You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The only way to get around Platini's anti-City stance
- Thread starter Cobwebcat
- Start date
Eddie
Well-Known Member
Thought I would throw my twopenn'orth in.
"The basic 'break even' principle will be that clubs cannot repeatedly spend more than their generated revenues, while guidance will also be provided on salaries and transfer spending and the sustainability of debt levels."
Above is taken from the article in the Telegraph about City taking a stance against Platini's proposal. Now if that sentence is correct there are surely questions that need answering:
1) "...cannot repeatedly spend more..." - does that mean once is acceptable as that is clearly not repeatedly?
2) If once is acceptable, is that once a season, once every 5 years, once every 10 years?
3) "...guidance...salaries..." sounds like a wage cap and therefore very much against EU law?
4) If it is guidance, then surely it is simply that, guidance, neither governance or enforceable law?
5) Further, if it is merely guidance, the proposal is toothless and cannot achieve what it is supposed to, so why would it be passed?
I'm no fancy Dan lawyer, however, I am sure the Sheikh's legal team must surely be laughing up their collective sleeves at the thought of the embarrassment they will be able to reek upon this despotic, anti-Islamic, anti-English racist bureaucrat?
As has been said, this is nothing but a transparent attempt at protectionism for the established 'big clubs'.
"The basic 'break even' principle will be that clubs cannot repeatedly spend more than their generated revenues, while guidance will also be provided on salaries and transfer spending and the sustainability of debt levels."
Above is taken from the article in the Telegraph about City taking a stance against Platini's proposal. Now if that sentence is correct there are surely questions that need answering:
1) "...cannot repeatedly spend more..." - does that mean once is acceptable as that is clearly not repeatedly?
2) If once is acceptable, is that once a season, once every 5 years, once every 10 years?
3) "...guidance...salaries..." sounds like a wage cap and therefore very much against EU law?
4) If it is guidance, then surely it is simply that, guidance, neither governance or enforceable law?
5) Further, if it is merely guidance, the proposal is toothless and cannot achieve what it is supposed to, so why would it be passed?
I'm no fancy Dan lawyer, however, I am sure the Sheikh's legal team must surely be laughing up their collective sleeves at the thought of the embarrassment they will be able to reek upon this despotic, anti-Islamic, anti-English racist bureaucrat?
As has been said, this is nothing but a transparent attempt at protectionism for the established 'big clubs'.
The whole thing is laughable, dont lose any sleep over this pile of crap. I had a look around over team forums a day after the story broke and only on the Chelsea forum was any kind of debate taking place. Other fans have read it and taken it for what it is, a pile of shit. Chelsea fans were on our side and were saying how the press made the story look like Abramovich had rubber stamped the idea, which they doubted because chelsea are in debt and under the rules could themselves be ruled out of the CL because without Abramovich they cant break even.
blueju
Well-Known Member
jake28 said:ive barely slept since reading about this on thursday night...any realistic views on what we could do to get
around these new rules if imposed???....
i think id kill the fat french prick if i saw him...im fuming..
You tried rohypnol?
Royal Blue Moon
Active Member
- Joined
- 18 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 44
Eddie said:As has been said, this is nothing but a transparent attempt at protectionism for the established 'big clubs'.
It's like the way the established elite clubs won't run with video technology in refereeing because they know they get more than their fair share of dodgy refereeing decisions - I mean, realistically, how many penalties are ever awarded against Utd or Liverpool at their home grounds?
This move is, as many on here have posted, designed to maintain the boring status quo of the same old clique walking away with the trophies at home and abroad every season. They may as well introduce a rule requiring maximum transfer fees and wages in proportion to the number of trophies a club has already won. Hopefully the EU will rule against this abominable and restrictive proposal, and that horrible shill of the clique (Platini) will be ousted from his position ASAP.
fathellensbellend
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2005
- Messages
- 4,345
the rule will be very easy to get around, if all you have to do, is spend within your turnover.
simply city need to produce a limited edition shirt of 1, and sell it to sheik mansour for say 250 million, and do this as often as we like.
its no different to chelsea charging 50 quid for tickets, or united selling themselves to asia.
we only need to be creative.
simply city need to produce a limited edition shirt of 1, and sell it to sheik mansour for say 250 million, and do this as often as we like.
its no different to chelsea charging 50 quid for tickets, or united selling themselves to asia.
we only need to be creative.
I think we have all been missing something here.
Maybe this could be the Shieks idea to protect City and ADUGs interest,
therefore making us, then keeping us, as the most powerful club about
ensuring our dominance for many years to come.
Maybe this could be the Shieks idea to protect City and ADUGs interest,
therefore making us, then keeping us, as the most powerful club about
ensuring our dominance for many years to come.
no need...just read a couple of C_T_I_D's posts. (ctid ;) )blueju said:jake28 said:ive barely slept since reading about this on thursday night...any realistic views on what we could do to get
around these new rules if imposed???....
i think id kill the fat french prick if i saw him...im fuming..
You tried rohypnol?
crizack
Well-Known Member
no-one can cap players wages, even the government wouldn't allow this, anyone who earns over £50,000 a year gets taxed %50 on whatever they get paid over £50,000, if ONE player get's payed 5 million a year, they pay £2.45m in tax. Even IF they could, they couldn't unless fans were to boycott matches due to ticket prices.
this is a load of shit which will NOT happen!
if they were to do anything, it would be to cap how much a club can be in debt before they have to call in the administrators, seein as though that UEFA is the bank of european football and they would much rather chase a debt than stop million pound transactions.
rubbish thread.
this is a load of shit which will NOT happen!
if they were to do anything, it would be to cap how much a club can be in debt before they have to call in the administrators, seein as though that UEFA is the bank of european football and they would much rather chase a debt than stop million pound transactions.
rubbish thread.