Time To Break FFP?

[gwladysnight]

That seems to be a common mis conception. There was no mention of a technicality, nor only being the 5 year delay. It was a factor, but not the only one. The far bigger one was that the case against City was thrown out.

It was 2-1 majority decision. After a whole chunk of the evidence was thrown out due to it being time barred.

There were two charges. The first was that City had obstructed UEFA the governing body. They were found guilty and fined £10m. The second was thrown out by a majority of 2-1 because UEFA could not prove their case without the time barred evidence.

UEFA believed that they were within the 5 year time period because City were charged within that period. City's lawyers argued the whole case should have been dealt with within 5 years. Given that the reason that the case wasn't dealt within 5 years was down to City's obstruction of the process then it is clear that it was a technicality.

City avoided the most serious charge by deliberately breaking another rule. It was an excellent strategy by City's lawyers. However, UEFA will almost certainly tighten up the rules.

 

[Blues Harp]

open your eyes.

open yours lad....we are miles away from the top 6, even with the "money we have from the Mosh"
mid table mediocrity is all the top management want

 

[ForeverBlue92]

Just break it FFS - Richarlison is off anyway next summer

 

[Gilbert..]

In all seriousness, clubs like Leicester and Sheffield United have shown you don't need to break financial fair play, you just need players with desire and something to prove who will listen to a good manager. We keep signing physically and mentally weak players who have no passion or desire to put their body on the line for the club (Richarlison and Digne excepted).

100%. If i could have liked this twice i would have.
Im in another thread arguing the toss over alex iwobi as some try and justify it.
Its no wonder we're so lame. Team has zero character because we have bought exactly that type of player.

 

[Mildredblues]

It was 2-1 majority decision. After a whole chunk of the evidence was thrown out due to it being time barred.

There were two charges. The first was that City had obstructed UEFA the governing body. They were found guilty and fined £10m. The second was thrown out by a majority of 2-1 because UEFA could not prove their case without the time barred evidence.

UEFA believed that they were within the 5 year time period because City were charged within that period. City's lawyers argued the whole case should have been dealt with within 5 years. Given that the reason that the case wasn't dealt within 5 years was down to City's obstruction of the process then it is clear that it was a technicality.

City avoided the most serious charge by deliberately breaking another rule. It was an excellent strategy by City's lawyers. However, UEFA will almost certainly tighten up the rules.

One interesting question I have is about the composition of the CAS 3 member panel. It was supposed to consist of 1 person recommended by City, one by UEFA and another neutral person. Instead Man City somehow got to choose 2 panel members and unsurprisingly they were the 2 who choose to challenge and overturn the verdict. Why didn't UEFA insist on the CAS neutral member not being appointed by City?
City literally decided their own case by appointing their own jury in the majority.

 

[TheSecondComing]

If this got voted on again, Everton would vote in its favour.

 

[Gilbert..]

FFP is the biggest swizz of the modern game.
Its real reason is to prevent clubs getting above their stations and challenging the established clubs guarenteed income of a dozen clubs around Europe.
The biggest hypocrites being bayern munich.

 

[Tin-Tin]

Just break it FFS - Richarlison is off anyway next summer

My take on it. Go for it with better value for money this year and then sell a Digne/Richarlison next year if we are over the limit. Or we could do a Wolves and come to an agreement.

Lets face it, if we dont improve and are crap next year one or both of those will be off anyway. May as well try and improve the squad while we already have a few quality players.

 

[gazzaa2]

In all seriousness, clubs like Leicester and Sheffield United have shown you don't need to break financial fair play, you just need players with desire and something to prove who will listen to a good manager. We keep signing physically and mentally weak players who have no passion or desire to put their body on the line for the club (Richarlison and Digne excepted).

Moyes did it here. For all his faults he knew how to build a good side on a budget.

 

[matty1878]

open yours lad....we are miles away from the top 6, even with the "money we have from the Mosh"
mid table mediocrity is all the top management want

ye of course they hired CA for mid table mediocrity

Jesus wept. Now again OPEN your eyes

 

[Terrarian]

I just want us to be competitive, I'd take us turning up at relegation threatened sides at this point. We've become a basket case.

 

[Tipp blue]

Realistically moshiri is well aware that if we are looking like we are going to break FFP then all we need to do is sell Richarlson to get out of it.

 

[ForeverBlue92]

Realistically moshiri is well aware that if we are looking like we are going to break FFP then all we need to do is sell Richarlson to get out of it.

Agree with what you mean mate but I dont think we are breaking FFP - not this season anyway.

AsI mentioned last accounts published didnt include Usmanovs £30 million naming rights deal or the profit we made last summer just gone - I don't know if UEFA include losses due to covid or not so unsure on that tbh.

Obviously if we want to spend big next summer the club either needs Usmanov to start paying us his USM naming rights immediately or we sell someone for big money like as you say Richarlison.

Richarlison's book value will be £24 million in the summer - therefore if we sold him for £100 million thats £76 million FFP profit - if we sold him for even more then we are completely sorted FFP speaking.

Add in Walcott? Bolasie, Sandro & Besic all off the books next summer thats alot of wages also freed up.

 

[Zatara]

@Neiler @catcherintherye @mill

Do any of you chaps know if the FFP 3 year cycle finishes this season (last + this combined) then would that mean next summer we can start from scratch.

Meaning, next summer + 2022 + 2023 we have the £105mil threshold again and start at zero?

Was just mulling this over as 2021 and 2022 we also have 16 contracts expiring which would be a huge opportunity for us.

 

[mill]

My reading of it is that its rolling 3 years. So as you add the current year, you knock one off.

so current would be 19/20, 18/19, 17/18.

with the thing they’ve done they’ve extended the current period by 12 months.

so the periods would be 19/20 & 20/21, 18/19, 17/18.

17/18 was a bad one for transfer spend but you are right in thinking that all our contracts roll off by the end of the current, extended period. Provided that we sell the players and bring the loss down by the summer 2021, we’d be looking very good going forward.

we’d have got the wage bill down, reduced the losses and have 17/18 dropping from the rolling period.

You’d think any sales would also make a decent profit in the current period as book value would be reduced so much already (we’ve already taken the majority of the amortised cost hit). Also means market values have time to inflate again.

You could probably estimate how much we need to make back in sales based on our current deficit, player book values and the players to be sold.

what I don’t know is if 19/20 & 20/21, will always be counted as a single period. If not, we’d lose both 17/18 & 18/19 once 21/2 is added (which again is great for our spending).

It’s why we’ve been able to spend. Ideally, we put ourselves in a position to be self sustainable. But, provided Moshiri *wants* to spend and isn’t bothered by the fact that’s he’s already wasted money, we have scope to spend AND remain compliant.

@Zatara