Hello Swarbs mate, I suppose Mata means well by saying what he did but even Utd posters on here threw their hand in weeks ago. This is a very negative board or Mata is deluded.
Its meant to be a three step process to being banned; warned, fined and then banned. If true, that three seasons before a ban would be seen.
Unless the Football club is taking the piss, then its a ban or points deduction in the knockout stages
Ill rep for this in the morning (In my timezone). The way Abramovich made his wealth is abhorrent and the laundering he does through Chelsea is simply protection for his illegally obtained fortune. The money made from Sibneft and others should belong to the Russian people. Much like the people of Manchester or Liverpool would be outraged if their industrial areas were sold off for peanuts in a corrupt deal. The reason Abramovich hasn't been targeted by Putin is that he's kept cozy with the Kremlin and avoided politics that could harm the state - unlike K̶h̶o̶d̶o̶r̶k̶o̶v̶s̶k̶y̶ edit: Berezovsky (it was late and I wasn't thinking straight). He's used Chelsea as a form of public leverage against potential prosecution in Russia. Its likely that such a high profile asset would have launched him into the circles required for western protection. With this guaranteed protection, Putin cannot declare war on Abramovich. To do so would be to declare war on all wealthy people. As such Gazprom makes extreme profits that they do not have to return to the poor in Russia. Most major billionaire clubs have this type of owner history and its that, not the money that disgusts me about the nouveau riche teams. That being said neither John Henry nor the Glazers have a perfect history either - else they wouldn't be so rich. Their indiscretions are currently unknown and likely of a much smaller scale. I'll pass judgement if anything comes to light then.
I take your point but them stadiums were built for other purposes in the first instances and aren't they leased anyway? What were they meant to do, knock em down? If we couldn't afford the stadiums then that is an issue for Olympic committees etc not the football clubs that move in after the event. As for the Russia thing, again, how Roman originally got rich is nothing to do with FFP. I'm frankly not interested in debating a subject that I don't know that much about (funny how many rival fans are experts when it comes to Russian economics though). FFP can't really start getting involved in political dealings that happened years ago but when deals are clearly just ways of making a football club look better financially then they should. If Roman pays Chelsea a few million to stick his company's name on our shirt rather than directly put the money into the club, then questions should be asked for instance.
Think you'll find Swarbs lived in Russia and his Mrs is Russian and that Danilo is Serbian, I'd guess their knowledge on Eastern Europe and Russian gangsterism is far greater than yours. Just saying.
He's 100% correct. Abramovich obtained his obscene wealth by raping the natural resources of Russia, post the collapse of communism. Him & his fellow oligarchs are spending millions on paintings & yachts with money that should be going back into Russia's infrastructure. He bought Chelsea to give him Western credibility.
In the case of City, they could at least insist on a market rent, share the naming rights money, or make them pay for the stadium. Right now, Manchester council is subsidising City to a much greater degree than Madrid council subsidised Real. It's nothing to do with FFP. Madrid sold their training ground to the city council and a load of private companies in 2001, way before Roman even knew what Chelsea was. The point was your claim that it's somehow better for a rich owner to pump money into a club rather than for government money to go into a club. My point is that both your owner and City's owner's money comes directly from the state, either directly or corruptly. Morally and substantively, it is no different, it's only the amounts that are different. Madrid council actually only gave Real about £20 million for their ground - most of the money they made came from the council rezoning the land for retail development which made the value shoot up. That's hardly 'pumping money' in on the same scale that Abramovich has siphoned money out of Russia and into Chelsea.
My "expertise" (which I'm not claiming is significant) has nothing to do with who I support and the fact that it's Chelsea we are talking about. I dislike people like Abramovich using the club as a way to launder their image and profits. I should know - Partizan's (my Serbian club) president was just arrested on a corruption charge relating to the privatisation of a textile firm! He is out on bail now, and stepped down. He was probably skimming profit from us rather than investing in us - but my point stands. I know the subject. The Madrid training ground scandal was corrupt and clever but was before FFP. FFP is actually in place to protect you, City, PSG, and Monaco, along with the former G14 (including us) and CL regulars! The only clubs so far punished by it have been the likes of: FK Borac Banja Luka, FK Sarajevo and FK Zeljeznicar (Bosnia), CSKA Sofia (Bulgaria), Maccabi Netanya (Israel), FK Shkendija 79 (Macedonia), Floriana (Malta), Buducnost Podgorica and Rudar Pjevlja (Montenegro), Ruch Chorzow (Poland), Sporting Clube de Portugal (Portugal), Vaslui (Romania), Rubin Kazan (Russia), Atletico Madrid (Spain), Eskisehirspor and Fenerbahce (Turkey), etc. The rules state that you can't spend more than you make - so how is my team supposed to get into the CL? We have a tiny market and no one buys our tops in China, so we can't ask our directors to give us modest sums to purchase moderate players that may or may not be good enough to get us into the group stages. We have to rely on home grown talent, that you then buy for peanuts and loan out, etc etc etc. As for state-owned wealth as Swarbs has pointed out, City have received funds from a legitimate state source (financed by the labour and resources of the UAE). You have received funds that used to belong to, and should belong to the Russian state. Not too much of a difference.
not sure from where you bring those bull****? there are 3 degrees of punishments, the UEFA as far as I know till now didn't set a guidance of scale of punishments under the FFP banner for having 'overdue payables', thus failing to comply with the FFP rules, UEFA didn't used that scale and banned the clubs straightway when they could had give them a warning
