or to join or start a new Discussion

34 Comments
Article Rating     Not Rated Yet

Is It Time To Dump FFP ?

In these times of uncertainty is this the best system to have ?

comment by Naby8 (U6997)

posted on 13/7/20

I think FFP is a good thing in the context of clubs not creating an unsustainable future for themselves but limiting investment from owners isn’t something I’m overly supportive of.

The concept of financial doping is just the status quo pulling up the drawbridge. It’s not like football is a level playing field right now so what are we preserving? The winners of the league in Germany, Italy and France are established, in Spain it’s 1 from 2. Is this the competition we’re protecting?

I’d personally look to find a way of allowing addition investment from owners. I understand the need to ensure the running costs are in line with income but if an owner wants to stump up 100m for a player then so be it. It just feels a little more honest than trying to pretend football is a level playing field only for the existing super clubs to benefit.

posted on 13/7/20

comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 2 minutes ago
We were found not guilty though, not just that they were time barred.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The wording suggests that alleged breaches either had a lack of sufficient evidence or were time-barred. This doesn't rule out the possibility that a number of alleged breaches had evidence but were time-barred. It also doesn't confirm this idea so you may be right.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The headline of the CAS report suggests it was more than lack of evidence though. On your second point, we'll have to wait until the verdict but I doubt CAS would have even considered the evidence for some of it if it didn't pass the first hurdle.

posted on 13/7/20

I'd rather see a rule around guaranteeing investment into the club over a period of time, rather than FFP.

Whether you believe the rule was created to help the big clubs or not, that's what it does.

I personally don't believe UEFA will act in the best interests of the game - they'll act in the interests of money.

posted on 13/7/20

Agree with that Winston.

I've never thought it should be driven by Uefa tbh as by default, only the bigger clubs will come under their remit. It needs to be driven by the domestic leagues.

posted on 13/7/20

To answer original question I'd say it most certainly is time to dump it.

posted on 13/7/20

comment by Naby8 (U6997)
posted 2 hours, 25 minutes ago
I think FFP is a good thing in the context of clubs not creating an unsustainable future for themselves but limiting investment from owners isn’t something I’m overly supportive of.

The concept of financial doping is just the status quo pulling up the drawbridge. It’s not like football is a level playing field right now so what are we preserving? The winners of the league in Germany, Italy and France are established, in Spain it’s 1 from 2. Is this the competition we’re protecting?

I’d personally look to find a way of allowing addition investment from owners. I understand the need to ensure the running costs are in line with income but if an owner wants to stump up 100m for a player then so be it. It just feels a little more honest than trying to pretend football is a level playing field only for the existing super clubs to benefit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
in spain it's currently 1 from 2 and a half (given atleti won the title fairly recently and certainly have chances to win another in the future imo)

posted on 13/7/20

comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 3 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 2 minutes ago
We were found not guilty though, not just that they were time barred.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The wording suggests that alleged breaches either had a lack of sufficient evidence or were time-barred. This doesn't rule out the possibility that a number of alleged breaches had evidence but were time-barred. It also doesn't confirm this idea so you may be right.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The headline of the CAS report suggests it was more than lack of evidence though. On your second point, we'll have to wait until the verdict but I doubt CAS would have even considered the evidence for some of it if it didn't pass the first hurdle.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Agreed the headline does appear more definitive. Also agreed that we won't know any more until we get the full documentation. I do not know if CAS will have considered the evidence for any allegations that were time-barred but that doesn't mean there wasn't evidence for such incidents. I am aware it also doesn't mean there is evidence.

Either way, it appears extremely unlikely that UEFA will appeal so City will be playing CL football next season.

comment by Naby8 (U6997)

posted on 13/7/20

comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
comment by Naby8 (U6997)
posted 2 hours, 25 minutes ago
I think FFP is a good thing in the context of clubs not creating an unsustainable future for themselves but limiting investment from owners isn’t something I’m overly supportive of.

The concept of financial doping is just the status quo pulling up the drawbridge. It’s not like football is a level playing field right now so what are we preserving? The winners of the league in Germany, Italy and France are established, in Spain it’s 1 from 2. Is this the competition we’re protecting?

I’d personally look to find a way of allowing addition investment from owners. I understand the need to ensure the running costs are in line with income but if an owner wants to stump up 100m for a player then so be it. It just feels a little more honest than trying to pretend football is a level playing field only for the existing super clubs to benefit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
in spain it's currently 1 from 2 and a half (given atleti won the title fairly recently and certainly have chances to win another in the future imo)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Atleti won it 6 years ago now and look set to post their worst points tally in quite a few years. Their win aside you have to go back 16 years to Rafa's Valencia side.

Atleti's win was a fantastic achievement (as was Monaco's in France) but you wont find many willing to put any money on them claiming the 2020/21 title.

I've just looked it up - Real and Barca have won the league in 30 of the last 35 seasons. Spain is 1 from 2.

But my wider point is that FFP has not made football any more competitive in the major leagues so why not allow investors to put money in? Might mean there are more clubs capable of winning in more leagues.

posted on 13/7/20

Ffp was created to stop fans losing their clubs due to owners spending money they didn't have, and gambling with their clubs heritage.

There still needs to be something in place to stop this, although I feel investors should be made to post funds to offset losses, if they spend above their clubs means.

This would allow rich owners to spend more than Ffp would allow, whilst it would avoid fans losing their clubs.

The current system is massively weighted in the favour of the club's that already have large revenue streams.

comment by bomdia (U13941)

posted 1 month ago

Anything that breaks up the self interested cartel of the G14 is good. Membership should mean an automatic 5 year ban from any UEFA competition. Set up to prevent competition and ensure the rich got richer. The grubby clubs behind it deserve a long ban.

Sign in if you want to comment
RATE THIS ARTICLE
Rate Breakdown
5
0 Votes
4
0 Votes
3
0 Votes
2
0 Votes
1
0 Votes

Average Rating: 0 from 0 votes

ARTICLE STATS
Day
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available
Month
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available