The Fat el Hombre
Well-Known Member
Yea Milan ain't arsed about Europa, this is just a step towards banning us from the CL. I didn't think it was gonna be this year though!?
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.
UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST
- Thread starter razman
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
cleavers
Moderator
I assume Milan had already been banned by UEFA, and had taken it to CAS, who have upheld the original ban ?
HelloCity
Well-Known Member
Milan have volunteered to not take part as part of the settlement.
BufordUSABlue
Well-Known Member
I assume Milan had already been banned by UEFA, and had taken it to CAS, who have upheld the original ban ?
I believe that's what they did last season Cleaves's
Newman Noggs
Well-Known Member
So, in response to persistent FFP breaches, UEFA have agreed a settlement with A C Milan involving negligible financial consequences.
Bodes well for us (no, not really, though it should set a precedent as regards proportionality of punishment)
It is an huge win for AC Milan.
They agree to get banned from a competition they don't care at all. In exchange, they get rid of their mounting FFP problems and get an extended period of time to get compliant.
If they didn't agree to such a decision they could have theorically been sanctionned year after year for breaking FFP break even rule. Now they get only one single sanction for a year they were going in the Europa League anyway.
However, they can not spend whatever they want. They have to balance the account by the deadline they have agreed to with UEFA. That means they'll have to be frugal on the market and sell players for good value (there are already talks about PSG buying Donnarumma).
They agree to get banned from a competition they don't care at all. In exchange, they get rid of their mounting FFP problems and get an extended period of time to get compliant.
If they didn't agree to such a decision they could have theorically been sanctionned year after year for breaking FFP break even rule. Now they get only one single sanction for a year they were going in the Europa League anyway.
However, they can not spend whatever they want. They have to balance the account by the deadline they have agreed to with UEFA. That means they'll have to be frugal on the market and sell players for good value (there are already talks about PSG buying Donnarumma).
I doubt City would agree to get banned for one year of European football (Champions League in your case).So, in response to persistent FFP breaches, UEFA have agreed a settlement with A C Milan involving negligible financial consequences.
Bodes well for us (no, not really, though it should set a precedent as regards proportionality of punishment)
laserblue
Well-Known Member
I assume Milan had already been banned by UEFA, and had taken it to CAS, who have upheld the original ban ?
This notion of Milan being banned is completely misleading. Milan had already asked to withdraw (supposedly to give them time to straighten out their finances) and following a meeting with UEFA came to an agreement to do just that. CAS didn't ban them. They merely ratified the agreement made between Milan and UEFA by issuing a 'Consent Award' which set aside earlier decisions made by UEFA's Adjudicatory and Investigatory Chambers. In other words UEFA have agreed to end proceedings against Milan for overspending in 2016-18. What a complete con job.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...wn-europa-league-following-one-year-uefa-ban/
Newman Noggs
Well-Known Member
I doubt City would agree to get banned for one year of European football (Champions League in your case).
That's my point. AC Milan lose nothing by agreeing. Even if we were inclined to reach an agreement, which I hope we never would, we would lose £80m+. Two wholly incomparable punishments.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.