PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[applecentral]

kim gordon disagrees with this post

We're all a few decades older now but any excuse to post this:

View attachment 114637

I’m just Wilde about Kim

 

[inchy14]

Don’t be a dick. The charges are all based on allegations that came from the Der Spiegel leaks. So no they haven’t faced 115 charges from the premier league but all charges have come from the same source of information & our execs have stated we have irrefutable evidence & I have no reason to doubt considering our execs seem calm as fuck & the results of CAS showed just how amateur & prejudiced the UEFA case was.

As I also said if the premier league was confident with their evidence they wouldn’t have loaded 115 charges. They’d go big on 1 or 2 years on the most likeable conviction & get it over & done with.

Good luck with that first sentence. I’m sure he’s related to my extremely argumentative ex-wife…. ;0)

 

[applecentral]

Oh no he isn’t.

Oh yes he is…

 

[halfcenturyup]

Good luck with that first sentence. I’m sure he’s related to my extremely argumentative ex-wife…. ;0)

He isn't entirely wrong though, even if he doesn't help himself sometimes with the way he puts his points across.

 

[Asa's left peg]

Was reading some of the CASS verdict this morning provided by one of the posters. Obviously some of the text is boring and repetitive, but one of the things I took away from it was the many references / mention of FFP and the importance of it to football (and the EU 'guidance' issues on the challenge to it) and how important it was that City did not minimalise it's importance by their actions (non cooperation).

Trouble is, if it was so perfect then - why does it need changing now?

 

[rice10]

This is potentially a stupid question and I apologise if so. Some of the charges that have been thrown our way is that we failed UEFAs ffp (I think). Now this got me wondering if that is a charge for us shouldn’t UTD also be charged with failing UEFA FFP?

I don’t think I have seen this answered anywhere but apologise if it has.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I think you have to start from the destination.

What do we want football to be?

I could write about ways to make it be competitive and have 3/4/5 way title, European and relegation battles, regularly rotating which teams are at the top and winning beyond “the top 4” but I feel like I’d get 20 comments from people who don’t want that and the whole thing would get derailed like the first post.

If you do want that then you have to narrow the gap between richest and poorest somehow, which means changing the revenue distribution, I’d definitely bring back ticket rev sharing because it would get rid of the arms race to exploit fans (5% ticket increase is less attractive when half is going to the other teams). Then you have to address the CL money problem, you’re always going to get a top 4 when 4th gets £60m extra a year to defend that position against 5th.

The ideas are easy, the difficulty is that you’re trying to bring in a system that benefits the poorer smaller players in the sport and hurts the big players by taking away their advantages.

Another problem is that football has a pyramid. If you reduce the gap between top and bottom in the PL, you are just increasing the gap between the bottom of the PL and the top of the Championship. It also has to be balanced with other European leagues if the PL wants to maintain its place, and pushing too much money down the pyramid weakens that.

I know you have in mind the various financial controls in other sports. I am not so sure they can just be replicated into football in England or in Europe. Something original and unique to football is needed I think.

 

[applecentral]

Both shite.





Apologies Kaz - couldn't help myself.

Kaz has that effect on men!

 

[Lord Blue]

I think the whole bag of finance rules should be ditched.
If a club goes bust they only have themselves to blame.
Definitely not nice for the fans of that club however.
But there are always other, better run, clubs waiting to deservedly take their place.

Backtracking slightly on the no finance rules...
No annual debt allowed, but leave it up to the clubs how they achieve that.
Possibly transfer fees should be met in full at the outset. So you can only buy what you can afford.
Possibly the full term of wages should be set aside ahead of any transfer too.

 

[halfcenturyup]

This is potentially a stupid question and I apologise if so. Some of the charges that have been thrown our way is that we failed UEFAs ffp (I think). Now this got me wondering if that is a charge for us shouldn’t UTD also be charged with failing UEFA FFP?

I don’t think I have seen this answered anywhere but apologise if it has.

I would imagine they are alleging the club acted in bad faith and presented incorrect financial information to UEFA for the years up to 2018.

Now, what UEFA could do with that is anyone's guess but I would imagine, even if UEFA had the energy to reopen the club's case, which I doubt, it would all be time limited anyway.

United didn't present incorrect financial information to UEFA, they just failed FFP.

All imho, of course.