Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
And there you have it, in black and white. The objective is to preserve inequality.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
FFP facing legal challenge (updated pg 12)
- Thread starter Neil_K
- Start date
Blue Heaven
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 20 Sep 2012
- Messages
- 798
Prestwich_Blue said:And there you have it, in black and white. The objective is to preserve inequality.Financial Fair Play does not have financial equality as its objective," a spokesman for European football's governing body said.
In theory and intent, you may be correct (and I agree with you), but that is not what the spokesman's quotation means. FFP is ostensibly to rein in profligate spending that causes instability at the club level, and ultimately, in leagues across the EU. It is not intended to result in any particular financial outcome.
Blue Heaven said:All of this is academic if Pratini gets his antitrust exemption from the EU parliament. Here's a (hopefully) helpful link:
http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/legislation/legislation.html
Both UEFA and FIFA have tried for decades to gain special treatment for football and in particular their own businesses and have failed.
D
D
Deleted member 52846
Guest
Re: Wall St Journal Article on FFP
Because in 2000 the G14 were formed and they wanted to monopolise money and success for themselves.ped said:lets hope ,the game has ticked along ,very nicely for the last 150 ,years,why must it change now,?
Franny Lee's Barrel Chest
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Aug 2005
- Messages
- 4,308
A couple of points:
Firstly, The analogy I put a while back was for a lottery winner on benefits not being allowed to buy a posh house and flash car because his only income was his benefits. Every club bar the usual suspects crave a Sheikh Mansour type who will win them the lottery. So I can't for the life of me think why they would wish this away at the drop of a hat. Their supporters must be going mad at their turkey type chairman effectively voting for Christmas! And if one was to take over Arse or Spurs or the rags, their tune would soon change wouldn't it?
Secondly, if Platini is so interested in Financial FAIR Play, why does he allow Real Madrid and Barcelona to take around 90% of the TV money in Spain when this is clearly not fair and is extremely damaging to the rest of the league. Also, why does he allow those clubs to receive state hand outs when this is clearly in violation of UEFA rules* (*Citation needed as they say in Wikipedia) You can't move in Spain for something RM or Barca related in your face. Even the crisps on sale are either RM or Barca branded.
Thirdly, and I realise this is a bit biased, but how on earth can you not see that a club like City are making major investment in their local area, building schools and colleges and making fantastic facilities for youngsters from a very young age and therefore investing in a lasting infrastructure? How can UEFA keep a straight face when they think that the hundreds of millions City receive from the likes of Etihad is merely to try and cheat the system? The problem with Platini and his crew is that he's judging the likes of City by his own allegedly corrupt standards.
Anyway, hopefully this case will run and run and in the meantime, City can spend how much they like on whoever they liked. Can you imagine Messi and Ronaldo coming to City (bear with me) and then UEFA telling City they can't compete in Europe? Sponsors would be queuing up to withdraw from their tatty little competitions.
Firstly, The analogy I put a while back was for a lottery winner on benefits not being allowed to buy a posh house and flash car because his only income was his benefits. Every club bar the usual suspects crave a Sheikh Mansour type who will win them the lottery. So I can't for the life of me think why they would wish this away at the drop of a hat. Their supporters must be going mad at their turkey type chairman effectively voting for Christmas! And if one was to take over Arse or Spurs or the rags, their tune would soon change wouldn't it?
Secondly, if Platini is so interested in Financial FAIR Play, why does he allow Real Madrid and Barcelona to take around 90% of the TV money in Spain when this is clearly not fair and is extremely damaging to the rest of the league. Also, why does he allow those clubs to receive state hand outs when this is clearly in violation of UEFA rules* (*Citation needed as they say in Wikipedia) You can't move in Spain for something RM or Barca related in your face. Even the crisps on sale are either RM or Barca branded.
Thirdly, and I realise this is a bit biased, but how on earth can you not see that a club like City are making major investment in their local area, building schools and colleges and making fantastic facilities for youngsters from a very young age and therefore investing in a lasting infrastructure? How can UEFA keep a straight face when they think that the hundreds of millions City receive from the likes of Etihad is merely to try and cheat the system? The problem with Platini and his crew is that he's judging the likes of City by his own allegedly corrupt standards.
Anyway, hopefully this case will run and run and in the meantime, City can spend how much they like on whoever they liked. Can you imagine Messi and Ronaldo coming to City (bear with me) and then UEFA telling City they can't compete in Europe? Sponsors would be queuing up to withdraw from their tatty little competitions.
JGL07
Well-Known Member
Re: Wall St Journal Article on FFP
As things stand French players with AS Monaco pay normal French income tax while non-French players pay zero income tax. Most agents and players negotiate wages on an 'after tax' basis. So assuming the 75% income tax is implemented, Monaco would pay one quarter the wages of other French clubs. This would make a total mockery of FFP.
Monaco has everything to do with FFP.I'm no cynic said:Although nothing to do with FFP [just yet], readers would do well to read today's news regarding AS Monaco. Apparently, the French government want to end the principality's tax haven status whereby there is no such thing as income tax. They also want Monaco to relocate their headquarters to France to ensure they operate on an equal basis to the rest of that league. There is also a dispute over a certain sum of money [£168m] if they refuse to move. Interesting stuff, and although it isn't at first sight anything to do with FFP, it is really as Monaco want to sign prestige players and the exemption from Income Tax is certainly a big pull for them.
As things stand French players with AS Monaco pay normal French income tax while non-French players pay zero income tax. Most agents and players negotiate wages on an 'after tax' basis. So assuming the 75% income tax is implemented, Monaco would pay one quarter the wages of other French clubs. This would make a total mockery of FFP.
Re: Wall St Journal Article on FFP
LOL.. you sound just like the air raid warden from Dad's Army !!
Agree, though..Tw@tini hasn't thought it through and I suspect that top legal dogs such as our belgian friend will drive a coach and horses (forgive the mixed metaphors) through the nasty , hypocritical self interest that informed this piece of half-baked 'legislation'
strongbowholic said:And another child sees the emperor is stark bollock naked.
Up yours Napoleon!
LOL.. you sound just like the air raid warden from Dad's Army !!
Agree, though..Tw@tini hasn't thought it through and I suspect that top legal dogs such as our belgian friend will drive a coach and horses (forgive the mixed metaphors) through the nasty , hypocritical self interest that informed this piece of half-baked 'legislation'
They will succeed this time because the EU is not what it once was. Now it is a means for the European elite to rule over the rest. It is basically no different to Uefa. FFFP sounds great to the top brass in Germany and France I bet.fbloke said:Blue Heaven said:All of this is academic if Pratini gets his antitrust exemption from the EU parliament. Here's a (hopefully) helpful link:
http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/legislation/legislation.html
Both UEFA and FIFA have tried for decades to gain special treatment for football and in particular their own businesses and have failed.
Well this isn't much help is it? From Herbert's Indy article on it:
Wonder if a club has appointed these guys on the quiet:
Legal specialists believe it may take five years for Striani's case to be dealt with.
Wonder if a club has appointed these guys on the quiet:
The European Club Association has, indeed, signed up to FFP – a reason why clubs are unable to mount legal challenges to the regime themselves. But that will not be enough to halt the Striani challenge.
Blue Heaven
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 20 Sep 2012
- Messages
- 798
TonyM said:They will succeed this time because the EU is not what it once was. Now it is a means for the European elite to rule over the rest. It is basically no different to Uefa. FFFP sounds great to the top brass in Germany and France I bet.fbloke said:Blue Heaven said:All of this is academic if Pratini gets his antitrust exemption from the EU parliament. Here's a (hopefully) helpful link:
http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/legislation/legislation.html
Both UEFA and FIFA have tried for decades to gain special treatment for football and in particular their own businesses and have failed.
Sadly, Tony, I believe you are correct. Pratini has been personally lobbying EU parliamentarians ever since he announced the details of FFP. It's been strongly rumored for some time that he has assurances that he will get the exemption if needed. I think this is the real reason why our club is taking FFP so seriously.