http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2332958/MARTIN-SAMUEL--THE-DEBATE-Platini-Manchester-United-Chelsea-financial-fair-play.html
Well, I’ve been away for a little while, so no columns to go at, but there was the small matter of an interview with UEFA president Michel Platini and a 12,000-word transcript of it, that got you all going a bit.
You know the drill by now. Watch out for the poet halfway through.
Head to head: Sportsmail's Martin Samuel (right) interviews Michel Platini (left)
I don't understand why you're so opposed to financial fair play. Do you want a game run by oil barons and Russian oligarchs, people who care nothing for clubs, treat them as play things and will inevitably asset strip them and walk away when they're bored, to the detriment of well run, solvent clubs? Paul1973, Chelmsford
You can always rely on Chelmsford Paul for a moronic comment. Presumably ‘oil barons and oligarchs’ refers to Manchester City and Chelsea and his ‘well-run clubs’ are Arsenal and Manchester United. So, Paul, which of those four clubs has the most investment by owners? The answer is Chelsea and City. Which of the four clubs has had most taken out by owners? Arsenal and United. You mention asset stripping, but perhaps a Chelsea fan could comment on just how much Roman Abramovich has done for the club, or perhaps you could have a look at City's plans for the Etihad and their new training centre. Where exactly is the asset stripping? Asset stripping is the money being paid to the Glazers and Arsenal's owners and directors for fourth place. Richard, Barnet
Ah, the cut and thrust of intellectual debate, and a bloke being called a moron within the first five sentences. You don’t get that on Newsnight, folks. And to be fair, Paul was asking for it. As is this gentleman next up.
Manchester United, Manchester United, Manchester United. Dear Samuel, you used Manchester United as an example of what's wrong with financial far play. Let me tell you, Manchester United don't want it because they are worried by the sugar daddies at Chelsea and Manchester City. Manchester United have managed to keep winning titles from the time of Blackburn Rovers’ riches through to City's Sheiks. Since Roman Abramovich bought Chelsea, United have won five League titles, a Champions League final, an FA Cup, three League Cups and the FIFA Club World Cup. United have not relied on the market through the years, as they have always integrated academy players through the ranks. You seem to care more about the competitive side of FFP than the protection of clubs. I am sure Chelsea and City supporters don't want to end up like Portsmouth or Leeds United once their owners get bored. Sam, Sheffield
Success: Manchester United celebrate lifting the Barclays Premier League title this season
Roman road to success: Abramovich's money has turned Chelsea into winners and that's why Manchester United are concerned about them
If you want to mess with statistics Sam at least do a proper job. It’s not just about what United have won during Abramovich’s time, but what they won in the 10 years before he took over, and what Chelsea have won in those time frames, as well. Manchester United (during Abramovich's time): Five Premier League, one Champions League, one FA Cup, three League Cup, one FIFA Club World Cup (11 total). Chelsea (During Abramovich’s time): Three Premier League, one Champions League, one Europa League, four FA Cup, two League Cup (10 total). Manchester United (10 years prior to Abramovich): Seven Premier League, one Champions League, three FA Cup, one Intercontinental Cup (12 total). Chelsea (10 years prior to Abramovich); Two FA Cup, one League Cup (three total).
So Chelsea were not rivals to Manchester United in the league or Europe until season 2003-04. And that’s why they are worried. Also, the integration of youth mentioned at United is coupled with quite regularly breaking various British transfer records, such as for a player under 20 (Wayne Rooney) or in specific positions such as defence (Rio Ferdinand) or goal (David de Gea). I wouldn’t presume to speak for the supporters of Chelsea or Manchester City either, if I were you; I doubt if many share your blinkered opinions. Like this chap, for instance.
Sorry have no time for Platini and his stupid views. He was a great footballer and that's about as good as it gets. Paul James, Manado
That was the point I made in the interview, Paul – because he was such a great footballer we really hope he will be a wise and insightful ruler of the game. That’s why he is such a disappointment. We expect Sepp Blatter and pals to act like dopes – we wished for more from Platini.
Star on the pitch: Michel Platini was a genius for France... it;s a shame he's been such a disappointment as an administrator
So there we have it. The Germans run football as they do the European Union. Are we surprised? No. Should we be worried? Very. Paulb, Cheshire
I don’t think it is just the Germans, Paul. Karl-Heinz Rummenigge is head of the European Clubs’ Association but he would be interchangeable with any senior executive at any major club in Europe. That could be David Gill or Ivan Gazidis. It wouldn’t mean the English run football – it would mean the elite established clubs do.
Platini, Pele, Sir Bobby Charlton and Franz Beckenbauer were all decent players but these days they are corporate rent-boys. The way they conduct themselves with their silly corporate events and parties, it is as if they are football’s government and invented the game – disgraceful. Diego Maradona might have his demons but he is genuinely passionate and only wants the best for the game and the fans. Beckenbauer, Pele, Charlton and the ego-maniac Pele are frauds.
Robert Heenan, Wilmslow
I don’t agree. Charlton has been a brilliant board member at Manchester United, and a positive influence, as has Beckenbauer at Bayern Munich. Platini went into football politics and my views are well known. Of the names you mentioned only Pele would appear to be a solely corporate entity. Charlton and Beckenbauer do corporate gigs, sure, but who wouldn’t? Even Sir Alex Ferguson’s ambassadorial role at Manchester United comes well rewarded. As for Maradona, your view is idealised to say the least.
Positive influence: Sir Bobby Charlton has been a brilliant board member at Old Trafford
This is the same man who ran around celebrating after scoring a penalty at the Heysel Stadium in 1985 when people were dead on the running track. Shameless. James1965, Manchester
I think there are a lot of reasons to criticise Michel Platini but his behaviour at Heysel is not among them. Nobody can say for sure who knew what in the immediate aftermath of that tragedy, and considering UEFA allowed the game to go ahead I think it very unlikely that the players appreciated the full consequences of the violence. Giampiero Boniperti, the Juventus president, admitted in his autobiography that he ordered no information to be leaked to his players, many of whom celebrated their victory at the end of the match. The behaviour of some fans and an inadequate venue, were to blame at Heysel. The villain was not the guy who scored a goal.
Platini has clearly never been to the Middle East in July. The temperature hits the 50s during the day and even at night it is in the 40s. In South Africa, they sold 30 million more beers during the 2010 World Cup than they did the previous year – people go to the tournament to party and drink. All that will happen in 2022 is people will go to the fan zones in the European cities and party there. It will be a disastrous World Cup if it goes ahead. Big Fella, Aland Islands
The maddening aspect is Platini knew this. He voted for Qatar and then, almost instantly, started campaigning for the date to be changed. If that happens the bidding process should reopen, as FIFA president Sepp Blatter says, because a winter World Cup in Qatar was never put to the vote. It may be, as Platini says, that Qatar win again – but at least people will know what proposal is on the ballot paper.
Protectionism: Wealthier people than Berlusconi (centre) and the AC Milan owner didn't want to compete
So financial fair play was introduced in Platini's words because he spoke to owners like Silvio Berlusconi and they said, 'We can't keep spending money on our teams any more'. So just because someone with more money came in and did exactly the same thing, apparently that's wrong? Platini says, yes, we should protect teams like Milan and Inter. What divine right do they have to be a top club? History should be celebrated, but it is utter nonsense that the top clubs are there for ever. Is it OK for Real Madrid to spend another £200m on three or four players just because they are a big club? Platini is an arrogant idiot who shouldn't be running football. I would love to see Portsmouth get an owner who makes them a top side, why wouldn't you want that? James Conroy, Lincoln
The poorest argument for FFP is that a lot of billionaires went to Platini begging to be saved from themselves. It is the same one that has been advanced over here for the Premier League’s new FFP rules. ‘We haven’t got the nuts to say no to agents – please put some rules in place so we can hide behind them and keep more of the television money.’ You are right. Wealthier people than Berlusconi had entered the game and he didn’t want to compete. Platini talks morality, but the influence of the elite has ensured FFP has ended up as protectionism, nothing more.
Australia has never hosted the World Cup also and deserves to. I can still see no justification for Qatar other than money. Australia deserved to be selected. We have the climate, the fans, the facilities and are a developing soccer country. We had everything going for us, yet barely featured when the votes were counted. Rolland, Sydney
I would have voted for Australia. Sydney hosted the greatest Olympic Games I have attended but I think the biggest obstacle remains television times. Sad but true.
'The presentation of Qatar and Russia was the same. So why we not have the right to receive the World Cup?' Because the conditions in Qatar in summer prevent people from playing football and watching it, you utter imbecile. Witness their petition to now switch it to winter. That alone invalidates their proposal. You might as well approve a bid from the mythical kingdom of Atlantis. RioJohnero, London
Honestly, mate, I wouldn’t start giving them ideas. They’re not very bright, these guys, you know.
Can you imagine how quickly he would go bankrupt if he had to run a real business? Blue Chick, Bonaire
We are getting some exotic addresses on here lately, have you noticed? Already this morning, we’ve had Manado, capital city of the Indonesian province of North Sulawesi, the Aland Islands, a Swedish speaking archipelago in Finland at the entrance to the Gulf of Bothnia in the Baltic Sea and now Bonaire, a Caribbean island in the Dutch Antilles. I am drawn to conclude that this is either, quite literally, the most widely read column in sports journalism, or there is a very good in-joke going on to which I am not party. Martin Samuel, fourth palm tree from the left, Ahurei, Rapa Iti (formerly French Polynesia).
Throwing money around: Monaco have signed one of Europe's most sought-after players in Radamel Falcao
How can Monaco spend all that money then, Michel? Tommy, London
They must have very good accountants. And, let’s be honest, if they haven’t, who has?
Financial fair play should also include a limit on how many players you can buy each season and how big a squad can be, to test a manager and stop rich clubs collecting talent just to sit on the bench. Mark, Bristol
If you want to implement FFP properly, there are so many others areas that need addressing to create a fairer game, including changes to the loan and transfer system to prevent the pointless stockpiling of talent. Will it happen? No. Why? Because it does not benefit the rich clubs.
Why are people like Blatter and Platini running the game we invented? It seems only the British abide by the fair play rules. We should be running the game instead. Johnathon, Marbella
We gave the game to the world, John. I don’t think we’re better than the others. I just don’t think some of the others are all that good.
You bottled attacking the thing most English fans believe: that Platini, by history or nature, is virulently anti-English and his decisions too often knife us for the benefit of the French and others. Steve, Maidstone
I didn’t bottle anything, Steve. I don’t agree that Platini’s actions are motivated by hatred of the English, no more than my disapproval of his policies comes from me being anti-French. When I started writing negatively about him many moons back, I got the usual twerps calling me a xenophobe and saying my motivation was dislike of a foreigner meddling in the English game. Now that just about everybody is worried about the problems I identified six years ago, I don’t hear that word bandied about so glibly. So I’ll give Platini the credit of not being anti-English, just wrong. I can’t bottle asking a question based around an argument I feel is specious.
And now, in a hands-across-the-Channel type of way, some nice French people will sing you a song.
You said: 'His arguments against technology, with goal-line cameras as the thin end of a large wedge, are also sound.' Well, I'm not sure they are sound. At the end of 2011 Platini claimed that:
(1) 'Football has also based its popularity on injustices. You can remember them and talk about them in the bars.' Then, in 2012, the argument became: (2) 'Why I am against the technology of the video referee is because on the Ukraine goal there was offside at the beginning. If you want technology for the goal, what do we do if it's offside before? It means that the action has to be stopped before. That's why I am against technology. Where do we go?' Then it was (3) because it was too expensive. And recently another reason has been added (4): 'You will have reviews on every two goals.' Then in case anyone was in doubt he stamped his foot and stated (5): 'I'm not going to change now at 57.' And that's the crux. It's no, no, no and no again, regardless. Peter Downey, Manchester
I specifically referred to Platini’s second argument – where do you start and stop with technology – by referring to the ‘thin end of a large wedge’. I don’t entirely agree with his objections because he is against goal line technology, but I do share his concerns. In turn: (1) I highlighted the ridiculousness of the first quote about bar room arguments in a piece in a column published on January 4, 2012.
(2) I have sympathy here because it does seem inconsistent to rule on Ukraine’s ghost goal using goal-line technology but not to apply a similar process to the earlier action and then, as Platini says, where does this start and end? (3) I can see his fears about the expense of it, too. If BATE Borisov have to install technology for Champions League fixtures and then take it out because the same process is not available in the financially poorer Belarusian league, this could become prohibitively costly. (4) The fear of reviews every two goals is not based in fact and (5) heaven knows what his age has to do with it, but his prime concern, I feel, is a real one. Thin end of the wedge.
This sheds a bit of light about the clubs and people in power. If UEFA planned on sharing the income of the Champions League there would be a breakaway Euro League before long. James, London
I think so, too, James. I never used to believe it would happen, but now I feel it getting nearer all the time. There’s a Philip Larkin poem called Going, Going about the environment and how he feels the destructive forces of the modern world are advancing far quicker than he imagined. Larkin’s was a weightier issue, obviously, but I think the same about the football I grew up watching and the grasping advance of the European elite.
So do you want to hear Larkin read his poem aloud? Of course you do. Ah, the wonders of the internet.
'Financial fair play is to protect the club, it is to protect the club from bankruptcy.' All regulations, most of which are sponsored by large businesses for the benefit of large businesses, are brought in under such auspices and well-intentioned do-gooders end up helping a cause they would never knowingly support. Same thing applies here. You would think that the fear of bankruptcy would keep the vast majority of clubs in check anyway. BaloJelli, Manchester
Couldn’t agree more. Why should Berlusconi need rules to stop him sending Milan bankrupt? You’re not supposed to go bankrupt in business. That’s how you end up owning AC Milan.
If he's got so much love for Supporters Direct - and I know Supporters Direct Europe have got quite a lot of influence with UEFA - then perhaps when fans start lobbying them to make more tickets available to genuine supporters for European finals then he'll listen. Blue Baby, London
Wish I had thought of that at the time, Baby. Sorry. But when we did the interview, on April 19, Chelsea had not yet even played their Europa League semi-final first leg.
I wish Martin Samuel was on Twitter to have a direct link. Tourhouse, London
Sorry, but it’s not going to happen. It’s a time vampire and I haven’t got the time. If you ever see a Twitter account purporting to be me, it’s not me. I promise.
Here today, gone tomorrow: Players like Theo Walcott and Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain are both examples of players who have been sold on early by a smaller club
I feel Platini squirm when pushed on financial fair play. He's going with the big clubs. Thank God, Manchester City got in there before they closed the door. It is sad other clubs won't be able to see the same improvements in team and infrastructure that we have. MCFCOK, Manchester
I agree. As long as investment is not in the form of loans, money comes into football from outside and remains, trickling down and being spread around. Is that such a bad thing?
Anyone without a bias towards a club can see that financial fair play is a farce. The big clubs get more money and will get better, while teams like Everton and Swansea City are prevented from ever reaching the elite because of turnover. No point building through youth because players like Wayne Rooney, Theo Walcott and Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain will all be bought by big clubs when they are young, and clubs will be forced to sell due to the need to add to profits and turnover. The fans will get squeezed, too, and the game will become more of a business than ever. Rob, London
Got it in one there, Rob. That’s why you’ll never be president of UEFA, mate.
Until next time...
Read more: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2332958/MARTIN-SAMUEL--THE-DEBATE-Platini-Manchester-United-Chelsea-financial-fair-play.html#ixzz2UldnOSVY" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... z2UldnOSVY</a>
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
