Financial Fair Play discussion

moomba

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
52,345
Likes
15,698
Location
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City
“Only in the BF world”? Come on literally everyone is of the opinion City are fixers, proving it conclusively is the problem though. If OJ Simpson can get away with murder...
Read again. Only in the BF world would.me wanting us charged, tried and.if.guilty be punished be seen as some form of.defence. or something only a paid employee of the club would say.

I'm well aware many think we are.guilty of offences, although I suspect very few know what actual offence they think we're guilty of.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Ed_Gein

You are nex !
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Posts
14,970
Likes
5,496
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
LFC, BVB, Rangers, Valencia, Storm
Come on guys, city's rise to the top has all been created through sincere sponsorships and so on. With one of the largest fan bases world wide and selling out the stadium for every game is really difficult to argue that they've cooked to books and found loop holes in every rule to find advantages in an unsporting manner
 

ADL9798

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Posts
11,233
Likes
12,118
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Liverpool
uefa are scared of ffp being pulled apart in the courts. hence why the punishment we got was settled, and why ffp has since loosened. uefa still have to answer to eu laws.
I think most football fans, managers, owners, etc would rather FFP rules were debated in court through an open and transparent process than some clubs deciding they don’t like the rules, then surreptitiously and systematically breaking them to gain advantage. Perhaps I’m cynical, but I think there’s a reason why PSG/City didn’t go down the former route despite all the blustering.

EU law applies in some respects but on a fundamental level the key issue here is how UEFA and the FA administer their own competitions. Tighten FFP, loosen FFP, it doesn’t matter. As long as it’s tightened or loosened for everyone.
 

moomba

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
52,345
Likes
15,698
Location
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City
I think most football fans, managers, owners, etc would rather FFP rules were debated in court through an open and transparent process than some clubs deciding they don’t like the rules, then surreptitiously and systematically breaking them to gain advantage. Perhaps I’m cynical, but I think there’s a reason why PSG/City didn’t go down the former route despite all the blustering.
I think it was just a pragmatic decision. We got a settlement we were happy with so didn't take that last resort of court action.

I wanted us to fight it at the time but that was more an emotional choice. TBH I still wish we did.

EU law applies in some respects but on a fundamental level the key issue here is how UEFA and the FA administer their own competitions. Tighten FFP, loosen FFP, it doesn’t matter. As long as it’s tightened or loosened for everyone.
You can administer your own competition but you still have to comply with the laws of the land. For example if UEFA wanted to make the champions League for white players only they wouldn't be allowed to. Their competition, same rules for all teams but illegal.
 
Last edited:

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 22, 2009
Posts
34,604
Likes
14,185
Location
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, Liverpool, Victory
I think it was just a pragmatic decision. We got a settlement we were happy with so didn't take that last resort of court action.

I wanted us to fight it at the time but that was more an emotional choice. TBH I still wish we did.



You can administer your own competition but you still have to comply with the laws of the land. For example if UEFA wanted to make the champions League for white players only they wouldn't be allowed to. Their competition, same rules for all teams but illegal.
PSG / City are also bound by EU laws and I suspect the reason either club doesn't complain too much about EU market rules is because of this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_aid_(European_Union)

Both PSG and City receive significant income from state based entities. I doubt that either club has applied to have that aid approved by the EU (happy to be corrected on this if it isn't the case) in the marketplace. I believe Tebas was prepared to take a case to the EU about this very thing.
 

moomba

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
52,345
Likes
15,698
Location
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City
PSG / City are also bound by EU laws and I suspect the reason either club doesn't complain too much about EU market rules is because of this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_aid_(European_Union)

Both PSG and City receive significant income from state based entities. I doubt that either club has applied to have that aid approved by the EU (happy to be corrected on this if it isn't the case) in the marketplace. I believe Tebas was prepared to take a case to the EU about this very thing.
Yeah, Tebas has been threatening to take us to court for a good few years now although I think instead of suing us he'd have to sue UEFA for not enforcing whatever law he thinks we've broken.

FWIW, FFP has a limit of 30% of income coming from state owned entities. We're currently around 13% but that will drop with the Puma deal.

No idea where the 30% comes from but it is in the FFP toolkit.
 
Last edited:

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 22, 2009
Posts
34,604
Likes
14,185
Location
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, Liverpool, Victory
Yeah, Tebas has been threatening to take us to court for a good few years now.

FWIW, FFP has a limit of 30% of income coming from state owned entities. We're currently around 13% but that will drop with the Puma deal.

No idea where the 30% comes from but it is in the FFP toolkit.
I dont care what FFP says. EU marketplace rules dont allow it at all unless approved.
 

moomba

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
52,345
Likes
15,698
Location
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City
Which law?

And where do you find details on which transactions with state owned entities have been approved.

I'm keen to see if we applied and we're rejected or just didn't apply.

Also keen to see if other football clubs have bothered to seek approval for their contracts with state owned entities.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Will.B.Worth.Da.Waite

Premiership Player
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Posts
4,586
Likes
678
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Liverpool FC
The funny thing with people moaning about us breaking the rules, is that don't seem to know or care if we've broken an actual rule or not. They just want us punished.

If UEFA can prove we've broken a rule, then I'm all for us to be punished. Getting kicked out of the Champions League is infinitely better than all the pissing and moaning.
Sepp, is that you?
 

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 22, 2009
Posts
34,604
Likes
14,185
Location
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, Liverpool, Victory
Which law?

And where do you find details on which transactions with state owned entities have been approved.

I'm keen to see if we applied and we're rejected or just didn't apply.

Also keen to see if other football clubs have bothered to seek approval for their contracts with state owned entities.
A link to EU state based aid law was posted further up the page.

In any case it was City fans that have tried to claim UEFA falling foul of EU laws (which they don't).
 

moomba

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
52,345
Likes
15,698
Location
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City
A link to EU state based aid law was posted further up the page.

In any case it was City fans that have tried to claim UEFA falling foul of EU laws (which they don't).
The Wikipedia (LOL) page you linked doesn't specify that organisations have to seek approval for every transaction with a state owned entity. And it doesn't detail which approvals have been sought and which haven't.

Which means that not only do you not know whether City are required to seek approval for AD based sponsorships, you don't even know whether we've done so or not.

So your constant claims that we've breached EU law on state aid are more a case of wishful thinking than anything else.
 

moomba

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
52,345
Likes
15,698
Location
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City
Don't know it is speculation, or UEFA have announced something but it appears UEFA have opened an investigation.

Hopefully it's quite open, and public. I doubt it though. UEFA will want to keep things closed, and I have a suspicion we might refuse to answer any questions for the period we've already been punished for.

Quite looking forward to it tbh.
 

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 22, 2009
Posts
34,604
Likes
14,185
Location
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, Liverpool, Victory
Not sure how much access investigators will get to the financial records of ADUG and state owned entities that received payments from ADUG (who then funded City through "commercial" deals) to fund sponsorship agreements (if documents leaked are infact authentic).
 

Magma

Premium Platinum
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Posts
40,494
Likes
28,868
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
West Adelaide Bloods, Man City.
about ******* time. i presume at worst we get a season ban from the cl. oh no....

maybe we can get money back from porto and swansea etc for us buying their players
 
Top Bottom