of a big city! Take a stride back and consider.

UEFA try and maintain the retain and transfer system in court when all legal opinion tells them they haven't a chance of winning. They lose and are warned football is not a special case. They try to limit the number of foreigners who can be in a club squad. They're told not even to bother going to court because it's clearly contrary to European law. They change the rules to insist on a quota of "home grown" players (as part of the club's "organic"growth?) and that hasn't a chance of standing up to a challenge. Now the masterminds at UEFA are trying to lay down rules for club finance, which is a bit difficult when they want to impose limits on shareholders' investment and the law says any agreement between competing parties to limit investment is prohibited. They're keeping a careful eye on sponsorship deals to prevent "financial doping" by owners, but they can't quite get hold of what a related parties deal is, preferring a definition of their own to the one in universal use in the world of commerce. There's more than a slight problem in understanding who is charged with the responsibility of deciding on the propriety of such deals. Not a great record of meddling.

In the sky blue corner, on the other hand, we have Sheikh Mansour, Etihad, Etisalat etc etc who have a proven (almost unrivalled) record of investment, growth and success.

And yet City fans blush, their heads sink into their shoulders and they panic at accusations of "cheating", "financial doping" from clubs who used investment from shareholders to buy trophies and then expanded their stadium and developed other revenue streams to perpetuate the success which they now claim is "fair", "paid for with their own money" and other such nonsense. And they are all massively in debt, but that isn't to be mentioned.

The European court will not be interested in taking action against a club in such robustly strong financial health, especially when the authorities taking the action are actually competing parties who entrusted the "rules" on which such action is based to other competing parties (as Platini's disarmingly honest comment to Martin Samuel - "it's what the clubs want" - actually signifies"). I think the road is leading to a very destructive suit against a cartel. Members of cartels can be fined up to 10% of their annual, world wide turnover.

I hope this is broken into nice easy chunks/paragraphs because some need to calm down. We have nothing to fear.

Top post mate. Factual, concisely and coherently presented and bang on the money. Gave me the sort of warm glow I usually only get when my incontinence bag bursts ;)

 

[Gordyola]

This was asked on Talksport the other night, Adrian Durham didn't know so they got clarification. The reporter and back with this!
If arsenal finish 5th and WIN the fa cup 7th place in the league opens up to a Europa league spot.

That's correct this is because the Cup Winners (CW) spot is an auto group entry 5th (N5) is Play-Off (pre group) 6th (N6) is Qualifier 3 (pre-play-off) So Arse would get the CW and their league place would go down one league place

http://www.uefa.com/uefaeuropaleague/season=2014/accesslist/

There was a discussion on the Utd thread in General Forum about this and it seems that if Arsenal finish 5th, they go into Europa league based on league position and their FA Cup win (should it happen) would go to the FA Cup final losers, not to 7th place in the league.

Edit: Page 36 of the thread if you're interested.
Edit2: Actually I'm now not sure. The only source seems to be Talksport and so far it seems, if Arsenal finish 5th and win the cup, it opens up 7th place, but if Arsenal finish 4th and win the cup, the cup losers get the place. Christ, can't UEFA make anything simple.

That's incorrect (in bold) This is from the competition rules and regulations

If the access list needs to be adjusted once all the participants are known and admitted, priority for the UEFA
Europa League will be given to the winners of the domestic cups (in accordance with the entry stage as per the
access list). The adjusted list will be announced by circular letter.

So If they get top 4 and win the Cup then Hull, as losers, will get the Europa spot, of that there is no question
But as I said above the CW place is a higher rated than 5 & 6th see picture from UEFA website https://www.flickr.com/photos/55807144@N05/13894655763/.
Because they take the CW place the 5 and 6th league places drop down one so 5th =6th and 6th =7th, this is important because it determines where they enter the competition. Although I've not found that in writing apart from the circular letter mentioned above

 

[Goatfacekillah]

The Daily Telegraph is indeed the best laxative in the world - one little dose and it works on the entire population of a big city! Take a stride back and consider.

UEFA try and maintain the retain and transfer system in court when all legal opinion tells them they haven't a chance of winning. They lose and are warned football is not a special case. They try to limit the number of foreigners who can be in a club squad. They're told not even to bother going to court because it's clearly contrary to European law. They change the rules to insist on a quota of "home grown" players (as part of the club's "organic"growth?) and that hasn't a chance of standing up to a challenge. Now the masterminds at UEFA are trying to lay down rules for club finance, which is a bit difficult when they want to impose limits on shareholders' investment and the law says any agreement between competing parties to limit investment is prohibited. They're keeping a careful eye on sponsorship deals to prevent "financial doping" by owners, but they can't quite get hold of what a related parties deal is, preferring a definition of their own to the one in universal use in the world of commerce. There's more than a slight problem in understanding who is charged with the responsibility of deciding on the propriety of such deals. Not a great record of meddling.

In the sky blue corner, on the other hand, we have Sheikh Mansour, Etihad, Etisalat etc etc who have a proven (almost unrivalled) record of investment, growth and success.

And yet City fans blush, their heads sink into their shoulders and they panic at accusations of "cheating", "financial doping" from clubs who used investment from shareholders to buy trophies and then expanded their stadium and developed other revenue streams to perpetuate the success which they now claim is "fair", "paid for with their own money" and other such nonsense. And they are all massively in debt, but that isn't to be mentioned.

The European court will not be interested in taking action against a club in such robustly strong financial health, especially when the authorities taking the action are actually competing parties who entrusted the "rules" on which such action is based to other competing parties (as Platini's disarmingly honest comment to Martin Samuel - "it's what the clubs want" - actually signifies"). I think the road is leading to a very destructive suit against a cartel. Members of cartels can be fined up to 10% of their annual, world wide turnover.

I hope this is broken into nice easy chunks/paragraphs because some need to calm down. We have nothing to fear.

I love you.

 

[inchy14]

The Daily Telegraph is indeed the best laxative in the world - one little dose and it works on the entire population of a big city! Take a stride back and consider.

UEFA try and maintain the retain and transfer system in court when all legal opinion tells them they haven't a chance of winning. They lose and are warned football is not a special case. They try to limit the number of foreigners who can be in a club squad. They're told not even to bother going to court because it's clearly contrary to European law. They change the rules to insist on a quota of "home grown" players (as part of the club's "organic"growth?) and that hasn't a chance of standing up to a challenge. Now the masterminds at UEFA are trying to lay down rules for club finance, which is a bit difficult when they want to impose limits on shareholders' investment and the law says any agreement between competing parties to limit investment is prohibited. They're keeping a careful eye on sponsorship deals to prevent "financial doping" by owners, but they can't quite get hold of what a related parties deal is, preferring a definition of their own to the one in universal use in the world of commerce. There's more than a slight problem in understanding who is charged with the responsibility of deciding on the propriety of such deals. Not a great record of meddling.

In the sky blue corner, on the other hand, we have Sheikh Mansour, Etihad, Etisalat etc etc who have a proven (almost unrivalled) record of investment, growth and success.

And yet City fans blush, their heads sink into their shoulders and they panic at accusations of "cheating", "financial doping" from clubs who used investment from shareholders to buy trophies and then expanded their stadium and developed other revenue streams to perpetuate the success which they now claim is "fair", "paid for with their own money" and other such nonsense. And they are all massively in debt, but that isn't to be mentioned.

The European court will not be interested in taking action against a club in such robustly strong financial health, especially when the authorities taking the action are actually competing parties who entrusted the "rules" on which such action is based to other competing parties (as Platini's disarmingly honest comment to Martin Samuel - "it's what the clubs want" - actually signifies"). I think the road is leading to a very destructive suit against a cartel. Members of cartels can be fined up to 10% of their annual, world wide turnover.

I hope this is broken into nice easy chunks/paragraphs because some need to calm down. We have nothing to fear.

You sir are without doubt my favourite poster by miles. (even when you don't use paragrapghs i like the cut of your jib)

 

[mcmanus]

^^^^ Great post BluessinceHydeRoad

If a bloke on an internet forum can pick holes in UEFA so easily what would the Sheikh's lawyers do?

 

[aguero93:20]

^^^^ Great post BluessinceHydeRoad

If a bloke on an internet forum can pick holes in UEFA so easily what would the Sheikh's lawyers do?

Use a hole that already exists and make it a lot wider, without using lube?

 

[Helmet Cole]

Have we been banned yet ?

Transfer ban

Will it be May before we here if we have passed or failed and any possible sanctions.

Apparently , like the title race it should be over in May, but the British media can't wait that long so have decided that city have been banned, fined, and the dippers have won the title. Personally I'm grateful for this sort of insightful journalism as I hate surprises.