FFP - 21 Man Squad Restriction & Homegrown Quota

[jimbopm]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

If it's true we can only name 5 homegrown players for next years tournament, I would treat that as a massive win for City.

The restriction of 21 players with 5 homegrown will effectively allow us to pick Hart, Milner, Clichy, Lopes and Guidetti.

Leaving a 16 man squad of Pants, Zabba, Vinny, MDM, Kola, Ferna, Yaya, Spanish Dave, Nasri, Garcia, Navas, Jojo, Dzeko, Kun and The Beast.

Only 15 there mate. Pants going will give us another HG slot to fill so Lopes no need to include ( can play anyway) guidetti also likely to go so Boyata could be included - only club trained one we have. Gives us two free overseas - Sagna and CB. Hope milner stays. Think we may sell Garcia to fit in Fernando. Leaves space for Rodwell if Milner leaves.

Yes Guidetti for Boyata is a logical swap, I've named 5 strikers there but only 2 centre halves. You are right too in that I have only named 15 players so that gives us room to add Mangala or Fernando if they come in. We could also cash in on Pants and sign a young English keeper, someone like McCarthy at Reading for instance.

You can see how much extra wiggle room gives us if we only have to name 5 homegrown.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

If it's true we can only name 5 homegrown players for next years tournament, I would treat that as a massive win for City.

The restriction of 21 players with 5 homegrown will effectively allow us to pick Hart, Milner, Clichy, Lopes and Guidetti.

Leaving a 16 man squad of Pants, Zabba, Vinny, MDM, Kola, Ferna, Yaya, Spanish Dave, Nasri, Garcia, Navas, Jojo, Dzeko, Kun and The Beast.

Only 15 there mate. Pants going will give us another HG slot to fill so Lopes no need to include ( can play anyway) guidetti also likely to go so Boyata could be included - only club trained one we have. Gives us two free overseas - Sagna and CB. Hope milner stays. Think we may sell Garcia to fit in Fernando. Leaves space for Rodwell if Milner leaves.

Yes Guidetti for Boyata is a logical swap, I've named 5 strikers there but only 2 centre halves. You are right too in that I have only named 15 players so that gives us room to add Mangala or Fernando if they come in. We could also cash in on Pants and sign a young English keeper, someone like McCarthy at Reading for instance.

You can see how much extra wiggle room gives us if we only have to name 5 homegrown.

Not necessarily. It depends on how the 5 home-grown is interpreted. In the CL rules, club-trained take priority so if you only name 4 home-grown, they'd ALL have to be club-trained. If it is 5 home-grown, the likelihood is that is will be 4 club-trained and 1 association. That means two of Milner, Hart & Clichy would have to be named in the main list of 16.

 

[Matty]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Only 15 there mate. Pants going will give us another HG slot to fill so Lopes no need to include ( can play anyway) guidetti also likely to go so Boyata could be included - only club trained one we have. Gives us two free overseas - Sagna and CB. Hope milner stays. Think we may sell Garcia to fit in Fernando. Leaves space for Rodwell if Milner leaves.

Yes Guidetti for Boyata is a logical swap, I've named 5 strikers there but only 2 centre halves. You are right too in that I have only named 15 players so that gives us room to add Mangala or Fernando if they come in. We could also cash in on Pants and sign a young English keeper, someone like McCarthy at Reading for instance.

You can see how much extra wiggle room gives us if we only have to name 5 homegrown.

Not necessarily. It depends on how the 5 home-grown is interpreted. In the CL rules, club-trained take priority so if you only name 4 home-grown, they'd ALL have to be club-trained. If it is 5 home-grown, the likelihood is that is will be 4 club-trained and 1 association. That means two of Milner, Hart & Clichy would have to be named in the main list of 16.

Unless we've managed to negotiate a better ruling than that for ourselves, the CL rules involve where a club names a smaller than 25 man squad as they were unable to name 8 home grown players, not where they are being forced into a reduced squad by a UEFA ruling.

 

[Carstairs]

Apologies if anyone has already poisted this: 'UEFA to allow a reduced homegrown quota':

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/football/clubs/manchestercity/article4096730.ece

Paywall mate, any chance you could cut and paste it?

Manchester City are expected to be allowed to field a reduced number of “home-grown” players in their Champions League squad for next season.
In a controversial development that is likely to invite a backlash from rival clubs and alarm the FA, the squad restrictions imposed on City for breaching Uefa’s Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules could be relaxed to enable them to name just five home-grown players.
Ordinarily, clubs are allowed to register a 25-man squad, of which a minimum of eight players must be classed as home-grown.
As part of the sanctions administered last week for failing FFP, City will be able to name only a 21-man squad in the Champions League next season, which sparked fears that the club could be forced into unwanted measures in order to fulfil the mandatory quota of home-grown players.
A ratio of 13 foreign and eight home-grown players raised the prospect of City having to omit certain overseas stars and award new contracts to a clutch of English players who are surplus to requirements.
Yet it appears that City may now be clear to field 16 foreign players, just one short of the usual figure of 17, and only five home-grown talents in their squad for Europe’s premier club competition. The situation would certainly help to explain the relaxed stance City have adopted over the futures of Joleon Lescott, the defender, and Gareth Barry, the midfielder, both of whom are out of contract this summer.
With Dedryck Boyata, the Belgium defender, offered a new contract to stay at City, albeit on reduced terms, there appeared to be a chance of the club also having to offer new deals to Lescott and/or Barry in an attempt to comply with Uefa’s criteria.
The original FFP punishment would have complicated the futures of Micah Richards, Jack Rodwell and Scott Sinclair, three English players who are on the periphery at City. A softening of Uefa’s position would leave the way clear for City to offload Lescott, Barry, Richards, Rodwell and Sinclair. Joe Hart, James Milner, Gaël Clichy, Boyata and Eirik Holmen Johansen, a 21-year-old Norwegian-born goalkeeper, would at present make up the five “home-grown” players.
Uefa said it was “not in a position to make any further comment” on the situation, but any such agreement would raise doubts about the credibility of FFP.
Greg Dyke, the FA chairman, said this month it was “pretty depressing” that clubs such as City could win the Barclays Premier League title with only two English players who start regularly for the club, and the latest twist may further dishearten him.
Khaldoon al-Mubarak, the City chairman, has voiced his opposition to FFP, questioning a system that punishes clubs with “zero debts” yet not those with huge debt mountains.
City’s punishment also includes a £49 million net cap on transfer spending this summer. The club are well advanced in their pursuit of Eliaquim Mangala and Fernando, the Porto centre half and midfielder respectively, and Bacary Sagna, who will soon be out of contract at Arsenal, although it remains to be seen if City opt to move for Cesc Fàbregas. Luis Enrique was non-committal when asked about the Spain midfielder’s future at his presentation as Barcelona’s new coach yesterday.
The uncertainty over Fàbregas coupled with Yaya Touré’s desire to return to Barcelona in the wake of farcical claims that his club did not make enough fuss about his 31st birthday last week will trigger talk of a swap deal, but City are adamant that their Ivory Coast midfielder will not be sold.
• David Beckham has urged Manchester United to retain his former “Class of ’92” team-mates on the coaching staff. Phil Neville, who is still officially United’s first-team coach, admitted yesterday that he was still in the dark over his future at Old Trafford, as are Nicky Butt and Paul Scholes. “It will be great to see if Scholesy, Butty and Phil can be involved,” Beckham said.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Yes Guidetti for Boyata is a logical swap, I've named 5 strikers there but only 2 centre halves. You are right too in that I have only named 15 players so that gives us room to add Mangala or Fernando if they come in. We could also cash in on Pants and sign a young English keeper, someone like McCarthy at Reading for instance.

You can see how much extra wiggle room gives us if we only have to name 5 homegrown.

Not necessarily. It depends on how the 5 home-grown is interpreted. In the CL rules, club-trained take priority so if you only name 4 home-grown, they'd ALL have to be club-trained. If it is 5 home-grown, the likelihood is that is will be 4 club-trained and 1 association. That means two of Milner, Hart & Clichy would have to be named in the main list of 16.

Unless we've managed to negotiate a better ruling than that for ourselves, the CL rules involve where a club names a smaller than 25 man squad as they were unable to name 8 home grown players, not where they are being forced into a reduced squad by a UEFA ruling.

But in those rules you can never have more association then club trained so we'll need to wait and see I guess. Could be 4 & 1, 3 & 2 or could be no stipulation as long as they're one or the other.

 

[Matty]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Not necessarily. It depends on how the 5 home-grown is interpreted. In the CL rules, club-trained take priority so if you only name 4 home-grown, they'd ALL have to be club-trained. If it is 5 home-grown, the likelihood is that is will be 4 club-trained and 1 association. That means two of Milner, Hart & Clichy would have to be named in the main list of 16.

Unless we've managed to negotiate a better ruling than that for ourselves, the CL rules involve where a club names a smaller than 25 man squad as they were unable to name 8 home grown players, not where they are being forced into a reduced squad by a UEFA ruling.

But in those rules you can never have more association then club trained so we'll need to wait and see I guess. Could be 4 & 1, 3 & 2 or could be no stipulation as long as they're one or the other.

All we can do is wait and see, however I'd be surprised if:-

A - City had agreed to the 21 man squad restriction without having a concrete, binding, decision in place as to how those 21 places could be made up.

B - City had agreed to the 21 man squad restriction and also the restriction that 4 of that 21 man squad would have to be club trained.

That would place such a restriction on our squad for next season that we would struggle to include all the players we wanted to. You'd end up with some high profile, important first team players having to miss out, something City would have fought very hard to prevent. Given the "so what" nature of the other sanctions I find it hard to believe we'd have allowed ourselves to be hampered to such a degree by this one.

 

[pavelsrnicek]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Unless we've managed to negotiate a better ruling than that for ourselves, the CL rules involve where a club names a smaller than 25 man squad as they were unable to name 8 home grown players, not where they are being forced into a reduced squad by a UEFA ruling.

But in those rules you can never have more association then club trained so we'll need to wait and see I guess. Could be 4 & 1, 3 & 2 or could be no stipulation as long as they're one or the other.

All we can do is wait and see, however I'd be surprised if:-

A - City had agreed to the 21 man squad restriction without having a concrete, binding, decision in place as to how those 21 places could be made up.

B - City had agreed to the 21 man squad restriction and also the restriction that 4 of that 21 man squad would have to be club trained.

That would place such a restriction on our squad for next season that we would struggle to include all the players we wanted to. You'd end up with some high profile, important first team players having to miss out, something City would have fought very hard to prevent. Given the "so what" nature of the other sanctions I find it hard to believe we'd have allowed ourselves to be hampered to such a degree by this one.

I'd agree with you on the above as it is pretty clear we have a difference of interpretation with UEFA already in relation to FFP so I doubt City would risk leaving this open to interpretation.

 

[Centurions]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Only 15 there mate. Pants going will give us another HG slot to fill so Lopes no need to include ( can play anyway) guidetti also likely to go so Boyata could be included - only club trained one we have. Gives us two free overseas - Sagna and CB. Hope milner stays. Think we may sell Garcia to fit in Fernando. Leaves space for Rodwell if Milner leaves.

Yes Guidetti for Boyata is a logical swap, I've named 5 strikers there but only 2 centre halves. You are right too in that I have only named 15 players so that gives us room to add Mangala or Fernando if they come in. We could also cash in on Pants and sign a young English keeper, someone like McCarthy at Reading for instance.

You can see how much extra wiggle room gives us if we only have to name 5 homegrown.

Not necessarily. It depends on how the 5 home-grown is interpreted. In the CL rules, club-trained take priority so if you only name 4 home-grown, they'd ALL have to be club-trained. If it is 5 home-grown, the likelihood is that is will be 4 club-trained and 1 association. That means two of Milner, Hart & Clichy would have to be named in the main list of 16.

Not strictly true, I posted this earlier on a different thread :-

If a club decided to submit a squad of 21 (without sanctions) then you're allowed 17 FT plus either 4 CT or 4 AT (or any combination). There's no requirement for any CT players at all. Of course our situation is unique since we know (unless UEFA come out with a different statement) that we're only allowed 16 FT. I would hazard a guess that we came up with a compromise of 1 CT & 4 AT (or any combination). Maybe...

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Not strictly true, I posted this earlier on a different thread :-

If a club decided to submit a squad of 21 (without sanctions) then you're allowed 17 FT plus either 4 CT or 4 AT (or any combination). There's no requirement for any CT players at all. Of course our situation is unique since we know (unless UEFA come out with a different statement) that we're only allowed 16 FT. I would hazard a guess that we came up with a compromise of 1 CT & 4 AT (or any combination). Maybe...

Sorry - you're right. There is no restriction.

 

[Hart of the Matter]

Re: FFP - 21 Man Squad Restriction & Homegrown Quota

This would explain the relaxed nature of the original club press release quoting we had only used 22 players this season which at the time seemed to rather miss the point about 8 HG.