- Apr 1, 2005
- 41,363
- 74,893
Did'nt City have some kind of meaningless lower squad limit for the CL because of them breaching FFP?
Yep, limited to 22.
Did'nt City have some kind of meaningless lower squad limit for the CL because of them breaching FFP?
Chelsea run a separate import export business where they import good young players with absolutely no intention of them ever playing for Chelsea, loan them out for a couple of years then export them, selling them on for a profit.
30 players out on loan an average £10 to £15 million profit on each one is £300 to £450 million revenue, ffp my arse.
Yep, limited to 22.
That's right. But again, when the average price of each player is probably about £40m and growing it's not much of a penalty is it?
I think you're right, it has prevented bankruptcies.
I don't think it's done nearly enough to redistribute wealth though, which is not my politics speaking but an attempt to recognise the realities of the game. Without good facilities for young and amatuer players and as a consequence of that, without a healthy network of small local amateur, semi-pro and fully professional clubs everywhere, there would be no Real Madrid and the handful of others who sit safely at the top of the heap.
I don't know whether FIFA/ UEFA deliberately set out to preserve the status quo at the top, or whether it was an accidental effect of not thinking the whole process through from top to bottom, in the face of fierce opposition and influence from vested interests that must have made the job next to impossible. In either event, the effect has, I believe, been to reduce competition and that is bad for the game in the long run.
That's right. But again, when the average price of each player is probably about £40m and growing it's not much of a penalty is it?
I think you're right, it has prevented bankruptcies.
I don't think it's done nearly enough to redistribute wealth though, which is not my politics speaking but an attempt to recognise the realities of the game. Without good facilities for young and amatuer players and as a consequence of that, without a healthy network of small local amateur, semi-pro and fully professional clubs everywhere, there would be no Real Madrid and the handful of others who sit safely at the top of the heap.
I don't know whether FIFA/ UEFA deliberately set out to preserve the status quo at the top, or whether it was an accidental effect of not thinking the whole process through from top to bottom, in the face of fierce opposition and influence from vested interests that must have made the job next to impossible. In either event, the effect has, I believe, been to reduce competition and that is bad for the game in the long run.
Yes but is it good for football and more importantly is it good for young players' careers, remember that Chelsea have no stake in these players careers and no interest in improving them.Wrong as this may be. Isn't this really good business?
Having reached the age of 78, I am now firmly convinced that money rules. Those that have it have the power and call the shots. Redistributing wealth has always been an insoluble problem during my lifetime.Despite whatever laws or rules have been introduced, little, if anything has changed the unfairness. I am not advocating complacency in fighting it as the fight to wrest the power away from those who hold the purse strings must be fought vigorously.
FIFA/UEFA are, I am sure, trying to impose some kind of authority. However, they too face the brick wall of relying on the money from those controlling the game ie rich football clubs, the players, the agents TV companies etc. To try and enforce a fairer playing field risks these people walking away with their money an setting up in competition taking the cream of the crop with them. Add in the possibility of corruption, the chances of stopping the rich clubs from dictating the rules, the problems worsen.
Hopefully, despite the uphill battle we face in becoming a top club will not prove to be insurmountable. However, without and injection of oodles of cash similar to the likes of City, Man Utd and Chelsea, it is nigh on impossible imho.
COYS
Well yes, up to a point.
Wealth always finds a way. But in the past, the wealth of clubs like Manchester United and yes, Spurs, was the result of their success and appeal, not the sole cause of it, and certainly not an external and non-football-generated cause of it as is now the case with Chelsea and Man City.
We all understand why rules don't exist to prevent owners playing with their money to buy trophies, but I do wish that it wasn't worshipped as though it represented the equivalent qualities and achievements of pure football geniuses like Busby, Nicholson, Shankly and Ferguson.
And that's my real problem with it: it reduces the value of strategic football talent. It reduces the whole thing to a game of "who's got the biggest bank balance" regardless of where the money came from, which has very little indeed to do with the game of football.
To add to this considering there is no real plan to integrate them into the team how does it differ to agents owning players which I believe is now banned.Yes but is it good for football and more importantly is it good for young players' careers, remember that Chelsea have no stake in these players careers and no interest in improving them.
Yes the better they are the better the fee they can charge, but that is just a bonus, these are good young players and their value will go up just with their age, not to mention the restrictions on their choice of where they want to play.
If Chelsea bought these players genuinely but they didn't work out ok, not selling them to rivals is one thing but buying them as grist to their financial mill knowing at the start that they intend to restrict their career path is quite another.
Let's see if anything telling comes of this... If Barca's complaint is thrown out, I'd say FFP is truly dead."We will [make a complaint about PSG] because they infringe Uefa's Financial Fair Play rules and also the European Union's competition rules," he said.
"We will make a complaint to Uefa and if they don't do anything we will take it to the competition tribunals in Switzerland and Brussels. And, from there, we don't rule out going through the courts in France and Spain."
He added: "Two months ago I met the president of PSG at La Liga's offices and I told him what we were going to do and the reasons why.
"He was angry with me and said that he did not understand. We have a relationship [through Qatar sports channel BeIn] for Spanish football, but La Liga must defend our clubs in these situations."
BBC article that Barca will report PSG over the Neymar deal.
http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/40777484
Let's see if anything telling comes of this... If Barca's complaint is thrown out, I'd say FFP is truly dead.
That's the point isn't it. If these clubs really can afford to do this without breaching the existing regulations, they might as well not be in place.£200m for one player or a similar amount for the few players City are buying, how are they meeting FFP rules??
£200m for one player or a similar amount for the few players City are buying, how are they meeting FFP rules??
To be fair, Barcelona complaining about fair play and infringing competition is a bit too rich for me! Bitch I NG because they're no longer the biggest dog in the kennel..... They're every bit as bad as Madrid, city, United and Chelsea imo.BBC article that Barca will report PSG over the Neymar deal.
http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/40777484
Let's see if anything telling comes of this... If Barca's complaint is thrown out, I'd say FFP is truly dead.
Madness, sometimes I think the game is beyond saving..