Uefas new money laws?

[citysix]

In relation to all the differing scenarios suggested by all sorts of people and from varying sources, lets get one thing straight before we continue.

In Football, whether English League, English F.A., P.F.A, UEFA or any other body with some remit of control or governing stance, Rules are often thought up and often implimented with no more substance than are ultimately accepted by those to which the 'New Rules' apply.

It certainly won't be the first or last time an organisation like UEFA has drawn up a set of rules, that when first implimented are challenged from a 'Real' legal perspective, have been found to be full of holes, and have then been withdrawn or changed due to simple elements which would likely infringe unfairly on an even and open market.

Once, and only once these rules are effectively put into action and show for the first time, any signs of having a detremental effect on any Club, which would undoubtedly be claimed as being unfair and discriminatory, would there be a legal challenge. This would probably be in line with rules regarding Trade, Employment Law and similar such British and EEC legislation.

I have a sneaking feeling as in the cold war years, when it was a case of who's Russian scientists were the best, this matter will be down to who's organisation has the best team of legal experts.

Now who thinks for a second someone with the amount of money behind him that our sheikh has, he will be bullied by some French Tart and an industry employing Fcukwits like Garth Crooks, David Gil, Phil Gartside and Gordon Taylor?

The embarrassment about to be heaped on FIFA with the World Cup votes scandal is just another example of organisations who like to lay down the law, piously preach about their power and history of brilliance in sport, but when it comes down to it, they are clueless cnuts, who wouldn't survive for a second in the real world should their sheep like followers might stand up against their ridiculous ideals, decisions and rules based on nothing more than the pipe dreams and whims or power hungry half wits.

I don't think Platini's brainwave will see the light of day before it is squashed like an ant under the hob nail boot of some legal genius, and think our even giving it serious thought, is crazy, we haven't arrived where we are today, for some prick with illusions of grandure to steal our fucking thunder!

The future's bright, the future's BLUE.

i concur 100%

 

[Ricster]

If they want fair play they should make allowances for taxation laws in variuos countries. Spain has reduced its upper rate from 43% to 23% for people earning over 600,000 Euros - of the 60 people who qualify 43 are footballers.

That means that a Spanish player who is paid £50k a week would have to be paid £80k by an English team to have the same take home pay!

We have far too many people earning over £500k a year over here for the Govt. to drop our upper tax band to 23%

City, or any other British club for that matter, have to take £40million a year from their income for salaries, whereas Real Madrid only have to find £25million to give its players the same take home pay.

And that's fair is it?

You might have just given City the loophole they actually need.

No way will the UEFA rule stand up with the difference's in tax.

Nice one Blue. You've just made my day.

Fuck UEFA!

 

[daveduke67]

If they want fair play they should make allowances for taxation laws in variuos countries. Spain has reduced its upper rate from 43% to 23% for people earning over 600,000 Euros - of the 60 people who qualify 43 are footballers.

That means that a Spanish player who is paid £50k a week would have to be paid £80k by an English team to have the same take home pay!

We have far too many people earning over £500k a year over here for the Govt. to drop our upper tax band to 23%

City, or any other British club for that matter, have to take £40million a year from their income for salaries, whereas Real Madrid only have to find £25million to give its players the same take home pay.

And that's fair is it?

You might have just given City the loophole they actually need.

No way will the UEFA rule stand up with the difference's in tax.

Nice one Blue. You've just made my day.

Fuck UEFA!

I'd hope that our legal team knew this already - if not

YOU READ IT HERE FIRST - FREE SEASONCARD FOR LIFE PLEASE ;-)

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

The operating profit posted by the club is likely to mean they meet the requirements. At the end of the day as a business they are profitable, just weighed down by financing which is only reflected in the net figure. Net Losses are sustainable, Operating losses are not.

All good and well mate but the realities of this will mean a club like ourselves being banned from a compation for effectively being free of debt whilst a club from stretford, balls deep in a Billion quids worth are told to just carry on! Every few years madrid go cap in hand to the royal family, will that be ok or will they get banned?

Not a fucking chance of this happening imo, the lawyers will rip it too shreds.

Nothing more than the politics of envy, designed to protect the old guard.

Its not the Royal Family its the banks that lend them monney thats why they in debt as well after last summer

 

[The Shrike]

This is a genuine question - so don't throw the toys out. But do you genuinely feel that a club bankrolled like yours is is good for football?

This might sound like sour grapes coming from a Gooner - as we have had a much shorter time out of the trophies than you lot, and haven't had to bear the heartache that you have in the EPL era.

And what's more we are a wealthy club, and its a bit hypocritical the way some Gooners play the pauper card.

But if your model is replicated, the league becomes nothing more than a contest to see which billionaire has the biggest cock. After the first couple of titles, won't it all get a bit pointless?

 

[the talisman]

This is a genuine question - so don't throw the toys out. But do you genuinely feel that a club bankrolled like yours is is good for football?

This might sound like sour grapes coming from a Gooner - as we have had a much shorter time out of the trophies than you lot, and haven't had to bear the heartache that you have in the EPL era.

And what's more we are a wealthy club, and its a bit hypocritical the way some Gooners play the pauper card.

But if your model is replicated, the league becomes nothing more than a contest to see which billionaire has the biggest cock. After the first couple of titles, won't it all get a bit pointless?

Yes it's good for football.

No it won't get a bit pointless.

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

This is a genuine question - so don't throw the toys out. But do you genuinely feel that a club bankrolled like yours is is good for football?

This might sound like sour grapes coming from a Gooner - as we have had a much shorter time out of the trophies than you lot, and haven't had to bear the heartache that you have in the EPL era.

And what's more we are a wealthy club, and its a bit hypocritical the way some Gooners play the pauper card.

But if your model is replicated, the league becomes nothing more than a contest to see which billionaire has the biggest cock. After the first couple of titles, won't it all get a bit pointless?

If you would of been through what we have as fans you would see it differently. Look at it this way we are pretty much a 1 off. Chelsea was different he brought a club that was succeding and just made it better. We were a club in free fall, hours from administration with nothing to look forward to except Championship football. Its all well and good when your up the top of the Prem pulling in £50-£60 million in tv revenue alone. All that has done has forced small clubs to stay small and just tightened the grip of the bigger clubs. The long term outlook is not for our owner to splash out untold fortunes for 10 years. Its a plan to make the club bigger which means more revenus from everything plus better sponsership, okay City fans aint stupid and can see we far from sustainable at present but it will all change.
As for the Billionaire and biggest cock thing. How many Billionaires have brought a club and spent £500 million since are takeover in 2008, the finacial bang is over most billionaires wouldnt think of doing it now

 

[blueinsa]

This is a genuine question - so don't throw the toys out. But do you genuinely feel that a club bankrolled like yours is is good for football?

This might sound like sour grapes coming from a Gooner - as we have had a much shorter time out of the trophies than you lot, and haven't had to bear the heartache that you have in the EPL era.

And what's more we are a wealthy club, and its a bit hypocritical the way some Gooners play the pauper card.

But if your model is replicated, the league becomes nothing more than a contest to see which billionaire has the biggest cock. After the first couple of titles, won't it all get a bit pointless?

The gooner has a point lads....

Let's tell our owner to stuff his money so that we can go back to the monopoly that is the 'Sky' big 4, invented in 92.

After all, that's not at all boring eh!?

 

[Skashion]

This is a genuine question - so don't throw the toys out. But do you genuinely feel that a club bankrolled like yours is is good for football?

This might sound like sour grapes coming from a Gooner - as we have had a much shorter time out of the trophies than you lot, and haven't had to bear the heartache that you have in the EPL era.

And what's more we are a wealthy club, and its a bit hypocritical the way some Gooners play the pauper card.

But if your model is replicated, the league becomes nothing more than a contest to see which billionaire has the biggest cock. After the first couple of titles, won't it all get a bit pointless?

I'd rather football wasn't like this but we're certainly not the problem. The problem is money in general. Money leads to success and success leads to more money thus perpetuating a stale oligarchy at the top of the football ladder which Platini is doing his level best to protect.

Yes, it is hard to take from an Arsenal fan because a) you're a regular beneficiary of Champions League money which is greatly responsible for this sorry situation, and b) you're a London club. You may well pay the percentage of your disposable income for tickets but your club benefits so much more due to the wage disparity between here and London.

 

[more lazy than useless]

This is a genuine question - so don't throw the toys out. But do you genuinely feel that a club bankrolled like yours is is good for football?

This might sound like sour grapes coming from a Gooner - as we have had a much shorter time out of the trophies than you lot, and haven't had to bear the heartache that you have in the EPL era.

And what's more we are a wealthy club, and its a bit hypocritical the way some Gooners play the pauper card.

But if your model is replicated, the league becomes nothing more than a contest to see which billionaire has the biggest cock. After the first couple of titles, won't it all get a bit pointless?

I think the best way to answer this is do you think it's fair for Arsenal to be where they are just because they have been in a position to take advantage of the riches of PL, CL etc. Basically, if your not in you can't get the money to get in. I am very comfortable with the idea of a good, wealthy investor and don't see it as any better or worse than the advantages that some other teams have had (Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal, Rangers, Celtic etc)
The day I hear some other fan say 'this isn't fair, we need an American model of sharing the big money equally' I'll take some notice.
Is it bad for football? No. There are cons, but also as many pros.