Time To Break FFP?

[andy4efc]

Release the uzbek kraken

 

[Dymak]

The desire to invest has to be there first. Usmanov is wealthier than Abramovich, but many owners love FFP as it allows them an excuse to restrict their investment.

There is also the danger that the RS will sell up to some mega rich country!

But bollox to these people whose initial reaction to good news is to cack themselves into being too scared to take advantage of it by trying to make out that we will somehow be restricted when other clubs won’t.

It’s also worth acknowledging that we have recently been allowed to obtain 30 million pound in revenue for naming rights on an imaginary stadium.

Bollox to FFP! If Usmanov wants to invest then he can, but he will have to want to!

 

[kenada_blue]

Here is a quote from the CAS finding ....

"MANCHESTER CITY FC DID NOT DISGUISE EQUITY FUNDING AS SPONSORSHIP CONTRIBUTIONS BUT DID FAIL TO COOPERATE WITH THE UEFA AUTHORITIES"

So UEFA were lying?

 

[blue to the bone]

So UEFA were lying?

Imagine that. Uefa been dishonest

 

[ossie_21]

Lol at everyone thinking we’d be all ok to break FFP.

This is Everton, we would be made an example of. Absolutely nobody in this league has been banned for diving since Niasse and Lanzini nearly 3 years ago. Both victims of not being a top 6 club

We would be docked 30 points and fined £100mil if we tried anything like City did

 

[Neiler]

Thats perhaps fair. I mean we haven't seen the exact wording of the statement and I will have to have a look at that. However the BBC are reporting "FFP lies in tatters".

The reality is, the next time they try to punish someone, they will know that if they take it to CAS, the principle has been established, big fines and particularly bans are not reasonable.

Whats most damaging for UEFA, is City massively attempted to flount the rules here. They went over and above flounting the rules as they wanted to facilitate a court case. City now don't take as many liberties as City then. And we are much more cautious than City are now.

I don't think we are signing Neymar by any stretch but do think there's a lot more wriggle room for us to work in.

That is my reading of it mate, the bit i read on the ruling is as follows:


"As the charges with respect to any dishonest concealment of equity funding were clearly more significant violations than obstructing the CFCB's investigations, it was not appropriate to impose a ban on participating in UEFA's club competitions for MCFC's failure to co-operate with the CFCB's investigations alone.

"However, considering i) the financial resources of MCFC; ii) the importance of the cooperation of clubs in investigations conducted by the CFCB, because of its limited investigative means; and iii) MCFC's disregard of such principle and its obstruction of the investigations, the CAS Panel found that a significant fine should be imposed on MCFC and considered it appropriate to reduce UEFA's initial fine by 2/3, i.e. to the amount of EUR 10 million."

City were found in breach of FFP and that has been upheld. Uefa jumped the gun a bit in banning City for two years, based on them not playing ball with their investigation. The ruling this morning as i read it is not about a breach in FFP - which was upheld, but the ban on non co-operation with the investigation and the punishment of a two year ban not being proportionate, it was deemed not and reverted to a 10 mill fine, which isnt insignificant. The case isnt about FFP, more about the proportionality of punishment based on the variable of City not playing ball with Uefa in the investigation.

Im not sure its the smoking gun we are looking for on FFP. Rather CAS and UEFA are at odds on their implementation of harshness for restrictions for breaches. Just my read of it anyhow, im open minded about it however.

 

[jazzy]

So UEFA were lying?

The statement .... "Did not disguise equity funding " is pretty self explanatory.

However , elsewhere in the CAS statement they say that some of the alledged breaches were time barred.

The full reasoning behind the CAS decision, has yet to be published so I think that it is too early to draw definitive conclusions.

 

[Yarrgh]

They would be taking to court, the wealthiest man in Russia who has links to the Russian state.

I'd also add, the precadent has been set now. Rule breaches equivalent of City's will not be punished with bans. That means a sponsor agreement, 15 times the size of the biggest in the league is now, in the precadent of European law established.

Disastrous for UEFA to take this to court and have that established. Great for clubs who want to invest, it's open season.

I have looked at the judgement and can't see anything that has changed with FFP in theory. I suspect you are right though. As long as any revenue is from a legitimate source (ie not criminal) then there is very little UEFA can do about it. Interesting times. Will Everton be one of the first to test the waters? I suspect yes.

 

[jazzy]

That is my reading of it mate, the bit i read on the ruling is as follows:


"As the charges with respect to any dishonest concealment of equity funding were clearly more significant violations than obstructing the CFCB's investigations, it was not appropriate to impose a ban on participating in UEFA's club competitions for MCFC's failure to co-operate with the CFCB's investigations alone.

"However, considering i) the financial resources of MCFC; ii) the importance of the cooperation of clubs in investigations conducted by the CFCB, because of its limited investigative means; and iii) MCFC's disregard of such principle and its obstruction of the investigations, the CAS Panel found that a significant fine should be imposed on MCFC and considered it appropriate to reduce UEFA's initial fine by 2/3, i.e. to the amount of EUR 10 million."

City were found in breach of FFP and that has been upheld. Uefa jumped the gun a bit in banning City for two years, based on them not playing ball with their investigation. The ruling this morning as i read it is not about a breach in FFP - which was upheld, but the ban on non co-operation with the investigation and the punishment of a two year ban not being proportionate, it was deemed not and reverted to a 10 mill fine, which isnt insignificant.

Im not sure its the smoking gun we are looking for on FFP. Rather CAS and UEFA are at odds on their implementation of harshness for restrictions for breaches. Just my read of it anyhow, im open minded about it however.

I think that your interpretation of their decision is wrong.

You have missed out the fundamental statement that "City did not disguise equity funding "

The reason for reducing the fine and rejecting the ban is that the alledged dishonest concealment were the more serious charges ( on which they were found not gulity ) and therefore the new fine reflects their conduct in failing to cooperate with the investigation - which they were found in breach of.

 

[funkygibson]

Stephen warnock on sky crying about the CAS ruling. Basically saying It’s the wrong decision as FFP was doing a great job in maintaining a level playing field in the league.

 

[Neiler]

I think that your interpretation of their decision is wrong.

You have missed out the fundamental statement that "City did not disguise equity funding "

The reason for reducing the fine and rejecting the ban is that the alledged dishonest concealment were the more serious charges ( on which they were found not gulity ) and therefore the new fine reflects their conduct in failing to cooperate with the investigation - which they were found in breach of.

If they arent guilty then why have they been fined 10 million Euro?

Im open minded, but i'd stick to my interpretation, as it says " "As the charges with respect to any dishonest concealment of equity funding were clearly more significant violations than obstructing the CFCB's investigations,"

Im sure more skilled people then me will be along in the media to analyse. Thats just my take on it, im not convinced this changes much to be honest.

 

[Alanbileysfeathercut]

Door is wide open now.

 

[Dymak]

Lol at everyone thinking we’d be all ok to break FFP.

This is Everton, we would be made an example of. Absolutely nobody in this league has been banned for diving since Niasse and Lanzini nearly 3 years ago. Both victims of not being a top 6 club

We would be docked 30 points and fined £100mil if we tried anything like City did

I don’t think City have ever even been threatened with being docked a single point by the Premier League.

We have already been allowed to receive 30 million pounds for first dibs on the naming rights of a stadium that doesn’t even exist.

City have just been told that their owner topping up the sponsorship money from one of their sponsorship companies isn’t a breach of any kind. Or, if you interpret it differently like some have done, it’s led to a 10 million Euro fine.

If Usmanov wants to invest, he can do so, and there won’t be any deductions of 60 points and 100 million pound fines just because we are Everton.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

If they arent guilty then why have they been fined 10 million Euro?

Im open minded, but i'd stick to my interpretation, as it says " "As the charges with respect to any dishonest concealment of equity funding were clearly more significant violations than obstructing the CFCB's investigations,"

Im sure more skilled people then me will be along in the media to analyse. Thats just my take on it, im not convinced this changes much to be honest.

The fine is for their failure to cooperate fully with the investigation, due to their mistrust in UEFA’s behaviour over the entire process.

CAS have ruled that UEFA failed to fully corroborate the alleged FFP rule breaks, primarily as it ran an entire case based on stolen and out of context emails.

This is an epic fail by UEFA.

 

[blulouie]

If they arent guilty then why have they been fined 10 million Euro?

Im open minded, but i'd stick to my interpretation, as it says " "As the charges with respect to any dishonest concealment of equity funding were clearly more significant violations than obstructing the CFCB's investigations,"

Im sure more skilled people then me will be along in the media to analyse. Thats just my take on it, im not convinced this changes much to be honest.

Looks to me like the only thing City were guilty of is not co-operating with the UEFA investigation.
Not sure why there's even the fine still in place , even tho its much lower @ £10 mil.