Time To Break FFP?

[number4.]

That was one factor that was highlighted, but by no means the only factor. I mean the time stamping is another issue of weakness for UEFA. Unless they complete things, within 5 years now, no punishment can be found.

I mean the BBC< not for hyperbole used the phrase "FFP is in tatters". They took it to court, and lost.Nobody else is going to accept being taken to court.

I completely agree FFP is in tatters here and while I havent the time for a long reply to all of the above, I'm of the firm opinion today that UEFA will exhaust all avenues on their options to control this as best they can (which might be not at all)

I'm not with you on the idea that yesterday was a defining precedent locking, but is certainly a significant day. I would fully expect them to explore how they can learn from the shambles at look into how the timestamping effectively destroyed their case. Before you argue that no one mentioned the timestamp, CAS do directly, by saying some evidence was dismissed for being nonsense, the remainder timestamped. It is likely that given CAS, called this out seperatly to the dismissed evidence that is was damming but inadmissible.

Last point - the "accept the rules when entering the competition" is still completely valid and present in PL today where the home grown players rule is at odds with employment law, but none the less part of the rules.

 

[number4.]

I think we believe the same things will happen, but attach different interpretations to it.

Some of the creative solutions people are suggesting won't happen and won't need to happen. Usmanov will continue to sponsor Everton, at a broadly respectable level and nothing will happen.

The point you make is right too, UEFA didn't even want to take City to court, until Der Speigel alleged rule breaches far beyond anything we have done or would do. However even that has been thrown out.

UEFA will not be taking people to court anymore. It is a costly exercise and they won't be massively keen on throwing more money down the drain.

I dont understand (and apologies in advance if wrong) but what do you mean by UEFA taking City to court? UEFA didn't, they banned and city appealed right?

 

[Tipp blue]

Does FFP income have to come football? Could Everton the company build a hotel on the grounds where Goodison is and 20 of Uzzys "friends" can stay for half million quid a night and spend every game weekend there.

 

[catcherintherye]

I completely agree FFP is in tatters here and while I havent the time for a long reply to all of the above, I'm of the firm opinion today that UEFA will exhaust all avenues on their options to control this as best they can (which might be not at all)

I'm not with you on the idea that yesterday was a defining precedent locking, but is certainly a significant day. I would fully expect them to explore how they can learn from the shambles at look into how the timestamping effectively destroyed their case. Before you argue that no one mentioned the timestamp, CAS do directly, by saying some evidence was dismissed for being nonsense, the remainder timestamped. It is likely that given CAS, called this out seperatly to the dismissed evidence that is was damming but inadmissible.

Last point - the "accept the rules when entering the competition" is still completely valid and present in PL today where the home grown players rule is at odds with employment law, but none the less part of the rules.

But rules exist on the basis of people's consent. Thats whats been missed by LFC and MUFC fans. They require consent. This vengeful approach of UEFA doesn't work. You have to build consensus. They seem to think UEFA should act as an attack dog to defend their privilege. That has been completely exposed.

People broadly support that rule, but if it were challenged, it would fall, so football tries to do what it can to avoid provoking a challenge. The same has to be with FFP now. Do we really want to be penalising clubs for securing sponsorship deals? That needs to be knocked on the head. Go after teams with big wage bills and huges debts, thats where the crooks are.

 

[Goat]

Does FFP income have to come football? Could Everton the company build a hotel on the grounds where Goodison is and 20 of Uzzys "friends" can stay for half million quid a night and spend every game weekend there.

I doubt a load of Russian billionaires are gonna be rocking up to kip in Walton.

 

[catcherintherye]

I dont understand (and apologies in advance if wrong) but what do you mean by UEFA taking City to court? UEFA didn't, they banned and city appealed right?

For clarity, I suppose I mean UEFA partook in a series of actions that were so unjust that City had no option but to take them to court, and have the case thrown out. It was completely unnecessary.

 

[roydo]

FFP isnt in tatters.

The 5 year time bar was as a result of a settlement between City and Uefa when they got done the first time. I dont think its an actual rule. Its to stop being done twice for the same offence.

They were exonerated on the sponsorship being dodgy. It doesnt mean USM, or me come to that, can lob £1/2 Billion at the Everton Ladies team.

@Maine road Man @PaulPowersTash

Have I got that near the reality?

 

[Tipp blue]

I doubt a load of Russian billionaires are gonna be rocking up to kip in Walton.

I know, that's why me or you could be a friend of Uzzy for a weekend and stay in the hotel for the weekend, and because we are such good "friends" of him he gives us an all expenses paid trip to Liverpool, how much the hotel stay cost is his business and a job for the Everton accounts to add up.

 

[Goat]

I know, that's why me or you could be a friend of Uzzy for a weekend and stay in the hotel for the weekend, and because we are such good "friends" of him he gives us an all expenses paid trip to Liverpool, how much the hotel stay cost is his business and a job for the Everton accounts to add up.

Seems like hassle, when he could just sponsor the traffic barrier at Finch Farm for the same amount.

 

[number4.]

FFP isnt in tatters.

The 5 year time bar was as a result of a settlement between City and Uefa when they got done the first time. I dont think its an actual rule. Its to stop being done twice for the same offence.

They were exonerated on the sponsorship being dodgy. It doesnt mean USM, or me come to that, can lob £1/2 Billion at the Everton Ladies team.

@Maine road Man @PaulPowersTash

Have I got that near the reality?

that is exactly my understanding

 

[catcherintherye]

FFP isnt in tatters.

The 5 year time bar was as a result of a settlement between City and Uefa when they got done the first time. I dont think its an actual rule. Its to stop being done twice for the same offence.

They were exonerated on the sponsorship being dodgy. It doesnt mean USM, or me come to that, can lob £1/2 Billion at the Everton Ladies team.

@Maine road Man @PaulPowersTash

Have I got that near the reality?

I'm not seeing any evidence to suggest it was just or centrally the time issue. That is one factor of many. CAS exonerated them, and I havent seen anything to say UEFA's case was watertight barring the time delay. In fact the opposite.

 

[roydo]

I'm not seeing any evidence to suggest it was just or centrally the time issue. That is one factor of many. CAS exonerated them, and I havent seen anything to say UEFA's case was watertight barring the time delay. In fact the opposite.

Unless I am mistaken, CAS didnt rule on FFP per ce, they ruled on the City/Etihad sponsorship being legit. The timebarred stuff they correctly lobbed out, but again, unless I am mistaken, the reason those charges were under a timebar in the first place, was cos that was agreed between City and UEFA when they settled the first "crime".

Ergo, there isnt a 5 year timebar within the FFP rules. (I may well be wrong, but if so, why did they agree to one a few years back?)

 

[catcherintherye]

Unless I am mistaken, CAS didnt rule on FFP per ce, they ruled on the City/Etihad sponsorship being legit. The timebarred stuff they correctly lobbed out, but again, unless I am mistaken, the reason those charges were under a timebar in the first place, was cos that was agreed between City and UEFA when they settled the first "crime".

Ergo, there isnt a 5 year timebar within the FFP rules. (I may well be wrong, but if so, why did they agree to one a few years back?)

The wider reporting is that the 5 year bar, alongside other things were a problem. The 5 year bar was one factor, but nothing to suggest "the case was essentially sound but outside of the time paramaters" kind of chat.

The other interesting factor in this, is given how long it takes to bring a case, would any be able to be brought within 5 years?

 

[ForeverBlue92]

Think we'll know the clubs intentions by the stadium naming rights deal - assuming it will be announced sometime this year if its around £15-20 million a year then its the club being cautious but if its £25+ million a season type deal (which even Spurs are struggling to obtain from commercial parties) then we know they are dipping their toe/willy in the water.

 

[PaulPowersTash]

FFP isnt in tatters.

The 5 year time bar was as a result of a settlement between City and Uefa when they got done the first time. I dont think its an actual rule. Its to stop being done twice for the same offence.

They were exonerated on the sponsorship being dodgy. It doesnt mean USM, or me come to that, can lob £1/2 Billion at the Everton Ladies team.

@Maine road Man @PaulPowersTash

Have I got that near the reality?

Yes. Exactly. Its my understanding that the time bar was part of the full and final settlement put in by City's legal team (clever dudes!) in 2014 to stop UEFA raking it up again and having another go - which is exactly what they did. The did it on the excuse of the hacked emails by Rui Pinto and released by Der Spiegal which they said gave them 'new evidence'. They were champing at the bit and heavily influenced by Bayern Munich, Liverpool, United and Javier Tebas on behalf of the Spanish big two to finally ban City. They guessed they didn't having anything to lose... Except their credibility & reputation.
From what's coming out City's legal team were Rumpole Of The Bailey and UEFA's was My Cousin Vinny! Hence the unanimous decision by all 3 members of CAS to fully exonerate City.