FFP - 21 Man Squad Restriction & Homegrown Quota

[ElanJo]

Furthermore, if players are signed this campaign, their transfer fees are not all piled in to one season's FFP report.

They're not. But for the purposes of a £60m spending limit for this summer, I'm pretty sure they will be counting it all at once.

But if you need to spend more than £60m on a title-winning side, you're doing it wrong.

£49m ;)

 

[EalingBlue2]

Furthermore, if players are signed this campaign, their transfer fees are not all piled in to one season's FFP report.

They're not. But for the purposes of a £60m spending limit for this summer, I'm pretty sure they will be counting it all at once.

But if you need to spend more than £60m on a title-winning side, you're doing it wrong.

£49m ;)

I reckon from Barry to Everton, Richards, pantillimon, guidetti and a couple of kids we will get best part of 20m so we will have about 70m to sign a centre mid, centreback and a reserve keeper and still have about 30 m left for a luxury signing

 

[Bill]

they are basically throwing us out, underhandedly. or they think they are, go and win it city, just so they can convene next may and discuss what they can do to us now. the most corrupt organisation in the world.

 

[jared]

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/may/16/manchester-city-fine-transfer-cap-uefa-ffp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.theguardian.com/football/201 ... p-uefa-ffp</a>

Manchester City have reluctantly accepted a conditional £49m fine and restrictions on their European squad and incoming transfers under Uefa's new financial fair play regime.

But the club said their summer transfer plans would be unaffected by restrictions they said would limit them to a maximum £49m net outlay in the upcoming transfer window.

The Premier League champions joined Paris St-Germain, who were given a similar penalty, and seven other clubs in accepting the first wave of FFP sanctions.

Under the complex ruling the club must also agree to a string of other conditions: maximum losses of €20m in 2014 and €10m in 2015, to cap their wage bill at current levels for the next two seasons and to "significantly limit" spending in the transfer market for the same period.

The sanctions will limit Manuel Pellegrini's options when it comes to naming his 21-man European squad, cut from the usual 25, of which eight must qualify as "homegrown". City pointed out, however, that last season they registered 23 players and used only 21.

If they comply with those conditions, they will get back €40m of the €60m fine, which will be deducted from their Uefa prize money over the next three years.

The club, who said they were on course to break even this financial year, claimed they had complied with the FFP rules but said they reluctantly accepted Uefa's sanctions in order to provide certainty.

City said they would be limited to spending a net maximum of £49m in the transfer window, bringing the splurges of recent years to an end.

"In normal circumstances the club would wish to pursue its case and present its position through every avenue of recourse," City said, explaining the decision to settle with Uefa's club financial control body. "However, our decision to do so must be balanced against the practical realities for our fans, for our partners and in the interests of the commercial operations of the club."

Theoretically other clubs have 10 days to appeal if they believe the sanctions to be too lenient.

If City comply with the restrictions, they will be lifted at the end of the 2015-16 season. The club said they would have complied with the restrictions anyway during the "natural course of the club's planned business operations".

They noted that, although the wage bill for 2014-15 would have to remain at the same level as 2013-14, performance-based bonuses could be paid outside that figure.

The penalties will intensify the debate over just how fair the new regime is. Some argue FFP simply entrenches the status quo, whereas Uefa says it is a vital element in restoring some sanity to football's inflationary spiral.

The other clubs, who accepted lesser sanctions, were Galatasaray, Trabzonspor and Bursaspor from Turkey, the Russian sides Zenit St Petersburg, Anzhi Makhachkala and Rubin Kazan, and Levski Sofia from Bulgaria.

City have argued that, despite combined losses of over £150m during the two seasons under consideration (2011-12 and 2012-13), they deserved to pass Uefa's financial test. They said that there had been "a fundamental disagreement" about how the regulations regarding players bought before June 2010 should be interpreted.

The FFP rules allowed for wages on contracts signed before that date to be discounted but only for the season 2011-12.

Uefa also had concerns over the value of their £350m sponsorship with Etihad and deals that raised £47m from image rights and intellectual property in 2012-13. It hoped that by combining sporting sanctions with a financial penalty it would hit affected clubs on the pitch as well as in the pocket.

Paris St-Germain agreed to Uefa's proposed sanction but said in a statement on Friday that the punishment represented a "tremendous handicap … in terms of the club's ability to fully compete on an equal footing against Europe's biggest teams".

PSG also said they "deplore the fact" that Uefa had not recognised "the full value" of their partnership with the Qatar Tourism Authority, which the governing body said was inflated.

Tags: Manchester City, Financial fair play, Uefa

 

[jared]

I think it's highly unlikely Jovetic or Kolarov will be sold.

They will either be omitted from the CL squad or sold.

You don't know that. It's equally plausible they will both be in the CL squad next season. No need for the hyperbole.

I find it hard to believe kolarov would be sold. Who are we gonna to replace him with? Given clichy's dip in form and MP rotating the two all season, kolarov is needed. Unless we plan to play zaba at LB after Sagna signs but that isn't the best obviously.

 

[fathellensbellend]

corrupt from top to bottom, i seriously wish we could just pull out, althouth i realise that isn't an option.

surely now with the sanctions, it's going to be a restriction of trade for a number of our players, whom will be denied the chance to ply the "trade" at the top level.

 

[EalingBlue2]

corrupt from top to bottom, i seriously wish we could just pull out, althouth i realise that isn't an option.

surely now with the sanctions, it's going to be a restriction of trade for a number of our players, whom will be denied the chance to ply the "trade" at the top level.

With 17 places this season and no punishment from 15 worst we can have is one new signing or two or someone like pants missing out - no big deal

 

[CatMan]

As of today these are our foreign players I am excluding Nasty because he qualifies under B list.
1) Pants
2) Zab
3) Komps
4) Demichelis
5) Kolorov
6) Garcia
7) Yaya
8) Fernandhino
9) Nasri
10) Silva
11) Navas
12) Dzeko
13) Aguero
14) Jovetic
15) Negredo

If we can only have 13 of the above who do you leave out? Don't forget we must have minimum three keepers in the squad. If we can have 17 and 4 Homegrown then we can add Sagna and Mangala no problem and Fernando if we get rid of one of the above. Sagna is foreign only joined Arsewipe when he was 23. The four HG would be Hart, Milner Clichy and Academy keeper, means Rodwell misses out.

I am assuming that the sanctions do not in any way restrict the number of B list players, so the likes of Lopez, Rekik and all the lads in the academy under 21 can play.

Negredo and Navas out as these can easily be covered by Lopes and what ever happened to that hot shot Guidetti? ;-)

 

[dennishasdoneit]

My only slight concern and it is very slight, but this particular ruling does damage our chances of CL success dramatically in the short term. WIll this put off any potential signing or even worse make some of our current players wanna jump ship in pursuit of CL glory.

in the short term is actually 1 year as far as I can see? And tbh we were not likely to win it next season anyway

spot on.
the chumps league side show can roll on for another season.
then 2015 we can approach it seriously-however hard a group we get ..in the meantime,lets concentrate on being title winners again,playing great football home and away and ensuring domestically we are second to no one.
chelsea poss the only prem team with a chance of winning chumps( if they get a striker) ..but prob germany and spain to fight it out realistically..
who cares? we have been cheated-spanish gov backs real madrid and hey ho they find £100m for bale...no problem with that .....80m for ronaldo..ffp?
but little old city-the cheeky upstarts.....slapped down at the big table..

barca ban on transfer deals for 12 months? sorry, ban lifted-for you are barca after all.


We wont forget this UEFA. NEVER. another example of rank hypocrisy, keeping the big teams rich, Wonder if Wenger is happy now-?
Never that bothered by champs league in the past, but after this i really hope we send kids out this season , in a what will be another tough group anyway, give world cup stars a bit of a rest, and come back 2015, with pelle at the helm to win the fucker. and stick two fingers up to the wenger and the like.

i never worried about arsenal spending money on top european names, or how theier 30k crowds at highbury were paying for Pires Berkamps reyes etc wages. never gave it a thought..so why does Wenger bleat about financial fair play so much if the legislation is about ensuring football clubs dont go bust? what does wenger care about us? the truth is that we are a competitor. .shame there wasn,t a city manager who queried wengers spending back in the day .

 

[1961_vintage]

HnSeems all these proposals were about protecting the status quo.

And the only ones to parfitt from that are the existing cabal. Corrupt bunch of wankers for whom protecting self-interest is the only priority.