Gentlemen, this is where I lose my posting virginity, I have lurked for many months, and now feel confident enough to offer an opinion. Personally I believe that the principle is an excellent one, and would prevent Man City, Chelsea etc. from repeating their profligate spending. However I cannot see the smart arse lawyers allowing FFP to prevent these clubs from continuing as they wish. Platini and Blatter will ultimately capitulate when confronted with Madrid, Barcelona, Man City, Chelsea PSG etc and their legal teams. Well thats it having just lost my virginity I am off for a smoke and a lie down.
hey i'm new too so not really in a position to welcome you! Anyways with regard to the topic i agree with your opinion. Considering the level of corruption inherent in fifa and the potential loopholes involved i doubt it will be implemented. Even if it is i mentioned lawyers will find numerous way to manipulate the rules to suit their own requirements and ultimately it will be the smaller clubs who will once again suffer imo though i really dont no much about the internal dealings in uefa.
Welcome aboard Balham FPP is a really good idea, but I fear you might be right. The clubs lawyers will fight and wriggle to circumvent the rules and I'm not sure either that I can see Platini facing up to the prospect of banning someone like City, Chelsea or Real from the Champions League. That said, you'd hope that the basic principles would be adhered to, in the spirit of the game, but that is maybe a optimistic view in a world dominated by financial muscle. One big test for FFP was the Etihad stadium naming rights and whether the £400m over 5 years deal 'represented fair market values' - I've not heard any more about it, can anyone offer an update?
Welcome Balham from Devon I hope it works but i'm feeling cynical about it. I think big teams like Bara and Real will find ways to get around it....
Big welcome from me too Balham Gooner Like you I too am a little sceptical about the ability of the FFP rules to clean up this side of the game. It was a very worthwhile proposition and one which deserves much success since the proliferation of money has and will continue to ruin the game. Whether the authorities have the steel to see through their intentions remain to be seen. I wish no ill on Manchester City but I can hardly see them qualifying under the precepts of the FFP rules but I wonder if indeed they will be excluded from European competition or if there will be some form of backtracking allowing them and other teams in a similar situation to continue playing in European competitions. If only things would happen because one wished it.
We should expect it to work because it needs to work so if it fails it should not be acceptable. No point resigning to a cynical view at this stage when it's not even going yet.
I agree with that sentiment (I thought you were supposed to be the cynical one? ) and I hope that FFP is implemented in a meaningful way. I think it's effectiveness may come as a deterent rather than an enforcing body. One would hope that clubs will adhere to the spirit of fair play that FFP sets out and not feel the need to test it's resolve buy flouting the rules. That said, Man City are already testing the water with their Etihad naming rights deal. £400m over 5 years is a huge amount of money, it's up to FFP to determine whether it's a fair market deal and in the process establish whether FFP will have any teeth.
I think it will have an effect. I think it will help redress the worst of the inequity in spending, but by how much is really a good question.
Welcome, BalhamGooner. On the FFP, I feel that like you clubs will sadly find a way around it. City's Etihad deal is an example of this.
i guess we'll just have to see how it turns out. in theory its good, but will fifa stop clubs from finding loopholes or not?
I agree with this, I can't really see it making a massive impact, but will probably lead Man City/Madrid etc to not spend as much.
May I respond to this first posting? There are few Gentlemen to be found here. It is also likely that our numbers include those so young that they are also virgins. Lurking is a popular sport here, but I would urge you to take care when offering opinions - it might be wiser to merely nod your agreement. The attempt to curtail excessive spending which invalidates any level of equality is foolhardy. Lawyers are never smart-arsed - they are learned and able to derive a handsome living off us the barrack-room variety. Platini may capitulate, but Blatter will stick by his ill-conceived project. Going off for a smoke is a wise move, I think many here would be well advised to consider doing the same whenever responses to their opinions are challenged. Welcome - I will watch with interest.
Welcome. The acid test here is what is done about City's sponsorship deal with Ethiad. If they get away with that then there really is no point to FFP. It will only end up punishing the second tier teams desperately trying to compete with City's financial doping. The Spurs and Arsenal's of this world will have to comply, whilst clubs like City will be able to abuse it.
Legal departments? You having a laugh? What can a legal team do against UEFA when it comes to a UEFA competition? It's UEFA's competition, UEFA invite clubs to play in it. They can make up any damn rule they want and exclude anyone they want and there's nothing any lawyer can do because they have *all* the power. If you don't like it your welcome to appeal, to UEFA....
Bosman ruling came about because... aww hell you know why it came about and you know why it has no fking bearing on FFP. FFP is not breaking any European law and UEFA is certainly above most courts as FC Sion found out. What do you mean can't impose a quota on foreign players? what do you think a 25 man squad with at least 8 HG + 4 Association players is? Which club has been allowed back into a UEFA competition as well recently?
Lets assume that it does work and th ebig clubs do abide by it, one possible unintended consquence might be that it merely cements the status quo. For example, let's say some Internet billionaire Yorkshire lad decides to restore Huddersfield Town back to their glory days of teh 1930s and decides to splash out big time on everything at th eclub, from youth system, scouting staff , training facilities, infratsructure, etc. All this costs big money. Then of course he will want to spend a large chunk of dough on players and coaches. They have to invest in this in order to catch up and get upto being able to compete with big bpys. However, if FFP means that they are prevented from entering Europe, would that deincentivise the potential owners in investing? Abramovish, it is said, spent sso much because he is obessessed with winning teh UEFA CL. If this is true, then it will mean that all clubs who have already gone and spent big on capital investments will be safe in teh knowledge that no one else will be able to catch up to them. Also, it has been seen from places like Italy, Germany, that massive investment in infrastructure and stadia are required every 25-30 years or so. In Italia 90 the stadia were fantastic, but just 22 year son they are crumbling. It is unlikely that governments will be able to justify this expense, and so the onus will be on each club to do this. Again, without huge investment based on projections of future income, this will not be possible, and so I wonder if FFP might mean we all end up with crumbling grounds, and having instead to rent grounds from Rugby (as they rent football grounds now for their big club matches and World CUps).
I think this may be a bit true, but there are a few clauses in the rules that allow investment in a youth system etc. and a few other things lie outside the rules. Also, I am not certain if capital infrastructure falls under the rules as they seem to often talk about "Operating Expenses"
Superjack is right. I'm sure Chelsea will come up with a sweet sponsorship deal to get over it. Does make me laugh though, not a peep while you lot & United were having it your own way but up pop some competition and you're up in arms. Just remember this, Chelsea's & City's owners are putting their OWN money into the clubs whereas Arsenals board have been raping your club for years. Had they not, you'd be up there still competing for the title and then you could rightly moan about other clubs. I feel the rules need to go further with tighter clauses about home grown players and when I say home grown I mean nationality wise with say at least 6 English nationals in the 18 man MATCHDAY squads regardless of age, the same for other countries leagues. don't mean to be controversial and not wumming, it's just the way I see it. I have never thought these rules would ever be enforceable due to the power of the clubs mentioned and there is no way UEFA would ever want to sanction either Barca or Real.
Well I don't think Arsenal boards have been robbing the club blind, whatever way you see it. There is a huge stadium to show where the money went wheras Man Utd, Liverpool etc have huge debts and nothing to show for it. Now whether you believe in the whole stadium/youth etc strategy is a fair discussion but I don't think they robbed the club. I think we could all come up with some laws that we think would be good for the game, but these days the laws have to mesh with so many other laws, labour laws, european laws, corporate laws, it really doesn't make it easy to come up with laws that are... well... legal.
