Ah yes, those lovely gentle Italian fans that never ever hurt anybody or got involved in extreme violence. Dead sheep, motor scooters, explosives ...............
[Football] Man City banned from European competitions for next 2 seaons
- Thread starter PILTDOWN MAN
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
highflyer
Well-known member
- Jan 21, 2016
- 2,554
For financial cheating it may be about the evidence available.The leaks have provided evidence pertinent to Man city that may not be available in regard to actions of other clubs
The pathetic lack of action in regard to overt racism by supporters of clubs (from any country) is another matter.
I’m more interested to see what the PL are going to do if they are found guilty.
Titles being taken away would happen, but would other clubs pile in and start to seek compensation?
Teams that missed out on European football?
Teams relegated?
Titles being taken away would happen, but would other clubs pile in and start to seek compensation?
Teams that missed out on European football?
Teams relegated?
blue-shifted
Banned
UEFA have money of course, but several orders of magnitude less than the clubs they are charged with disciplining. This issue they will have is if They ban a City or Madrid or Juve, that gets overturned in CAS a couple of years later and are then sued for loss of all earnings resulting from the ban. With the broadcasting income, gates and prize money from the Champions League, that would amount to a catastrophic financial loss to UEFA.
City have got nothing to lose by playing hardball as they have unlimited wealth. They are hoping UEFA lose their nerve. It's possible
blue-shifted
Banned
Usually, (Like when Tevez played for West Ham to knock us out of the cup) they don't go back and reinstate. City, I'm sure will keep all the trophies and not be made to pay back any prize money. The alternative is way too messy
Postman Pat
Well-known member
Interesting piece in the Guardian yesterday saying that by going after City, UEFA could end up losing all of the power and clubs may find other competitions to play in.
But the ramifications could still be seismic. What if City spend their two years out of Uefa competition playing lucrative friendlies around the world? What if they show that you don’t actually need Uefa and its (already barely significant) concerns for smaller clubs to thrive? What if Fifa were willing to provide the umbrella of a new competition? That has always been the existential threat hanging over Uefa.
Everywhere the old conventions are falling away, institutions that seemed inviolable proving impotent before those willing to ignore them. This could be football’s moment.
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...wo-year-ban-may-be-seismic-not-least-for-uefa
But the ramifications could still be seismic. What if City spend their two years out of Uefa competition playing lucrative friendlies around the world? What if they show that you don’t actually need Uefa and its (already barely significant) concerns for smaller clubs to thrive? What if Fifa were willing to provide the umbrella of a new competition? That has always been the existential threat hanging over Uefa.
Everywhere the old conventions are falling away, institutions that seemed inviolable proving impotent before those willing to ignore them. This could be football’s moment.
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...wo-year-ban-may-be-seismic-not-least-for-uefa
It would be legitimately hilarious if on the eve of winning the PL title this season "for the first time" City are retrospectively stripped of their title from last season and it goes to Liverpool, thus negating the whole fawning press coverage.
UEFA is worth billions. It doesn't matter how much the clubs are worth, billions is easily enough to pay for the top lawyers, particularly if they're in the right (meaning the clubs will end up paying for it).
No, because they can allow the clubs to compete while the case goes through the CAS, and the ban can be afterwards. And it also doesn't answer why they ban Man City, but not all the others.
It wouldn't be catastrophic, because UEFA are worth enough to pay it. Not that it would happen, as described above.
Ninja Elephant
Doctor Elephant
- Feb 16, 2009
- 18,855
What I find quite funny is the arguments from the City fans that the club hasn't done anything wrong. There are a few things here - 1) You have to totally ignore the annual lavish spending without actually generating significant fees from player sales and 2) You have to be prepared to accept mental "sponsorship" deals as financially acceptable and justified rather than deals which stink to high heaven and are obvious circumventions of the FFP rules.
worthingseagull123
Well-known member
- May 5, 2012
- 2,688
I was having a dig at holier than thou Liverpool.
I feel no pity for Man City for breaking the rules.
Football finance is in a speculation bubble. Debts in between clubs are increasing for the first time in 5+ years, and the clubs all over Europe expect the footbal economy to keep growing, which is far from certain - quite the reverse. The bigger clubs in Premier League spend about £1b more abroad than they recieve, and a lot of clubs all over Europe are dependent on this spending to continue. Meanwhile inside the Premier League, the smaller clubs depend on the opposite: they need big clubs outside the UK to keep buying their players.
This is a very dangerous bubble and some of the wiser owners (like Tony Bloom) have decided to cut spending and put more emphasis on youth production, much to the frustration of their fans but very likely a wise move in the mid-term future.
Though this bubble is not widely discussed yet, I think the powers that be will realise that they cant strangle the economical locomotive (since City will probably spend considerably less without participation in CL) that is Manchester City without consequences for the football economy in general, and I think they will get their Europe ban lifted. Too bad, since I hate them, but clubs need money to pay their transfers debts and need teams like City in order to be able to do that, since income is growing slower than spendings.
This is a very dangerous bubble and some of the wiser owners (like Tony Bloom) have decided to cut spending and put more emphasis on youth production, much to the frustration of their fans but very likely a wise move in the mid-term future.
Though this bubble is not widely discussed yet, I think the powers that be will realise that they cant strangle the economical locomotive (since City will probably spend considerably less without participation in CL) that is Manchester City without consequences for the football economy in general, and I think they will get their Europe ban lifted. Too bad, since I hate them, but clubs need money to pay their transfers debts and need teams like City in order to be able to do that, since income is growing slower than spendings.
Weststander
Well-known member
I did spot that.
But genuinely, the weekend phone ins were dominated by an endless supply of Spurs and Arsenal supporters (surprisingly few ManU and Liverpool, unsurprisingly no Chelski). Elated and also bitter than ManC had fraudulently given themselves a huge financial advantage in player budgets, cheating their way to trophies over their hopes. Perhaps most Liverpool fans are enjoying football just now, whilst Spurs and Arsenal fans feel robbed by the last ten years of Citeh’s cheating?
As a footnote, Wenger could not hide his satisfaction today. He called out ManC as financial dopers years ago, when most wouldn’t listen.
Looking at the table it would be Everton and United that benefited that season - Everton would be in the CL and United in Europa.
Everton could argue Cities cheating affected quite a bit.
HAILSHAM SEAGULL
Well-known member
- Nov 9, 2009
- 10,359
Great article by Martin Samuels today, well worth a read.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...ramed-UEFA-Europes-privileged-elite-BENT.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...ramed-UEFA-Europes-privileged-elite-BENT.html
Neville's Breakfast
Well-known member
Excellent article. Unfortunately, many supporters are complicit in this protectionism. Endless debates about how ‘big’ a club is and bitter condemnation of success achieved by anyone outside the elite.
Horton's halftime iceberg
Blooming Marvellous
I thought they ended up paying the £42 million fine and getting a transfer embargo, but this was an EFL fine and punishment.
I think Leicester avoided it as they stayed up in the PL.
Bournemouth have paid a 4.75 million and 7 odd million fine due to £40 odd million loses in the EFL. Maxim Denim is a billionaire and I cannot see how a small club like Bournemouth could challenge these loses on what they generate from match day and off field commercial activity.
QPRs fine was much smaller than that. Possible 9 million [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION] ?
Horton's halftime iceberg
Blooming Marvellous
I thought it was about £20 million cash and the directors had to write of £20 odd millions in shares and loans.
It was quoted at £42m fine but in reality was
£22m of loans that were never going to be repaid were formally written off by being converted into shares.
£17m fine spread over 13 years from the date of the offence, so if you work this out at a single payment at the date of the offence (and use a fair overdraft rate of say 6% a year) this works out as £9m
£3m in EFL legal fees that would never have had to have been paid had QPR admitted their breach to begin with.
IMO only the fine is a true punishment, which works out as £9m compared to the £170m the club earned in Premier League broadcasting fees and parachute payments.