dctid said:Big G said:jonmcity said:thought the whole thing was to stop clubs going into massive debt. Not stopping investment in football. Oh forgot the reason they gave for bringing this in dosn't matter anymore
Exactly, the FFPR is in basic to stop club mortgaging themselves up for the hope of success, bit like Leeds did under Risdale, we are lucky to have an owner who is willing to plough in his own funds and basically write the money off too, fairly unique, but we still have to show figures that we can sustain without our sugar daddy, hence the sponsorship deals.
is it fook - its to prevent sugar daddies buying clubs and breaking the cartel that has been in existence for years which is why those clubs with the most to lose are kicking up crap
Irwell said:Why would Arsenal or Liverpool know anything about the deal? Whilst City have discussed it at length with UEFA, it is subject to commercial confidentiality agreements and so UEFA would be leaving themselves wide open if they divulged the details. They are making noises in UEFA's direction because their fans are kicking up a stink about it so that they aren't seen to be just letting it happen without a fight.dctid said:Unless you are an integral part of the deal then i suggest that is pure guess work - if it was a done deal and all ok Le Arse - Liverpool etc whom are more likely to have connections with UEFA and know a little more about whatever this deal is would not be kicking up so much shit - but they are
I think you mean Saint Platini. Either way though, they may be corrupt but they aren't stupid. You don't stand in front of a Lion and poke it with a stick.dctid said:Yup and FIFA is an un corruptable organisation headed by Saint Blatter
Not really... If they were to choose to block our entry, which I can't see them doing in a month of sundays, it still wouldn't affect entry into the tournament this year as FFPR hasn't come into effect yet.TBooksbluearmy said:The whole thing boils down to if it is with in the rules. If UEFA try and ban the club and we go to court the chances are that UEFa will have to let us take part until the case is heard, and that could take yrs before it comes to court..
With the Champions League draw only about a month away they will have to come to a decision very soon.
TBooksbluearmy said:The whole thing boils down to if it is with in the rules. If UEFA try and ban the club and we go to court the chances are that UEFa will have to let us take part until the case is heard, and that could take yrs before it comes to court..
With the Champions League draw only about a month away they will have to come to a decision very soon.
Why do you say that? Financial penalty in the form of refusal of entry to the Champions League on the basis of a UEFA FFPR ruling could be construed as restraint of trade on the basis that UEFA are attempting to use contractual clauses to limit contracts companies can enter into with third parties. That would go way beyond CAS' authority.dctid said:If it goes to court both parties will be bound by the Court of Arbitration Of Sport - dont know how long it would take to be honest - susoect it would be reasonably quick
2013/2014 is when UEFA will start examining the books BUT they will look at the previous 2011/2012 and 2012/2013.
UEFA will not have to let us or anybody continue to take part
Big G said:You have looked into this the wrong way and far too deeply hence having the wrong grasp. there are no grounds for UEFA to pull the plug as we have been consultation throughout the process with UEFA and got the go ahead.
Irwell said:Why do you say that? Financial penalty in the form of refusal of entry to the Champions League on the basis of a UEFA FFPR ruling could be construed as restraint of trade on the basis that UEFA are attempting to use contractual clauses to limit contracts companies can enter into with third parties. That would go way beyond CAS' authority.dctid said:If it goes to court both parties will be bound by the Court of Arbitration Of Sport - dont know how long it would take to be honest - susoect it would be reasonably quick
2013/2014 is when UEFA will start examining the books BUT they will look at the previous 2011/2012 and 2012/2013.
UEFA will not have to let us or anybody continue to take part
Rules take second place to law. I agree, a UEFA license isn't an automatic right. The problem is that the grounds on which they choose to grant or refuse those licenses could be construed as restraint of trade. That isn't something that would require arbitration from CAS, it is an illegal act that could be taken to court.dctid said:Because those are the fookin rules read them -
Anex IV - Appeals can be lodged against decisions made by the UEFA administration in writing before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in accordance with the relevant provisions laid down in the UEFA Statutes
A UEFA License IS NOT repeat NOT a fookin automatic right - its little more than a private members club which has a set of rules that clubs wishing to enter it must comply with.
suggest you go to UEFA website and read them - there is an awful lot of though gone into it - i dont understand alot of it but the idea that this is a bluff by UEFA is ridiculas.
Whilst you can have discussions about whether your plans are in keeping with the spirit of the rules or not, UEFA aren't in a position to sign something off until the actual contract has been signed. They would have to have people go through everything to make sure it was in keeping with what was discussed before doing so.fortunate son said:is this actually true? if it was the case, why dont UEFA come out in response to Wenger / Ayers statements and say that alls above board with the Etihad deal.
instead they have said they will be 'looking into it'
im not convinced