Man City banned from Europe !

[Dahnsouff]

BINGO

[sylofox]

So the ban is 20/21 and 21/22. They will end up with one yr ban so 20/21.

 

So if corinavirus cancels 20/21 tournament will that mean ban served?

[urban.spaceman]

^ Poor article IMO.

 

1. It fails to point out the differences between UEFA's FFP and EFL's FFP.

2. The EFL acknowledged we had made no attempt to deliberately deceive them and that the issues arose from a genuine difference in interpretation of the rule.

3. The EFL's rules keep changing every year.

4. Many other clubs have broken the EFL's rules either inadvertently or deliberately: Birmingham, Bournemouth, Derby, Leeds, QPR, Wolves... LOADS more.

5. Vichai didn't "bankroll his club to success" - Newcastle spent 3 times what we did in 2015/16 and they got relegated. Our intelligent scouting and recruiting won us the league.

6. We weren't "unable to spend" the £80m Maguire money - we just chose not to. We'd already bought Soyuncu the previous summer and didn't want to get ripped off. 

7. Man City have deliberately and aggressively been breaking FFP rules by signing sponsorship deals with third parties which have been 'doped' by 400% or more with investments from their owner. They've refused to cooperate, complained about the legality of the rules that they've signed up to and have already found to be cheating.

8. Even with these FFP rules in place we've developed a prosperous and sustainable model of discovering and developing talent cheaply, selling for a much higher fee and reinvesting that back into the squad. That all comes from our title win and Champions League earnings.

[st albans fox]

I disagree hugely with the sentiment of the article ...... if Man City win then I believe we are in trouble without new ownership ...... wolves, villa and Everton for a start will comfortably outspend us .....so it becomes a race to spend as much as possible to chase the golden ticket - it’s a recipe for financial meltdown !

[Dahnsouff]

12 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

I disagree hugely with the sentiment of the article ...... if Man City win then I believe we are in trouble without new ownership ...... wolves, villa and Everton for a start will comfortably outspend us .....so it becomes a race to spend as much as possible to chase the golden ticket - it’s a recipe for financial meltdown !

See, I get what you are saying (At least I think I do), but Man City are only one of many others who could comfortably outspend us and be probably more appealing. It’s the acceptance that every other club like Liverpool, Man Utd, Chelsea, etc, etc, are allowed to operate in this carefree manner without scorn. The only reason people dislike Man City is because they are “new money”.

[st albans fox]

1 minute ago, Dahnsouff said:

See, I get what you are saying (At least I think I do), but Man City are only one of many others who could comfortably outspend us and be probably more appealing. It’s the acceptance that every other club like Liverpool, Man Utd, Chelsea, etc, etc, are allowed to operate in this carefree manner without scorn. The only reason people dislike Man City is because they are “new money”.

The existing system has us competing just below the top six clubs .......my concern is that if ffp is dismantled via a successful appeal, we will end up competing below that second level in the prem as we will lag behind a group of clubs who will outspend us ..... that doesn’t mean we will necessarily drop below them performance wise but generally, the higher the spend, the higher the finishing position .....

[Dahnsouff]

5 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

The existing system has us competing just below the top six clubs .......my concern is that if ffp is dismantled via a successful appeal, we will end up competing below that second level in the prem as we will lag behind a group of clubs who will outspend us ..... that doesn’t mean we will necessarily drop below them performance wise but generally, the higher the spend, the higher the finishing position .....

Again, it’s hard to disagree, but FFP in its current guise reinforces this divide by only letting those with historic revenue spend. I have no idea what the solution is unless we cap all clubs irregardless of revenue. (That is obviously never going to happen) 

[Sly]

I disagree with the article. 
 

I disagree with the principle of FFP though. It’s restrictive of trade and keeps the poor, poor; then the rich, richer. 
 

Either adopt a UEFA wide maximum salary cap system, or scrap it altogether. 
 

You can’t have a system, that protects the elite.
 

If I went and purchased a vacuum company, then poured millions into it to make it carbon neutral, easily accessible and the best product on the market; rivalling Hoover and Dyson. The world would be up in arms with outrage if someone tried to fine me for wanting to succeed and take on the establish brands! That’s what FFP is, it’s restriction of trade. 
 

Stupid bloody system.
 

 

Edited 27 February 2020 by Sly

[st albans fox]

5 minutes ago, Sly said:

I disagree with the article. 
 

I disagree with the principle of FFP though. It’s restrictive of trade and keeps the poor, poor; then the rich, richer. 
 

Either adopt a UEFA wide maximum salary cap system, or scrap it altogether. 
 

You can’t have a system, that protects the elite.
 

If I went and purchased a vacuum company, then poured millions into it to make it carbon neutral, easily accessible and the best product on the market; rivalling Hoover and Dyson. The world would be up in arms with outrage if someone tried to fine me for wanting to succeed and take on the establish brands! That’s what FFP is, it’s restriction of trade. 
 

Stupid bloody system.
 

 

Your principles are admirable ....

 

I wish I had them ....

 

l guess I’m too selfish ... I don’t want us dropping below teams like villa and wolves .......

Edited 27 February 2020 by st albans fox

[Sly]

17 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Your principles are admirable ....

 

I wish I had them ....

 

l guess I’m too selfish ... I don’t want us dropping below teams like villa and wolves .......

You can be successful without money.

 

It’s harder but not impossible.

 

 

[Chrysalis]

2 hours ago, Dahnsouff said:

Again, it’s hard to disagree, but FFP in its current guise reinforces this divide by only letting those with historic revenue spend. I have no idea what the solution is unless we cap all clubs irregardless of revenue. (That is obviously never going to happen) 

The solution as what you said, but also as you said wont happen as the big 6 will never agree to it for obvious reasons.

 

I think the restriction of trade argument has merit, absolutely no question, but will it win out in a legal battle, I think we about to find out, it may well be possible that with the threat of the higher level court case, the first appeal might even win to remove the threat to FFP itself.

 

I also agree that Everton and Wolves would probably outspend us if there was no FFP, the evidence points towards our owners not been willing to break the bank.

Edited 27 February 2020 by Chrysalis

[Lambert09]

So I’ve just had a thought on how coronavirus is going to save man city. 

 

Due to so many teams being reliant on tv revenue, if not every club. The potential of loss of tv revenue is going to lead to clubs  having to sell all prized assets to balance their books for future seasons. Even in this situation who is going to be buying these players as the big clubs will be in the same situation.  

 

If Citys appeal is rejected it will set a precedent on clubs being punished for not meeting the FFP targets. But come next year potentially the majority of clubs will be out of line as they are stuck paying large wages that would usually be balanced by the tv income. As well as prize money for finishes which would also be lost if the season is void. 

 

Because of this, I genuinely think City will be given a free pass as this would be a bad time to set this precedent. 

 

We might be in a a situation where the only way to keep clubs functioning is to allow cash injections from their owners. 

 

The other alternative, which may actually come from all of this is that teams boycott UEFA and allow fifa to create their money spinning super league. 

 

Does anyone one have any information that might contradict this? 

Edited 22 March 2020 by Lambert09

[Ian Nacho]

26 minutes ago, Lambert09 said:

So I’ve just had a thought on how coronavirus is going to save man city. 

 

Due to so many teams being reliant on tv revenue, if not every club. The potential of loss of tv revenue is going to lead to clubs  having to sell all prized assets to balance their books for future seasons. Even in this situation who is going to be buying these players as the big clubs will be in the same situation.  

 

If Citys appeal is rejected it will set a precedent on clubs being punished for not meeting the FFP targets. But come next year potentially the majority of clubs will be out of line as they are stuck paying large wages that would usually be balanced by the tv income. As well as prize money for finishes which would also be lost if the season is void. 

 

Because of this, I genuinely think City will be given a free pass as this would be a bad time to set this precedent. 

 

We might be in a a situation where the only way to keep clubs functioning is to allow cash injections from their owners. 

 

The other alternative, which may actually come from all of this is that teams boycott UEFA and allow fifa to create their money spinning super league. 

 

Does anyone one have any information that might contradict this? 

I think the losses which are the issue go back a few years, which means Man City would still get punished. I think FFP rules may get waivered this year though as most clubs will be making a loss, especially those in the EFL. 

[MPH]

2 hours ago, Lambert09 said:

So I’ve just had a thought on how coronavirus is going to save man city. 

 

Due to so many teams being reliant on tv revenue, if not every club. The potential of loss of tv revenue is going to lead to clubs  having to sell all prized assets to balance their books for future seasons. Even in this situation who is going to be buying these players as the big clubs will be in the same situation.  

 

If Citys appeal is rejected it will set a precedent on clubs being punished for not meeting the FFP targets. But come next year potentially the majority of clubs will be out of line as they are stuck paying large wages that would usually be balanced by the tv income. As well as prize money for finishes which would also be lost if the season is void. 

 

Because of this, I genuinely think City will be given a free pass as this would be a bad time to set this precedent. 

 

We might be in a a situation where the only way to keep clubs functioning is to allow cash injections from their owners. 

 

The other alternative, which may actually come from all of this is that teams boycott UEFA and allow fifa to create their money spinning super league. 

 

Does anyone one have any information that might contradict this? 

Just to point out that man cities illegal activity is not resulting from this season but from previous seasons. i do think you make a good point though- and in my opinion FFP penIlties should be removed for this season as a club’s expenditure is supposed to relate directly to their income and a lot of teams are going to take a massive hit this year.