This is not a debate if City is guilty or not. Lets say they are. Period.
This is about the way UEFA manages these FFP breach cases. And it stinks of corruption, favouritism and bullying.
Paris Saint-Germain:
"The solution the club reached — as did Manchester City, which was accumulating high-end players in England in a similar spending spree — was to sign a slew of sponsorship deals and associations with enterprises linked to its owners. One in particular stood out: a huge agreement with the Qatar Tourism Authority for a nebulous concept known as “nation branding" that was booked as P.S.G.’s highest sponsorship deal, more than 100 million euros ($111 million) per season.
It was those sponsorship deals that came under the microscope when P.S.G., already penalized for a financial breach in 2015, came under investigation again only a month after the Neymar and Mbappé transfers. Under F.F.P. rules, clubs cannot spend more than they earn, and if they do, they can only fall within a limit of 30 million euros across three years.
To assess the value of P.S.G.’s sponsorships, Leterme, the UEFA financial investigator, commissioned the sports marketing company Octagon Worldwide to analyze the agreements. He also told P.S.G. it could hire a different firm to conduct its own analysis.
The Octagon version returned a verdict that valued the Qatar tourism agreement, a sponsorship that had hardly any visibility, at less than 5 million euros; P.S.G. said its analysis, conducted for the club by Nielsen, came back with a figure close to the amount claimed by P.S.G. Rather than request a third study, Leterme determined, to the consternation of members of his investigative committee, that the Nielsen figures should be used."
"The details of UEFA’s nearly yearlong investigation of P.S.G., and the fight over its conclusions, are included in documents obtained by The New York Times that in page after page eviscerate the decision by UEFA investigators to exonerate the Qatari-financed club, one of the biggest spenders in sports. But the documents also reveal how UEFA appeared to sink its own investigation, and how P.S.G. used a technicality to avoid the possibility of serious punishment and preserve its cherished place in soccer’s richest competition, the Champions League."
There are no longer any active investigations into P.S.G.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/24/sports/psg-uefa-ffp.html
Manchester City:
Similar to the case of PSG, about inflated sponsor deals.
"In December 2018, the Uefa chief investigator publicly previewed the outcome and sanction he intended to be delivered to Manchester City, before any investigation had even begun.
"The subsequent flawed and consistently leaked Uefa process he oversaw has meant that there was little doubt in the result that he would deliver. The club has formally complained to the Uefa disciplinary body, a complaint which was validated by a CAS ruling.
"Simply put, this is a case initiated by Uefa, prosecuted by Uefa and judged by Uefa. With this prejudicial process now over, the club will pursue an impartial judgment as quickly as possible and will therefore, in the first instance, commence proceedings with the Court of Arbitration for Sport at the earliest opportunity."
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/51510284
---------------------------------------------------------------------
As said, this is not about trying to clear City, but about the way these investigations are conducted. UEFA are corrupt and I think they have City as a target for some reason, because if this was an honest footballing governing body, they would hang PSG as well.
UEFA is judge, jury and executioner. And they chose to keep a blind for PSG and hang City, over similar allegations. Madness.
I wonder why the media and rival fans do not pick up on this.
UEFA FFP: PSG vs City
posted on 17/2/20
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by Holland's big brother Europe (U1250)
posted 3 minutes ago
Why are we looking at 12 years though and not 10 years, because FFP came into effect in 2010.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know you’re new to this supporting City malarkey but 2008 is when the Sheikh bought City
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The first 2 years spending have nothing to do with the FFP though. Which is what we've been discussing the past few days.
posted on 17/2/20
comment by Holland's big brother Europe (U1250)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by Holland's big brother Europe (U1250)
posted 3 minutes ago
Why are we looking at 12 years though and not 10 years, because FFP came into effect in 2010.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know you’re new to this supporting City malarkey but 2008 is when the Sheikh bought City
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The first 2 years spending have nothing to do with the FFP though. Which is what we've been discussing the past few days.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lopping two years off isn’t going to make people think City haven’t spent a ridiculous amount
posted on 17/2/20
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by Holland's big brother Europe (U1250)
posted 3 minutes ago
Why are we looking at 12 years though and not 10 years, because FFP came into effect in 2010.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know you’re new to this supporting City malarkey but 2008 is when the Sheikh bought City
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 17/2/20
Another one who doesnt get it. What the fack has spent before FFP came into to play to with FFP?
You've both been set straight by Melton, yet here you are, thinking you are the dogs ballocks
posted on 17/2/20
Its just citys spending.. £1.18bn net since the current owners took over
What's your problem?
posted on 17/2/20
Facking thick caaaaant
posted on 17/2/20
comment by Holland's big brother Europe (U1250)
posted 57 minutes ago
Another one who doesnt get it. What the fack has spent before FFP came into to play to with FFP?
You've both been set straight by Melton, yet here you are, thinking you are the dogs ballocks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn’t say City’s spend before FFP had anything to do with after FFP. I refuted somethingelse’s claim about City’s spending, particularly since the Sheikh threw his cash about.
Yet again you’ve jumped in halfway through a conversation and made yourself look a right knobhead.
posted on 17/2/20
Nobody is going to get banned from anything as long as the owners have enough political clout in the Middle East to threaten UEFA with severe consequences.
American, Russian, Thai and Chinese owners accused of doing the same thing will have the book thrown at them.
posted on 17/2/20
The Chinese hold more sway than the Arabs.
Luckily a Chinese firm owns 13% of City
posted on 17/2/20
in 2011, Man City posted the biggest loss ever in football history £197m
In that year their wages alone (£174m) exceeded their entire revenue (£153m) by £21m.
So a club, with a revenue of circa £150m made a loss of nearly £200m
Funnily enough they then sign a sponsorship deal later that year which was the largest deal of its kind in sport......which is what you'd expect from a club that , who before winning the FA Cup that year hadn't actually won anything major in over 40 years.
We've all known whats happened at City. All their success should have an * next to it. * Won through financial doping. The biggest surprise is that its taken so long to exact some justice. 2 year ban does not go far enough IMO.
Potential here also for an EPL punishment. Theri FFP states that clubs cannot make a loss in excess of £105m across the 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 seasons. Any club that posts losses in excess of that figure could face severe penalties, including a points deduction. If City have been misreporting their break-even then should they be found guilty (on appeal) they could also be caught up with the an EPL punishment