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

[Ray78]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

It looks like we have to win the Champions League the hard way.

By not being in it?

We are not going to opt out and they will not kick us out yet.

 

[depps]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Shaw, Barkley,Colman,Ramsey,Oxlade


We are the champions and that alone makes us very attractive, Shaw for £27 million who you would get 10 years out of him would be money well spent.

Coleman keeps coming up in these discussions but he isn't home grown. Didn't sign for Everton until he was 20 and before that was playing for Sligo Rovers in Ireland.

As much as I'd like to see Coleman playing for City he would be ridiculously overpriced in comparison to bringing in a similar level of player from Europe or South America and doesn't have the benefit of HG status so why waste the money

The best English players have always cost the most money, its something we have to get used to im afraid, we are a player now, not some fucking wanna be.

I understand that but Coleman isn't English and wouldn't count as Home Grown under the UEFA or Premier League squad rules so why pay the premium for him?

 

[Henkeman]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Martin Samuel once more...

And while we're at it

Considering he thinks it is right for Manchester City to be expelled from the Champions League, sometimes it is amusing to consider what Arsene Wenger feels is fair in football. Rewarding failure, for instance. Very fair. Arsenal, his club, have not been anywhere near the Premier League trophy for 10 years now, yet are consistently seeded in Pot 1 of the Champions League draw, and have been since 2000-01.

UEFA’s co-efficient system, which takes historical form into account and therefore protects the biggest and richest clubs from one ordinary season — or in Arsenal’s case, nine — will come to Wenger’s rescue again this summer. Despite having to go through another qualification play-off, providing Arsenal progress, Wenger already knows his team are among the highest seeds for 2014-15, no matter the fourth-place finish.
Underwhelming: Arsenal have seldom threatened the European elite but retain their status in pot 1
+12

Underwhelming: Arsenal have seldom threatened the European elite but retain their status in pot 1

Manchester City, the actual champions in two of the previous three seasons, will be in Pot 2, if lucky. Borussia Dortmund won the Bundesliga in 2011-12 and were placed in Pot 4. ‘Nobody has ever won the Champions League from Pot 4,’ explained Dortmund chief executive officer Hans-Joachim Watzke. Still no word from Wenger on this, so it’s probably fair.

Sky-high ticket prices; also fair. This season Arsenal had the highest priced season ticket in the league (£1,955) and the top priced cheapest season ticket, too, at £985. As Arsenal play Hull City on Saturday looking for their first trophy since 2005, some might think this poor value for money. Not Wenger. No word condemns Arsenal for squeezing their public, despite the advantage of a 60,000 capacity stadium.

‘The only way we can pay the wages and compete without any external help is through the ticket prices,’ he said in January 2013. ‘It is our main income so, of course, the prices are high. It is down to every individual to decide. If you want to go to a concert tomorrow, you look at the price of a ticket and if it is too high, you say yes or no.’

This is the upmarket version of like it or lump it, really. Super fair. Manchester City, meanwhile, on the back of two titles, the FA Cup and the League Cup in the last four seasons, have the cheapest prices in the Premier League, and are even the right side of three clubs in the Conference.

Wealth distribution: another area of fairness that does not set Wenger’s antennae twitching. In 2012-13, for getting eliminated at the Champions League knockout stage by the first good team they played, Arsenal pocketed £26.1million and Manchester United £29.6m.

UEFA also pass a solidarity payment to the Premier League to distribute among the other 16 clubs. Last year it was £1.3m split 16 ways — or £81,250 each. Sounds fair. Certainly, there is no complaint from Wenger.

‘If you say to me tomorrow that the 20 Premier League clubs get £100m each, I’m OK, I’ll take the gamble,’ he said last week, with the air of a man who knows his real odds are £26.1m versus £81,250. The clubs in the Champions League command 79 per cent of the competition revenue, and Michel Platini, the UEFA president, says wealth redistribution is a matter for those clubs. Are Arsenal going to start giving away their fortune to create fairer domestic competitions? Is Wenger lobbying his friend Platini to engineer this great leap forward? Guess again.

So, for all his much-vaunted fairness, Wenger’s take on matters that affect his club is about as impartial as Jose Mourinho’s opinion of what makes a good referee. Wenger’s sense of justice is, bottom line, whatever works for him and Arsenal. Fair’s fair.

 

[Claytop]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Martin Samuel once more...

And while we're at it

Considering he thinks it is right for Manchester City to be expelled from the Champions League, sometimes it is amusing to consider what Arsene Wenger feels is fair in football. Rewarding failure, for instance. Very fair. Arsenal, his club, have not been anywhere near the Premier League trophy for 10 years now, yet are consistently seeded in Pot 1 of the Champions League draw, and have been since 2000-01.

UEFA’s co-efficient system, which takes historical form into account and therefore protects the biggest and richest clubs from one ordinary season — or in Arsenal’s case, nine — will come to Wenger’s rescue again this summer. Despite having to go through another qualification play-off, providing Arsenal progress, Wenger already knows his team are among the highest seeds for 2014-15, no matter the fourth-place finish.
Underwhelming: Arsenal have seldom threatened the European elite but retain their status in pot 1
+12

Underwhelming: Arsenal have seldom threatened the European elite but retain their status in pot 1

Manchester City, the actual champions in two of the previous three seasons, will be in Pot 2, if lucky. Borussia Dortmund won the Bundesliga in 2011-12 and were placed in Pot 4. ‘Nobody has ever won the Champions League from Pot 4,’ explained Dortmund chief executive officer Hans-Joachim Watzke. Still no word from Wenger on this, so it’s probably fair.

Sky-high ticket prices; also fair. This season Arsenal had the highest priced season ticket in the league (£1,955) and the top priced cheapest season ticket, too, at £985. As Arsenal play Hull City on Saturday looking for their first trophy since 2005, some might think this poor value for money. Not Wenger. No word condemns Arsenal for squeezing their public, despite the advantage of a 60,000 capacity stadium.

‘The only way we can pay the wages and compete without any external help is through the ticket prices,’ he said in January 2013. ‘It is our main income so, of course, the prices are high. It is down to every individual to decide. If you want to go to a concert tomorrow, you look at the price of a ticket and if it is too high, you say yes or no.’

This is the upmarket version of like it or lump it, really. Super fair. Manchester City, meanwhile, on the back of two titles, the FA Cup and the League Cup in the last four seasons, have the cheapest prices in the Premier League, and are even the right side of three clubs in the Conference.

Wealth distribution: another area of fairness that does not set Wenger’s antennae twitching. In 2012-13, for getting eliminated at the Champions League knockout stage by the first good team they played, Arsenal pocketed £26.1million and Manchester United £29.6m.

UEFA also pass a solidarity payment to the Premier League to distribute among the other 16 clubs. Last year it was £1.3m split 16 ways — or £81,250 each. Sounds fair. Certainly, there is no complaint from Wenger.

‘If you say to me tomorrow that the 20 Premier League clubs get £100m each, I’m OK, I’ll take the gamble,’ he said last week, with the air of a man who knows his real odds are £26.1m versus £81,250. The clubs in the Champions League command 79 per cent of the competition revenue, and Michel Platini, the UEFA president, says wealth redistribution is a matter for those clubs. Are Arsenal going to start giving away their fortune to create fairer domestic competitions? Is Wenger lobbying his friend Platini to engineer this great leap forward? Guess again.

So, for all his much-vaunted fairness, Wenger’s take on matters that affect his club is about as impartial as Jose Mourinho’s opinion of what makes a good referee. Wenger’s sense of justice is, bottom line, whatever works for him and Arsenal. Fair’s fair.

You got a link for that mate?

 

[Anonymous]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Martin Samuel on the money (forgive the pun!) once again.

 

[Henkeman]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Martin Samuel once more...

And while we're at it

Considering he thinks it is right for Manchester City to be expelled from the Champions League, sometimes it is amusing to consider what Arsene Wenger feels is fair in football. Rewarding failure, for instance. Very fair. Arsenal, his club, have not been anywhere near the Premier League trophy for 10 years now, yet are consistently seeded in Pot 1 of the Champions League draw, and have been since 2000-01.

UEFA’s co-efficient system, which takes historical form into account and therefore protects the biggest and richest clubs from one ordinary season — or in Arsenal’s case, nine — will come to Wenger’s rescue again this summer. Despite having to go through another qualification play-off, providing Arsenal progress, Wenger already knows his team are among the highest seeds for 2014-15, no matter the fourth-place finish.
Underwhelming: Arsenal have seldom threatened the European elite but retain their status in pot 1
+12

Underwhelming: Arsenal have seldom threatened the European elite but retain their status in pot 1

Manchester City, the actual champions in two of the previous three seasons, will be in Pot 2, if lucky. Borussia Dortmund won the Bundesliga in 2011-12 and were placed in Pot 4. ‘Nobody has ever won the Champions League from Pot 4,’ explained Dortmund chief executive officer Hans-Joachim Watzke. Still no word from Wenger on this, so it’s probably fair.

Sky-high ticket prices; also fair. This season Arsenal had the highest priced season ticket in the league (£1,955) and the top priced cheapest season ticket, too, at £985. As Arsenal play Hull City on Saturday looking for their first trophy since 2005, some might think this poor value for money. Not Wenger. No word condemns Arsenal for squeezing their public, despite the advantage of a 60,000 capacity stadium.

‘The only way we can pay the wages and compete without any external help is through the ticket prices,’ he said in January 2013. ‘It is our main income so, of course, the prices are high. It is down to every individual to decide. If you want to go to a concert tomorrow, you look at the price of a ticket and if it is too high, you say yes or no.’

This is the upmarket version of like it or lump it, really. Super fair. Manchester City, meanwhile, on the back of two titles, the FA Cup and the League Cup in the last four seasons, have the cheapest prices in the Premier League, and are even the right side of three clubs in the Conference.

Wealth distribution: another area of fairness that does not set Wenger’s antennae twitching. In 2012-13, for getting eliminated at the Champions League knockout stage by the first good team they played, Arsenal pocketed £26.1million and Manchester United £29.6m.

UEFA also pass a solidarity payment to the Premier League to distribute among the other 16 clubs. Last year it was £1.3m split 16 ways — or £81,250 each. Sounds fair. Certainly, there is no complaint from Wenger.

‘If you say to me tomorrow that the 20 Premier League clubs get £100m each, I’m OK, I’ll take the gamble,’ he said last week, with the air of a man who knows his real odds are £26.1m versus £81,250. The clubs in the Champions League command 79 per cent of the competition revenue, and Michel Platini, the UEFA president, says wealth redistribution is a matter for those clubs. Are Arsenal going to start giving away their fortune to create fairer domestic competitions? Is Wenger lobbying his friend Platini to engineer this great leap forward? Guess again.

So, for all his much-vaunted fairness, Wenger’s take on matters that affect his club is about as impartial as Jose Mourinho’s opinion of what makes a good referee. Wenger’s sense of justice is, bottom line, whatever works for him and Arsenal. Fair’s fair.

You got a link for that mate?

Yup - it's in a bigger article about England:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/ar...agan-fine-prospects-neither-ready-Brazil.html

 

[Claytop]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Thanks

He's bang on again..

 

[Lancet Fluke]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Exactly. I'm also reasoning that the related party ones will have to have been fully justified financially , which only leaves that third party deal they're supposedly not revealing details of.

If it is indeed the third party IP sale then that raises the issue of what happens in a year or so's time when the name of the third party is revealed (as will happen) and the IP sale turns out to be completely above board and perfectly acceptable? By that stage UEFA will have already fined us £50m, and reduced our Champion's League squad for this season (plus probably a similar punishment for next season, when the same issues will arise). Can we claim back the £50m? What about our Champion's League campaign? That will have long gone. Can we sue for potential lost earnings? If we go out in the 2nd round again could we argue that with a full 25 man squad we'd have progressed further? UEFA are playing with fire here.

Having spent the weekend looking into what the squad size reduction means for City, I'd suggest that we are fighting not just the financial sanctions, but also this particular sanction. A 21 man squad with 8 "English" players would leave us with a huge problem in registering players for next season's competition. We'd effectively be limited to 13 "foreign" players, and this is with me including Richards and Rodwell in our calculations. If we were to lose those two then the picture becomes even more complicated.

HART* PANT
NASTY KOMPANY CLICHY* KOLAROV RICHARDS* ZABA DEMI
DINHO NAVAS MILNER* NASRI RODWELL* SILVA GARCIA TOURE
DZEKO AGUERO JOVETIC NEGREDO

That's 21 players right there, and there's only 5 homegrown players in there two of whom are Richards and Rodwell. If we lose the appeal and/or are have our squad limit imposed I don't see how we pick a CL squad strong enough to do well in the competition without replacing at least two of our first team regulars with English players.

This is beginning to feel like a huge clusterfuck of problems.

If we accept the squad restrictions I'd have thought replacing Pants with an English understudy would be the first thing and then maybe sell Kolarov and replace him with Ashley Cole on a free?

 

[EalingBlue2]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Fabregas
Pogba
Lots of good players who would be home grown. - we can also sign 20 year olds from other countries and they can play on top of the 21

 

[Claytop]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

If it is indeed the third party IP sale then that raises the issue of what happens in a year or so's time when the name of the third party is revealed (as will happen) and the IP sale turns out to be completely above board and perfectly acceptable? By that stage UEFA will have already fined us £50m, and reduced our Champion's League squad for this season (plus probably a similar punishment for next season, when the same issues will arise). Can we claim back the £50m? What about our Champion's League campaign? That will have long gone. Can we sue for potential lost earnings? If we go out in the 2nd round again could we argue that with a full 25 man squad we'd have progressed further? UEFA are playing with fire here.

Having spent the weekend looking into what the squad size reduction means for City, I'd suggest that we are fighting not just the financial sanctions, but also this particular sanction. A 21 man squad with 8 "English" players would leave us with a huge problem in registering players for next season's competition. We'd effectively be limited to 13 "foreign" players, and this is with me including Richards and Rodwell in our calculations. If we were to lose those two then the picture becomes even more complicated.

HART* PANT
NASTY KOMPANY CLICHY* KOLAROV RICHARDS* ZABA DEMI
DINHO NAVAS MILNER* NASRI RODWELL* SILVA GARCIA TOURE
DZEKO AGUERO JOVETIC NEGREDO

That's 21 players right there, and there's only 5 homegrown players in there two of whom are Richards and Rodwell. If we lose the appeal and/or are have our squad limit imposed I don't see how we pick a CL squad strong enough to do well in the competition without replacing at least two of our first team regulars with English players.

This is beginning to feel like a huge clusterfuck of problems.

If we accept the squad restrictions I'd have thought replacing Pants with an English understudy would be the first thing and then maybe sell Kolarov and replace him with Ashley Cole on a free?

Tbf I don't reckon we're going to accept anything. From everything we've heard it sounds like we were given assurances we would be fine and have been strung along by UEFA. I liked recent comments saying we had been planning legal action in the background for the last 3 years.