Time To Break FFP?

[Neiler]

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.

Im not sure that is the case mate, can those who think this is the end of FFP help me understand their point of view?

My interpretation is above, im open minded about it.

 

[Gardocki]

Apologies if this has been covered, I'm at work and don't have time to ready beyond the last couple of pages, but will this have any implication on the Premier leagues FFP regulations? Surely those are the ones that are hampering our ability to spend - not the UEFA ones?

Think they say we can't run at a loss of more than 150mill over 3 years or something?

 

[jazzy]

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.

You might find this useful......


City may have seen their punishment reduced, but CAS still found that City contravened Article 56 of the Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations.
So what is that?

The licensee must:
a) cooperate with the licensor and the UEFA Club Financial Control Body in respect of their requests and enquiries;

b) provide the licensor and the UEFA Club Financial Control Body with all necessary information and/or relevant documents to fully demonstrate that the monitoring requirements are fulfilled, as well as any other document requested and deemed to be relevant for club monitoring decision-making, by the deadline set by the licensor and/or the UEFA administration (the report ingentity or combination of entities in respect of which information is required must be the same as for club licensing);

c) confirm that all the submitted documentation and information are complete and accurate;

d) promptly notify the licensor in writing about any subsequent events that constitute a significant change to the information previously submitted to the licensor, including a change of legal form or legal group structure.

So, that generally concerns the co-operation with UEFA in ensuring FFP rules are being adhered to.

I'm no longer practising but was a solicitor and used to reading and interpreting decisions from a Court.

City WERE NOT found gulity of disguising equity funding. This may be beause they didn't do it or because the alledged breaches were time barred.
City WERE found gulity of failing to cooperate in the investigation ( Article 58 set out above ).

Hope this helps.

 

[The_La]

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.

Wrecks my head this. FFP has widened the gap more than ever. Basically makes it so the only ways to legitimately raise and invest money ALL benefit the biggest teams. Think about it:

• You can raise money through sponsorship. Who attracts the biggest sponsorship deals? The biggest clubs who have a worldwide massive fan base. (Utd, Barca, LFC, Real, Juve etc)
• You can raise money through ticket sales. Who have the biggest stadiums and can sell the most tickets for the highest prices? That'll be the big boys again
• You can raise money through merchandise sales etc. Who sells the most merchandise? Yup....
• You can raise money through player sales. Which players attract the biggest and most premium fees? The ones who play for the biggest clubs. LFC for example manage to sell their cast offs for way higher fees than other clubs. Ibe, Solanke and Ings for example got them £55m. How much would we have got for 3 similar players?!

City and Chelsea have had to spend massively to get themselves a seat at the table, when they had none of the 4 advantages above in place at the time. And the other clubs don't like it.

I think a super league type thing will happen eventually, sadly. And it will ruin footy completely - even beyond what it is now. The game's broken......and yet we keep coming back for more.

 

[jazzy]

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.

The fine is due to a breach of Artice 58 which requires a club to cooperate in a UEFA investigatin.
CAS found that City did not cooperate and decided that the appropriate fine should be £10 m.

 

[catcherintherye]

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.

We will all need to see the full testament of what CAS says. However what we know is that the UEFA case was rejected, but the one that City accepted of holding back some information was upheld.

The precedent from this would appear to be, if you with hold information you can be fined, but if you breach the rules, in a way similar ton how City were deemed to that is not breaking the rules.

 

[Dymak]

Apologies if this has been covered, I'm at work and don't have time to ready beyond the last couple of pages, but will this have any implication on the Premier leagues FFP regulations? Surely those are the ones that are hampering our ability to spend - not the UEFA ones?

Think they say we can't run at a loss of more than 150mill over 3 years or something?

The PL have been silent towards all of City’s spending as far as I am aware; never threatened them with a single penalty. They even allowed Everton to receive 30 million pound for ‘first dibs’ on a stadium that doesn’t even exist.

 

[Neiler]

You might find this useful......


City may have seen their punishment reduced, but CAS still found that City contravened Article 56 of the Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations.
So what is that?

So, that generally concerns the co-operation with UEFA in ensuring FFP rules are being adhered to.

I'm no longer practising but was a solicitor and used to reading and interpreting decisions from a Court.

City WERE NOT found gulity of disguising equity funding. This may be beause they didn't do it or because the alledged breaches were time barred.
City WERE found gulity of failing to cooperate in the investigation ( Article 58 set out above ).

Hope this helps.

Thanks mate.

Can i ask as well, as im not clear on the part WERE NOT found guilty of disguising equity funding - i read the ruling as City were guilty, but the propotianlty of the ruling on 1) Non cooperation 2) Breach - i read it as being upheld - were to harsh by Uefa and redcued reduced by CAS - im very open to being wrong.

im not being argumentive im just trying to understand, id be delighted if this was good for Everton.

 

[Tubey]

It's a free for all now. FFP is dead.

Well, for the big clubs. They'll make exceptions for anyone threatening the status quo of course.

 

[jazzy]

We will all need to see the full testament of what CAS says. However what we know is that the UEFA case was rejected, but the one that City accepted of holding back some information was upheld.

The precedent from this would appear to be, if you with hold information you can be fined, but if you breach the rules, in a way similar ton how City were deemed to that is not breaking the rules.

City either DID NOT breach the rules , or if there was a breach UEFA were out of time for dealing with it.
This isn't rocket science

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

Im not sure that is the case mate, can those who think this is the end of FFP help me understand their point of view?

My interpretation is above, im open minded about it.

With regards to the ruling that is the case mate.

The wider implications that this has on FFP is another debate, the ruling today is clear.

Personally I was hoping that City would fail today and they’d take this to the civil courts and challenge the entire premise of FFP which imho is fundamentally anti competitive and was always sold on a false premise.

 

[Dymak]

It's a free for all now. FFP is dead.

Well, for the big clubs. They'll make exceptions for anyone threatening the status quo of course.

Maybe, but I’d say Everton are big enough to be in the group that is allowed to take the piss. We are a northern Spurs. I keep mentioning it, but being allowed to receive 30 million for first dibs on sponsoring an imaginary stadium really does give us some insight into what we will be allowed to get away with.

 

[jazzy]

Thanks mate, it does.

Can i ask as well, as im not clear on the part WERE NOT found guilty of disguising equity funding - i read the ruling as City were guilty, but the propotianlty of the ruling on 1) Non comoperation 2) Breach - i read it as being upheld - were to harsh by Uefa and redcued reduced by CAS - im very open to being wrong.

im not being argumentive im just trying to understand, id be delighted if this was good for Everton.

It is neither good or bad from an Everton point of view.

We need to see the full transcript of the decision to be sure but the staement released today states that City were not in breach of disguising equity payments. However , as note of caution , the statemnt goes onto say that UEFA were out of time in relation to some of the alleged breaches. We do not know exactly what ones at this time.

 

[Neiler]

It is neither good or bad from an Everton point of view.

We need to see the full transcript of the decision to be sure but the staement released today states that City were not in breach of disguising equity payments. However , as note of caution , the statemnt goes onto say that UEFA were out of time in relation to some of the alleged breaches. We do not know exactly what ones at this time.

Ok mate. We're all speculating until a full statement is released essentially.

 

[APN_EFC]

The funny thing with this is that if we do break FFP, we'll be the ones who are punished severely, and they make an example of us, or try out a new punishment on us