OB1 said:fbloke said:I think its fair to say that anyone who knows enough about FFPR to offer any sort of informed opinion realises that its a nonsense.
UEFA are attempting to square a circle and are acting as if the backing of BIG clubs makes things a fait accompli which it doesnt.
I find it interesting that PSG seem quite simply to have decided to stick two fingers up to UEFA and quite bluntly announce a massive sponsorship which seems designed to directly challenge UEFA to use FFPR rules against them.
Why would they do that? Well UEFA have expended huge amount of time, money, effort and political influence to get where they are and one challenge in the European Courts of Justice would kill it stone dead in an instant. That said a club needs to be harmed by the rules and so they create an environment for that harm to happen.
The long term damage to UEFA (Platini in particular) will perhaps also mean that CL matches/ league matches for certain clubs could be played in Qatar or other similar countries?
I was kind of hoping that City would just spend and be damned but they have chosen a different route, which may prove to be very sensible. I can afford to be flippant about the rules. Qatar came to the party a bit later so may feel they cannot afford to play the same game as City or may just have taken a different strategy because they have a different outlook. Maybe they think that UEFA know that they cannot ultimately enforce the rules and that UEFA have hoped the influence of the elite clubs and a lack of bravery on the part of others would hold the rules in place? Are UEFA that stupid? I don't know but I don't usually hold those that run football in high regard.
I said earlier in the thread that teams like City and PSG could form the basis of some kind of European Super League, to run in competition to the UCL. They have the means to eclipse the financial rewards of the UCL and that could produce interesting dilemmas for other top teams and top players. I would assume that, ultimately, UEFA could do nothing to prevent teams playing in such a league, alongside their normal domestic games: that would surely be illegal? Chelsea would presumably be happy to join such a league and if you enticed in the likes of Barca, A.C. Milan and Real Madrid, other big clubs would surely follow the money and so would the best players and the T.V..
What people have to remember is that City may be owned by Mansour, who is wealthy enough, but they are now closely, perhaps inextricably, linked to the world's richest city. UEFA are paupers in comparison.
oakiecokie said:stonerblue said:Sigh said:The solution today is the same as the solution "yesterday."
The application of pressure (I'm not going to say force, as that may cause others to draw an inference to external restraint) to the most vulnerable presentation of the enemy's aspect.
Beginning with the selection of those with proven experience in the collection of data more likely than not to be inflammatory, prejudicial & relevant to the end desired, & terminating with "brown envelopes" on the desks of those with a true interest in maintaining the contents of said envelopes a matter between them - the recipient - and the envelope:
or, persist in doing that which will NOT work as the conflicting interests are mutually exclusive. Two objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time.
3 times and i'm still no wiser.
Hahah.Thanks fuck for that.Thought it was just me,being thick as pigshit.
fbloke said:Qatar have spent and are spending billions in football from being a sponsor at Barca through to hosting the WC and lots in between.
I suspect they fee that the have a lot less to lose than football has if they have to go their separate ways?
Thanks for that Braggster. It's always an education when you comment on my posts, mate :-)Braggster said:Tobacco and oil exploration and production. Marginal tax rate on certain north sea oil fields can exceed 80%!gordondaviesmoustache said:I wonder if there's an industry out there that pays a higher percentage of its turnover to the Treasury? Whisky distilling maybe.
The Real Madrid resort will be in Ras All Khaimah (also part ofthe UAE), not Dubai, but your point still stands.fbloke said:OB1 said:fbloke said:I think its fair to say that anyone who knows enough about FFPR to offer any sort of informed opinion realises that its a nonsense.
UEFA are attempting to square a circle and are acting as if the backing of BIG clubs makes things a fait accompli which it doesnt.
I find it interesting that PSG seem quite simply to have decided to stick two fingers up to UEFA and quite bluntly announce a massive sponsorship which seems designed to directly challenge UEFA to use FFPR rules against them.
Why would they do that? Well UEFA have expended huge amount of time, money, effort and political influence to get where they are and one challenge in the European Courts of Justice would kill it stone dead in an instant. That said a club needs to be harmed by the rules and so they create an environment for that harm to happen.
The long term damage to UEFA (Platini in particular) will perhaps also mean that CL matches/ league matches for certain clubs could be played in Qatar or other similar countries?
I was kind of hoping that City would just spend and be damned but they have chosen a different route, which may prove to be very sensible. I can afford to be flippant about the rules. Qatar came to the party a bit later so may feel they cannot afford to play the same game as City or may just have taken a different strategy because they have a different outlook. Maybe they think that UEFA know that they cannot ultimately enforce the rules and that UEFA have hoped the influence of the elite clubs and a lack of bravery on the part of others would hold the rules in place? Are UEFA that stupid? I don't know but I don't usually hold those that run football in high regard.
I said earlier in the thread that teams like City and PSG could form the basis of some kind of European Super League, to run in competition to the UCL. They have the means to eclipse the financial rewards of the UCL and that could produce interesting dilemmas for other top teams and top players. I would assume that, ultimately, UEFA could do nothing to prevent teams playing in such a league, alongside their normal domestic games: that would surely be illegal? Chelsea would presumably be happy to join such a league and if you enticed in the likes of Barca, A.C. Milan and Real Madrid, other big clubs would surely follow the money and so would the best players and the T.V..
What people have to remember is that City may be owned by Mansour, who is wealthy enough, but they are now closely, perhaps inextricably, linked to the world's richest city. UEFA are paupers in comparison.
Qatar have spent and are spending billions in football from being a sponsor at Barca through to hosting the WC and lots in between.
I suspect they fee that the have a lot less to lose than football has if they have to go their separate ways?
As for 'tempting' top clubs into a non-UEFA competition Barca have tens of millions of Qatari cash in their coffers and Real Madrid are involved in Dubai's Real Madrid world.
On which side of the el pan will they find most butter?
BillyShears said:fbloke said:Qatar have spent and are spending billions in football from being a sponsor at Barca through to hosting the WC and lots in between.
I suspect they fee that the have a lot less to lose than football has if they have to go their separate ways?
It's also worth nothing that in France in particular, part of the "deal" between Sarkozy, PSG, and the Qatari's was that Qatar, via it's Al Jazeera tv network, would bring competition to Canal Plus for TV rights for ligue 1 thus increasing the amount of money each club gets. This has come to fruition as BeinSport the Al Jazeera owned network here in France has won the rights to all PL, CL, and all Ligue 1 games from next season.
Although there has been the usual sniping and cynicism from the chairmen of certain clubs in France about what PSG have done, there has also been a tacit acknowledgement that it is good for the league and good for the game on the whole in France. Leonardo is on record saying that PSG would rather buy French players from French clubs so that money they spend goes back into French football. In turn top clubs have said they would rather sell to Paris than see their players go abroad.
I've posted this before, but it was Sarkozy who encouraged QSI to buy PSG. He hosted a 'meeting' at the Elysee Palace soon after being voted into office at which both Platini the Qatari's were present. QSI wanted Platini's vote for the WC, and Sarkozy wanted the team he supported to be bought by someone like Sheikh Mansour. A deal was struck that night. This is all documented and common knowledge in France.
Platini's FFP proposals are toothless, which makes the PL's proposals gumless!
LoveCity said:All eyes on PSG's sponsorship deal. IF approved we can go ahead with a £200million-per-year deal with Abu Dhabi Tourism and UEFA can do nothing without applying double standards that City could surely start legal action over.
The one law for one and one for another would be ripped a new arsehole by Sheikh Mansours money men...Wreckless Alec said:LoveCity said:All eyes on PSG's sponsorship deal. IF approved we can go ahead with a £200million-per-year deal with Abu Dhabi Tourism and UEFA can do nothing without applying double standards that City could surely start legal action over.
The couple of reservations I have are that, firstly, PSG were a founder member of the G14 who set up the champions league whereas we aren't part of that cartel. Secondly, French clubs seem supportive of PSG whereas English clubs clearly aren't to us. I suspect that PSG may have received some "assurances" as to their treatement by UEFA.
If we do have to take on the establishment, I think we may well be on our own but whether it comes to that remains to be seen.