FFP - 21 Man Squad Restriction & Homegrown Quota

[Matty]

Well well well ... so it seems that UEFA have changed their tune. My email made it to the relevant people there and although they won't go on record via email, they were prepared to tell me that as it stands the details of this part of the settlement hasn't actually been decided by UEFA. I asked if that meant that they were still negotiating with City and Paris and his answer was "all I can tell you is that the details of this part of the settlements hasn't yet been agreed."

Yesterday I thought it was just laziness on the part of City/UEFA in giving the general public the details, but it sounds more like this detail hasn't actually been agreed upon and there's still negotiating going on behind the scenes.

Interesting.

I'm a little surprised that we've agreed to the Champion's League squad sanction without being 100% certain exactly what that sanction entails. Although, at worse, the sanction is what the majority of us thought it was anyway, so I suppose if they are still sorting this out there's the possibility that it won't be as bad as 13 + 4 + 4.

I am wondering if there is a legality issue with respect to players' contracts. For example, it is entirely possible that players could have non CL clauses in their contracts, and it could be argued that the players excluded from the list would be entitled to activate those clauses on the basis that although City qualified for the CL, through no fault of the players, they are being excluded from the list because of City's wrongdoing.

That's a can or worms no-one wants to open. You could equally argue, if you were the player, that it was UEFA's fault as they were the ones who imposed the penalty. The player is penalised by UEFA, and the player did nothing wrong personally.

 

[Anonymous]

Interesting.

I'm a little surprised that we've agreed to the Champion's League squad sanction without being 100% certain exactly what that sanction entails. Although, at worse, the sanction is what the majority of us thought it was anyway, so I suppose if they are still sorting this out there's the possibility that it won't be as bad as 13 + 4 + 4.

I am wondering if there is a legality issue with respect to players' contracts. For example, it is entirely possible that players could have non CL clauses in their contracts, and it could be argued that the players excluded from the list would be entitled to activate those clauses on the basis that although City qualified for the CL, through no fault of the players, they are being excluded from the list because of City's wrongdoing.

That's a can or worms no-one wants to open. You could equally argue, if you were the player, that it was UEFA's fault as they were the ones who imposed the penalty. The player is penalised by UEFA, and the player did nothing wrong personally.

True but his contract is with City, and it's City who in theory are giving the CL guarantee, and it's also in theory through City's inability to adhere to FFP, rules which we knew were in place for years, that the situation has come about.

Definitely something fishy about why UEFA seemingly haven't decided how these sanctions are going to be imposed.

 

[Eds]

UEFA in 'making it as they go along to suit the Cartel' shocker. I wonder which paper will report that in tomorrow's headlines?

 

[aguero93:20]

I am wondering if there is a legality issue with respect to players' contracts. For example, it is entirely possible that players could have non CL clauses in their contracts, and it could be argued that the players excluded from the list would be entitled to activate those clauses on the basis that although City qualified for the CL, through no fault of the players, they are being excluded from the list because of City's wrongdoing.

That's a can or worms no-one wants to open. You could equally argue, if you were the player, that it was UEFA's fault as they were the ones who imposed the penalty. The player is penalised by UEFA, and the player did nothing wrong personally.

True but his contract is with City, and it's City who in theory are giving the CL guarantee, and it's also in theory through City's inability to adhere to FFP, rules which we knew were in place for years, that the situation has come about.

Definitely something fishy about why UEFA seemingly haven't decided how these sanctions are going to be imposed.

Never mind that a squad sanction that only affects none homegrown players is against the free movement of labour (which UEFA have been told before they have to observe- Bosman) and City are being prevented from honouring these contracts by an outside factor no under their influence then Billy?

 

[George Hannah]

[.. it is entirely possible that players could have non CL clauses in their contracts, and it could be argued that the players excluded from the list would be entitled to activate those clauses on the basis that although City qualified for the CL, through no fault of the players, they are being excluded from the list because of City's wrongdoing.

indeed, they may have been the cause of City's financial wrongdoing as well!

 

[Chippy_boy]

I wonder if Billy has got his promised UEFA email confirming his phone call yesterday when they told him it was 13:8

Not yet he hasn't.

Well well well ... so it seems that UEFA have changed their tune. My email made it to the relevant people there and although they won't go on record via email, they were prepared to tell me that as it stands the details of this part of the settlement hasn't actually been decided by UEFA. I asked if that meant that they were still negotiating with City and Paris and his answer was "all I can tell you is that the details of this part of the settlements hasn't yet been agreed."

Yesterday I thought it was just laziness on the part of City/UEFA in giving the general public the details, but it sounds more like this detail hasn't actually been agreed upon and there's still negotiating going on behind the scenes.

I think it's more a case of the people you are talking to not knowing or being prepared to divulge the detail at this time.

I cannot remotely imagine City would have agreed to the sanctions and made a public statement to that effect, without knowing this sort of detail. It's not like a trivial detail that can be worked through later, it's fundamental to the way we will operate the business over the next 12 months. It is THE single most important restriction being imposed. We cannot have just left that open for later discussion can we? CAN WE???

 

[Ducado]

I am wondering if there is a legality issue with respect to players' contracts. For example, it is entirely possible that players could have non CL clauses in their contracts, and it could be argued that the players excluded from the list would be entitled to activate those clauses on the basis that although City qualified for the CL, through no fault of the players, they are being excluded from the list because of City's wrongdoing.

That's a can or worms no-one wants to open. You could equally argue, if you were the player, that it was UEFA's fault as they were the ones who imposed the penalty. The player is penalised by UEFA, and the player did nothing wrong personally.

True but his contract is with City, and it's City who in theory are giving the CL guarantee, and it's also in theory through City's inability to adhere to FFP, rules which we knew were in place for years, that the situation has come about.

Definitely something fishy about why UEFA seemingly haven't decided how these sanctions are going to be imposed.

Like has been said wait till the 10 days is up, it's pretty obviouse to me

 

[Chippy_boy]

That's a can or worms no-one wants to open. You could equally argue, if you were the player, that it was UEFA's fault as they were the ones who imposed the penalty. The player is penalised by UEFA, and the player did nothing wrong personally.

True but his contract is with City, and it's City who in theory are giving the CL guarantee, and it's also in theory through City's inability to adhere to FFP, rules which we knew were in place for years, that the situation has come about.

Definitely something fishy about why UEFA seemingly haven't decided how these sanctions are going to be imposed.

Like has been said wait till the 10 days is up, it's pretty obviouse to me

I agree, that's the way it looks to me as well. I think the person Billy dealt with at UEFA shot their mouth off and has had to quickly wind it back in and stay schtum until the 10 days have passed.

 

[cibaman]

True but his contract is with City, and it's City who in theory are giving the CL guarantee, and it's also in theory through City's inability to adhere to FFP, rules which we knew were in place for years, that the situation has come about.

Definitely something fishy about why UEFA seemingly haven't decided how these sanctions are going to be imposed.

Like has been said wait till the 10 days is up, it's pretty obviouse to me

I agree, that's the way it looks to me as well. I think the person Billy dealt with at UEFA shot their mouth off and has had to quickly wind it back in and stay schtum until the 10 days have passed.

I don't get this 10 day reasoning at all. If it turned out to be 17+4 and it wasn't announced until after the deadline the clubs that would potentially be affected would kick up an almighty stink. Even if they weren't planning to appeal before they probably would simply because UEFA had dealt with it in this way. And some of those clubs such as Arsenal are hugely influential in UEFA, particularly with regard to FFP. They would surely be able to argue at CAS that the 10 day clock shouldn't start ticking until all the material details of the sanctions had been announced.

UEFA created a rod for their own back with the appeal process. But having introduced it, it wouldn't make sense for them to immediately sabotage it. It would guarantee that next year any club with a potential right to appeal would immediately lodge an appeal as soon as any sanctions were announced, just in case UEFA were hiding any details.

 

[more lazy than useless]

I don't get this 10 day reasoning at all. If it turned out to be 17+4 and it wasn't announced until after the deadline the clubs that would potentially be affected would kick up an almighty stink. Even if they weren't planning to appeal before they probably would simply because UEFA had dealt with it in this way. And some of those clubs such as Arsenal are hugely influential in UEFA, particularly with regard to FFP. They would surely be able to argue at CAS that the 10 day clock shouldn't start ticking until all the material details of the sanctions had been announced.

UEFA created a rod for their own back with the appeal process. But having introduced it, it wouldn't make sense for them to immediately sabotage it. It would guarantee that next year any club with a potential right to appeal would immediately lodge an appeal as soon as any sanctions were announced, just in case UEFA were hiding any details.

I have to agree with you on that. I posted earlier that I think people are probably mistaken in thinking that the other clubs only kmow what is in the public domain, it makes no sense. There's no reason they can't ask for details and be allowed to see them.

That said, the poster who has been in touch with UEFA was told by their pr people that UEFA hadn't actually decided yet! (is that this thread? its hard to keep up).