UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST

[laserblue]

Take a deep breath before you read this. If you want to read it?

He doesn’t pull any Scouse punches, from the first paragraph, ‘it’s only since the demolition of Watford in the FA Cup final – reducing the competition to a farce’, to, Spurs and Liverpool have reached the Champions League final and secured top four spots (and Liverpool 97 points) by playing fair financially, and in the past, selling in order to improve their squads.

Unless other clubs do the same, it’s not exactly sport. (meaning City)

He starts of being less than diplomatic, but them comes out with the well used City-FFP related accusations by Scousers, financial doping, etc.

Expect this article to appear on a RAWK forum near you soon.

You are not obliged to click on the link.


Man City and Liverpool’s Spending – A Factual ‘Transfer Price Index’ Analysis

https://tomkinstimes.com/2019/05/ma...ding-a-factual-transfer-price-index-analysis/

Somebody tell him that Liverpool failed FFP in 2013 and were set to fail again in 2015 until UEFA accepted their plea to offset £50m of stadium development costs (the Stanley Park project) which never happened. Which makes Liverpool liars as well as cheats.

He might also be reminded that if he expects City to face stiffer opposition in domestic cups a good first step might be for the coward Klopp not to bin them off, as he has done the past two seasons, because he's incapable of running a campaign on four fronts.

 

[PragueBlue]

Basically he says that if you buy well you are corrupting the game.

Their model penalises us for buying KdB *cheap* but rewards them for wasting money on Carroll, Moreno etc etc

Somebody posted this earlier on another thread. it shows the inflation adjusted amounts spent on transfer fees since the beginning of the Premier League. As can be seen the dippers are (once again) in 2nd place on total amount spent to have won a grand total of no PL titles. Chelsea are top, the rags 3rd and we are 4th.

https://www.skysports.com/football/...sive-premier-league-transfers-in-todays-money

 

[Deleted member 77198]

Take a deep breath before you read this. If you want to read it?

He doesn’t pull any Scouse punches, from the first paragraph, ‘it’s only since the demolition of Watford in the FA Cup final – reducing the competition to a farce’, to, Spurs and Liverpool have reached the Champions League final and secured top four spots (and Liverpool 97 points) by playing fair financially, and in the past, selling in order to improve their squads.

Unless other clubs do the same, it’s not exactly sport. (meaning City)

He starts of being less than diplomatic, but them comes out with the well used City-FFP related accusations by Scousers, financial doping, etc.

Expect this article to appear on a RAWK forum near you soon.

You are not obliged to click on the link.


Man City and Liverpool’s Spending – A Factual ‘Transfer Price Index’ Analysis

https://tomkinstimes.com/2019/05/ma...ding-a-factual-transfer-price-index-analysis/

Liverpool have sold players because they have been mostly irrelevant when it comes to winning trophies this decade so their players leave to play for teams that win stuff.

That’s the only reason Liverpool have such a small net spend. Not out of some moral way of going about business.

 

[spiny]

The allegations from the UEFA appear to be focussed around ADUG not ADEC providing/underwriting funding for the ETIHAD sponsorship of City. UEFA claim there is a case to answer. City this and deny any breach of FFP with the matter referred to CAS.

Outside the purview of CAS are the allegations of a campaign to damage the reputation and commercial interests of City reflected in Club statements. Evidence of conspiracies and cartels would almost certainly have to be resolved externally at a higher judicial level than CAS that would get UEFA off the hook.


We have the Der Spiegel leaks that City say are hacked, taken out of context and misinterpreted. City also claim breach of process, including the leaked recommendation for a ban from the CL and their comprehensive evidence submitted has not been fully considered. Again a mechanism to get UEFA off the hook who also have battles with FIFA.

There appears to have been a concerted MSM and social media campaign to portray City, our owners, the club, players and fans in a negative light. We joke about City Bingo but for example the attacks on Raheem Sterling have been a disgrace and not isolated.

Martin Samuel is well connected having worked in Manchester and London. He has consistently campaigned against FFP and as a West Ham supporter cannot be considered a City shill unlike pundits and reporters for certain clubs. His recent article names Manchester United and highlights 3 more English clubs as guilty of hypocrisy in their stance against City, FFP and spending.

What they have in common is a history of promoting their own interests at the expense of other clubs that started with stopping sharing part of gate receipts with away teams that was specifically designed at the start of the football league to minimise the domination of bigger clubs we now see. Next they threatened resulting in the creation of the Premier League, financially pulling up the drawbridge through access to UEFA competitions.

The G14 clubs have enjoyed an easy ride, free of scrutiny so far. The fact that it has been disbanded does not preclude conspiracy. The Premier League has been a resounding success outgrowing their European counterparts. However the narrative is about the excitement and competitivenes of the Premier League. However, referees cannot be considered neutral when PGMOL is employed by the Premier League and decisive, dodgy decisions continue. VAR also cannot be relied upon as shown by the City v Spurs game at the Etihad. I am in favour of goal line technology but VAR leaves a lot to be desired.


I think that Manchester City are reluctant players in the FFP and conspiracy game but having “taken the pinch” I believe now we will go down to the wire. Money may talk in the West but face is equally important in the East.

Add American and other rich owners from Germany and Italy plus Spain, all of whom expect everyone to play to their rules for ROI. Now the model has changed, they are seeking to revert to the old status quo and new ways of protectionism and are now faced with a new and different model for competition that has left them behind. It is a dangerous game for them to play.

Cartels, conspiracies and other measures designed to restrict competitiveness are frowned upon in international law so if referred to them, could bite them in the bum. Alternatively they may see this as the last roll of the dice. The potential is for this to change football around the globe.

 

[Newquayblue]

As long as we keep winning I don't give a flying %$£@ what anyone thinks, in fact it makes beating them even sweeter!

 

[MillionMilesAway]

The Tomkins Times calculated 'today' prices is based on a formula he's used for a long time - that site has been up a long time, he says 2009 was the first time he did it, and he's just added a few more years to it to bring it up to date.

The numbers are different from the link through Sky to TotalMoney, but nothing particularly says one is worse or better than the other.

It is however a little artificial in places - a cut off for one chart of 2008 essentially disregards most the high spending of Chelsea. Aguero most expensive currently? Seems reasonable, he's the best long-standing player in the league.

The part I do think is an unreasonable stretch is essentially "Spiegel leak claimed Mancini was paid off-book, so maybe the players are too, which means no-one can buy them". He is right that City haven't lost players at their peak (or very rarely), and the other top 6 sides have, or most of them.

Oh, and he believes McKenna's punditarena piece. That doesn't really need more comment.

So it's stats are interpreted from a Liverpool-centric viewpoint, but hey, it's a Liverpool fansite.

Nothing to be bothered about, but expect it to be quoted on and off now.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

What reason do they have to rush the submission if they are acting independently? Sounds very much like UEFA told them to hurry up because of the 5 year deadline which should not be the investigators concern.

None of the Club Financial Control Body seems independent from UEFA neither the IC or the AC. In fact they seem to act as part of UEFA and it's UEFA that are claiming they are independent and we all buy it.

Ah, gotcha.
I think this is down to interpretation of independent - I'd assumed you meant that the committee acted without interference from UEFA Council, which I think it probably does. It's a UEFA committee though, so isn't be a third-party body.

While nothing on the UEFA pages uses the word 'independent', it's reasonable that the UEFA investigators have to adhere to the rules of the UEFA investigations if they want to not have findings thrown out.

 

[jrb]

As other’s have stated, Liverpool's recent transfer war chest is down to selling their best players who wanted to move to other clubs to win trophies. Which they have proved was the right decision. It would have been interesting to see what Liverpool’s transfer war chest would have been like, alongside UEFA and PL FFP, if those players had decided to stay.

Not once have I read anywhere amongst all this Liverpool net spend back slapping is that damning fact. Liverpool couldn't hold on to their best players. Yes, they have replaced them with comparable players, yet Liverpool still remain trophy less in their recent era.

This Summer Liverpool won’t have any transfer kitty. But they will have the PL and CL money. But their wages and agent fees have gone through the roof after signing all those new players. Let’s see how much they have to spend on players this Summer, while still having to complying with FFP.

 

[Metalartin]

Ah, gotcha.
I think this is down to interpretation of independent - I'd assumed you meant that the committee acted without interference from UEFA Council, which I think it probably does. It's a UEFA committee though, so isn't be a third-party body.

While nothing on the UEFA pages uses the word 'independent', it's reasonable that the UEFA investigators have to adhere to the rules of the UEFA investigations if they want to not have findings thrown out.

Reasonable you say? I'll have to disagree there, very dodgy indeed how they rushed to meet the deadline with many questions yet to be posed.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

As other’s have stated, Liverpool's recent transfer war chest is down to selling their best players who wanted to move to other clubs to win trophies. Which they have proved was the right decision. It would have been interesting to see what Liverpool’s transfer war chest would have been like, alongside UEFA and PL FFP, if those players had decided to stay.

Not once have I read anywhere amongst all this Liverpool net spend back slapping is that damning fact. Liverpool couldn't hold on to their best players. Yes, they have replaced them with comparable players, yet Liverpool still remain trophy less in their recent era.

This Summer Liverpool won’t have any transfer kitty. But they will have the PL and CL money. But their wages and agent fees have gone through the roof after signing all those new players. Let’s see how much they have to spend on players this Summer, while still having to complying with FFP.

I think that's all true.
As I see it, the whole point of citing 'net spend' is the same argument that Liverpool have had to 'earn' their money by selling good players to improve the squad, whereas City haven't, especially up to around 2012.

Liverpool will have plenty to spend now, I would think. The CL will give them a huge amount.