PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[dadnlad]

Spurs won last summers window and January’s window. How can we compete!

Who cares about trophies eh?

and there's still wriggle room if that share tip off comes in

 

[halfcenturyup]

In the late 1970s Peter Swales embarked on a period of very high, debt financed spending in an aim to make City the most glamorous and successful club in the land. The policy took time before it proved to be disastrous on the pitch and catastrophic off it. By the time we saw the full effects of the approach City were in the third tier and was surviving courtesy of the banks. Later we saw Leeds follow a similar approach to try and replace Manchester United as the country's leading club with possibly even more disastrous consequences. Loans were not guaranteed by an owner but secured on club assets. Nevertheless Leeds were dumped into the third tier and broke. There were no FFP or P&S regulations in place to stop either club's "kamikaze spending". The question is actually whether the regulations would have stopped either club's trolly dash and there is some doubt. Another point to make is that neither club went bust, both are still in business and in City's case .... Both appear to have been kept going by the normal mechanisms of the market. It is hard to see that the situation of either club would have been helped by a ten point deduction, or even more by repeated points deductions.

Many on here will reply that both City and Leeds relied on loans, on the great villain DEBT to finance their recklessness and this is true. And in the 1980s &1990s some clubs got into considerable trouble by taking out loans to finance ground improvements, most often new stands. Chelsea and Wolves were two that I remember and both suffered from it, Wolves spectacularly so, almost dropping out of the league. These are, however, projects requiring large capital investment and loans/debt has always been the obvious way to raise capital. Indeed FFP allows it subject to the proviso that the club can pay the interest on the loans. This is certainly not a ridiculous regulation but it is nullified to some extent by the proviso that this must be paid out of "normal" revenue, which excludes anything owners/shareholders might want to put in. Even before FFP was introduced a number of clubs built impressive new grounds and since their introduction Spurs have built a very impressive one. new stadia were certainly needed when the disgraceful standard of some was considered but whether FFP has made it easier or harder to finance is the question.

I think I want to put forward several points arising out of what I've written. The first is that FFP does not ban investment but it does limit it. It certainly doesn't ban debt but it insists that the interest must be paid out of "normal" revenue but limits the owner's ability to pay the interest severely. Many clubs find that their scope for improvement is severely constrained while others who thrived before the introduction of the regulations are left to spend, spend, spend and pile on the debt in the manner of Swales and Leeds! IF (and a big if) FFP had a noble aim I suspect it was to force clubs into good business practice. It hasn't done this. It has allowed clubs at the top when the regulations were introduced to spend and borrow more while the others find that however good their business model or however rich their owners their scope for improvement is limited. I can't think why UEFA and the PL have introduced such restrictive, protectionist regulations.

Yep. It's a real head-scratcher.

:)

 

[eyalluvitt]

It should have been ‘end of story’ …except Ceferin chose to give an interview where he brought it back to life. There are a 100 ways he could have batted the loaded questions away with no controversy but he chose to start the war again.

It’s lead to headlines in every media outlet and all the usual suspects having a feeding frenzy. Ffs even Rui Pinto has got involved !!!

I suspect it was all deliberate from Ceferin. He is currently changing rules to tru and allow him to stay on as head of UEFA which has led to his ally Bobin resigning today and causing chaos at UEFA. I’m sure the interview was all part of his big plan

Cerefin sounds like piles medication

 

[Centurions]

If Jordan and co had class they wouldn’t try to taint our hearing. It’s not just about the legalities mate.

It is about the legalities though as that's the only thing stopping them going for more clicks. Believe it or not, Jordan isn't a total moron.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Cerefin sounds like piles medication

Cherubim and Ceferin is where my brain takes me with his name.

 

[bluenova]

Cerefin sounds like piles medication

What does Ceferin* sound like?


*I am only smug because I spotted it wasn't Cerefin a whole day ago.

 

[Tb1981]

Let’s get it right
Jordan had changed his time since Stefan went into talksport a as max schooled him.

His backtracking is in full motion.
Now all of a sudden he thinks a back room deal will be done…..
what he means is basically that we will be cleared and his response can’t be that he was totally wrong so he will do what the I’ll educated rags and dippers on Twitter do - he will claim conspiracy

For the record if any deals get made it’s quite clearly because the premier league can win their case

 

[HelloCity]

It always amazes me just how much has been thrown at City compared to Chelsea.
I know Chelsea had it a bit, all the Chelski stuff etc, but it was nothing compared to what has been thrown & continues to be thrown at our club.
Even a **** like Abramovich got an easy side compared to our owner.

The major difference is that we’re in the same catchment area as United and Liverpool. Were major competition for them in terms of support in the north west.

 

[domalino]

Agree with you on Ceferin / UEFA but if you permit me to swim against the tide, I don't agree about FFP. This is a sport after all and it shouldn't just be the team with the most money winning everything (yes I know 'twas ever thus and that, at the moment, we have the "most" money).

The trick is balancing competition and sporting "hope" with sustainability, community asset protection and financial responsibility. It's a tremendously difficult issue and, personally, I have no answer. Except that there must be one :)

For me the fundamental issue with FFP or any financial controls is that if we have decided that money is the biggest factor in success, how can we accept a league where some teams have 10x the revenue and spending of others and pretend they are competitors?

How can it be “financial doping” - cheating - for Luton to spend as much as Arsenal of their owner decides he wants to?

It’s pretty clear that if you want parity on the pitch, you have to adopt a US system with revenue sharing and both minimum and maximum spending limits on squads.

The version of FFP we’ve been given is like playing snakes and ladders, but half way through the game the person at the front says “let’s get rid of some of the snakes, but also we’re getting rid of all the ladders”. Good luck catching up.

 

[ricky77]

Let’s get it right
Jordan had changed his time since Stefan went into talksport a as max schooled him.

His backtracking is in full motion.
Now all of a sudden he thinks a back room deal will be done…..
what he means is basically that we will be cleared and his response can’t be that he was totally wrong so he will do what the I’ll educated rags and dippers on Twitter do - he will claim conspiracy

For the record if any deals get made it’s quite clearly because the premier league can win their case

Was this today ? Jordan seemed full pelt on us having a case to answer as recent as yesterday. Has he had another backtrack ?