Manchester City banned from CL for 2 seasons and fined 30 million euros | CAS - Ban lifted, fined 10 million
- Thread starter roonster09
- Start date
Detail whore
Why?Ironic a real madrid fan says that
RC
There is nothing to stop an oil baron buying a club but still working within FFP rules.
It might be more of a 5-10 year project.
People want instant success.
There is nothing to stop an oil baron buying a club but still working within FFP rules.
It might be more of a 5-10 year project.
People want instant success.
Absolutely. I also don't understand why rich clubs are not allowed to buy refs. It's absurd to tell owners how they can spend their own money.
Absurd to have to abide by a speeding limit when you own a fast car.
The FA/Premier League showing a distinct lack of backbone since this news broke. No comment from them, no clarification as to what penalties City may face. Hell, are they even considering their own investigation?
The game is gone.
The game is gone.
Hahah. Owners. Ever heard of a football club? Ever heard of fair competition? Ever heard of competition rules? Bye now
Owners pumping in money is one thing. When it's a bleeding country that's doing it, it's a little bit different tbh. This isn't another Jack Walker. Football is in danger of losing all touch with reality with likes of PSG n City etc. They had to do something. And they knew the rules, signed up to them and still cheated and hid payments and exaggerated sponsorship payments. They can be against the rules in principle if they wish to but they can't break them and expect no punishment.
Madrid, Barca, Bayern, United, Liverpool, Arsenal etc have spent decades building up their businesses and reputations in the game for some tinpot club with a Sheikh financing them to come along and change the picture. Of course it wasn't going to go down well. That's life. If you set up a fizzy drinks business tomorrow for example and over time it started to take off and do well do you think Coca Cola Co would sit by and do nothing? No. They'd try to squeeze you out of the market or even buy out your business. The historic Elite clubs are acting like Coca Cola in this instance. They don't want change.
Madrid, Barca, Bayern, United, Liverpool, Arsenal etc have spent decades building up their businesses and reputations in the game for some tinpot club with a Sheikh financing them to come along and change the picture. Of course it wasn't going to go down well. That's life. If you set up a fizzy drinks business tomorrow for example and over time it started to take off and do well do you think Coca Cola Co would sit by and do nothing? No. They'd try to squeeze you out of the market or even buy out your business. The historic Elite clubs are acting like Coca Cola in this instance. They don't want change.
"The billionaire owner of our rivals spends so much money on their club while our billionaire owner won't. So unfair"
Competition rules are an entirely different matter btw, learn to read before replying to me. Bye
Absolutely. Because every club has a billionaire owner. Fantastic point.
As is the second one. Financial rules clearly have nothing whatsoever to do with competition rules.
A great post in full.
So? How the feck does preventing money being pumped into the game is a good thing? Because you're a fan of a club without advantage, so it's unfair to you? Great point.
In no way, shape or form does a rule that effectively curtails potential earnings for the players make sense
Great reading comprehension
Yes because more money is exactly what the game needs. A very select number of clubs having unlimited power and resource, basically that of entire countries with massive wealth, can only lead to good things for the game. Good one.
Careful now. Just a few seconds until your reading comprehension will be put into question.
I think its the scale and the source of the money being pumped into the these teams thats a problem. The fit and proper ownership rules are probably a better means of addressing it but they might as well not exist. And yes buying Neymar and Mbappe in the same window, doubling the transfer record in the process, despite rules limiting how much you can spend doesn't feel healthy for the game. But then i suppose Real bought Kaka and Ronaldo in the same window so its been a problem for a while.
Having City and PSG exist is bad enough, i wouldn't want to encourage more investment of that sort. FFP might not be the best or fairest way of discouraging them but its better than nothing.
Having City and PSG exist is bad enough, i wouldn't want to encourage more investment of that sort. FFP might not be the best or fairest way of discouraging them but its better than nothing.
Yes indeed, we’re obviously missing something here.
That is happening right now, even with FFP
And the game appears to be doing better than ever
This is a major problem for me. It's all very well people saying that owners should be able to spend what they like, but when they artificially inflate transfer prices so "normal" clubs are having to shell out 30 - 50 million quid for average players it starts to become a major problem for any club not financed beyond their natural means.
Chelsea were bad enough, but at least they seem to have leveled off and at least attempted to live within their means. It doesn't feel like that at all with City and PSG. How much of their infrastructure and resources can they actually afford if they had to pay for it?
Great news for football. Hope it stays like it is after the CAS.
No, it really isn’t.
Yes, it really is. As demonstrated by the increasingly bigger tv and sponsorships deals, which are motivated by the increasingly larger audience.
Football fans by and large like the way things are right now
Are you arguing with yourself in two paragraphs of the same post? First paragraph is a valid reply to the flawed analogy in the second
And how is that possibly related to nation states backing select football clubs?
Still don't see how this gets upheld without PSG also being affected.
It'll get reduced/written off.
It'll get reduced/written off.
The ironic thing is City are more like Coca Cola, rather than the small, hard working fizzy drinks business.
You should tell the whole world, only way they don't win it...
You made the point that reducing the game to a small numbers of select elite clubs wouldn't be good for the game. I merely pointed out that that is already the case
In fact, it's highly likely that the number of elite clubs would be smaller without sugar daddy owners
But, yeah, that has little relevance to my argument. Which is that not allowing people to invest their own money into their own companies is bullshit. Edit: or since we're talking about the specific case of FFP, the arbitrary cap on ownership investment is bs.
Last edited:
Because the problem isn't that they were outside of ffp but that they lied about the source of funds, and falsified the accounts.
Just because they have not commented doesn't mean things aren't happening.
They have to be really careful here with both what they say and what actions they take as the City legal dept. will be all over any mistakes.
https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFile.../Regulations/02/60/37/12/2603712_DOWNLOAD.pdf
Article 4 which talks about the admission criteria and procedure has this interesting point:
4.01(f)
confirm in writing that they themselves, as well as their players and officials, agree to recognise the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne, Switzerland, as defined in the relevant provisions of the UEFA Statutes and agree that any proceedings before the CAS concerning admission to, participation in or exclusion from the competition will be held in an expedited manner in accordance with the CAS Code of Sports-related Arbitration and with the directions issued by the CAS, including for provisional or super-provisional measures, to the explicit exclusion of any state court;
I'm not a lawyer but if I'm understanding this point correctly, CAS will be the final decision making body here?
Article 4 which talks about the admission criteria and procedure has this interesting point:
4.01(f)
confirm in writing that they themselves, as well as their players and officials, agree to recognise the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne, Switzerland, as defined in the relevant provisions of the UEFA Statutes and agree that any proceedings before the CAS concerning admission to, participation in or exclusion from the competition will be held in an expedited manner in accordance with the CAS Code of Sports-related Arbitration and with the directions issued by the CAS, including for provisional or super-provisional measures, to the explicit exclusion of any state court;
I'm not a lawyer but if I'm understanding this point correctly, CAS will be the final decision making body here?
Citeh bought around 16 first team players the season they got shieked.
15 the following season.
8 the season after that.
No other club in the world could do that. Not even the elite rich clubs.
Now all they have to do is outbid the elite clubs for any player in the world. Not so fair after all
Yeah, that's what it states, but this will only be the case if CAS gets involved as an arbitrator.
Of course it is. They can spend it however they like, but if they want to play in UEFA competitions, they have to play by UEFA rules. Nobody is forcing them.
PSG should then get a 5 season Champions league. The Neymar and Mbappe deals alone are worth two season bans each.
While it’s not been fun watching City win over the last few years, it has been funny watching their fans ditch their principles. They made a great noise in the 90s about how they were all about loyalty while we were about money, and how they were authentic while we were plastic. Now they dont care if what they’re doing is cheating, or even if its done to protect the image of human rights abusers, they’ll do anything to keep hold of the money that put them at the top.
This is football mate. It’s a competitive sport, we’re not talking companies here.
I’m all for a fairer system, however trading a relatively small number of elite clubs, whose power was built on reputation and prestige, with an even smaller number of elite clubs (currently 2), whose power are built on limitless wealth and legal power, is not levelling the playing field. That one club has more resource behind it than the rest of the league combined, and can scare off the sports ruling bodies with threats, that’s all healthy for the sport yeah?
Try asking the French football league how the current model is working, because that’s where a couple other leagues could easily be headed.
I really don’t understand any pro-City arguments.
We can debate who is the best striker in the PL, Ole In/Ole Out, VAR and all sorts of footballing topics and both sides genuinely have something worthwhile to say. There is a debate to be had.
There is no debate here. They agreed to rules. The broke those rules. They lied about how they were breaking the rules and then proceeded to win trophies with players that shouldn’t have been playing for them. Scoring goals they had no right to score.
Their squad is crazy and gives them an unfair advantage over every other team.
That doesn’t even include the fact that we don’t even know the players real wages.
It is cut and dry and their titles should be taken away. Simple.
We can debate who is the best striker in the PL, Ole In/Ole Out, VAR and all sorts of footballing topics and both sides genuinely have something worthwhile to say. There is a debate to be had.
There is no debate here. They agreed to rules. The broke those rules. They lied about how they were breaking the rules and then proceeded to win trophies with players that shouldn’t have been playing for them. Scoring goals they had no right to score.
Their squad is crazy and gives them an unfair advantage over every other team.
That doesn’t even include the fact that we don’t even know the players real wages.
It is cut and dry and their titles should be taken away. Simple.
Last edited: