General/Non-Spurs Transfers

'O Zio

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
2,154
Don Balon reporting that Bale turned down a £90m move to Utd which they say Zidane will think is unforgiveable as it meant Real Madrid couldn't buy Mbappe.

http://www.donbalon.com/noticia/detalle/67330/secreto-gareth-bale-real-madrid-llamada-mata-zidane

The secret of Gareth Bale in Real Madrid: the call that kills Zidane

The Frenchman pulls the rug

Zidane was clear: Gareth Bale came out and Kylian Mbappé came in. The move of the Real Madrid coach pointed in a single direction: lose sight of the Welshman this summer.

The coach put the play on the table of Florentino Perez who, warned by the player's injuries that are a huge problem in the Real, authorized the sale.

The one chosen to place to crack was the United of Mourinho that entered the race. The problem? One.

'Mou' convinced Manchester to put 100m for Bale, an amount that even Florentino Perez looked good, but Gareth refused.

Bale did not want to negotiate his exit to a team of risk.

To drop a winning project like Real Madrid, by a team under construction like United, does not enter the plans of a Gareth who was unwilling to miss the glory years of Madrid.

Bale refused to pack and blocked the arrival of Mbappé who would choose the PSG. Zidane will not forgive
I don't believe that was the direct cause for a second. Perez/Zidane just looking for a scapegoat IMO.
 

DCSPUR

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2005
Messages
2,913
I don't believe that was the direct cause for a second. Perez/Zidane just looking for a scapegoat IMO.
not convinced either. If Bale had gone to the EPL this year he could have easily torn the place apart and been player of the year....Perez would look like a mug. If Bale gets fit and has a good year Real will benefit on and off the field.

PS clearly Mbappe chose PSG and Real wouldn't have got him either way
 

DJS

Smacks of villainy
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
23,294
La Ligament calling for investigation into PSG and Manchester City, which whilst I feel this is needed as their spending is disgusting, La Liga have a bit of a cheek considering st one point their government was bailing their clubs out of debt whilst they still kept spending massive money on players...
 

'O Zio

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
2,154
La Ligament calling for investigation into PSG and Manchester City, which whilst I feel this is needed as their spending is disgusting, La Liga have a bit of a cheek considering st one point their government was bailing their clubs out of debt whilst they still kept spending massive money on players...
They've really got some nerve. You'd think they'd want to keep quiet otherwise someone might start looking a little more closely into Real Madrid's rather convenient training ground arrangement, for example...

Either way it's nonsense because you don't need an investigation for FFP - it's assessed at regular intervals of something like 2 years IIRC. Anyway, as it stands, PSG have no obligation to adhere to FFP right now because they have until the FFP deadline to get their affairs in order. It's like asking for an investigation into someone's taxes before they've even filed their tax return, it just doesn't make any sense. Wait until the FFP deadline/assessment and then if PSG pass with flying colours seemingly inexplicably, then you can call for an investigation, but right now it's just nonsensical
 

-Afri-Coy-

Active Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Messages
497
They've really got some nerve. You'd think they'd want to keep quiet otherwise someone might start looking a little more closely into Real Madrid's rather convenient training ground arrangement, for example...

Either way it's nonsense because you don't need an investigation for FFP - it's assessed at regular intervals of something like 2 years IIRC. Anyway, as it stands, PSG have no obligation to adhere to FFP right now because they have until the FFP deadline to get their affairs in order. It's like asking for an investigation into someone's taxes before they've even filed their tax return, it just doesn't make any sense. Wait until the FFP deadline/assessment and then if PSG pass with flying colours seemingly inexplicably, then you can call for an investigation, but right now it's just nonsensical
IMHO FFP was brought into play to protect the established clubs from rich men with project clubs. Which in all honesty is fair, but it's ironic that Real Madrid and Barcelona have been running the transfer windows with no repercussions, and now that the PSG's and Man City's of this world can usurp them when it comes to spending big, they get La Liga to lodge a complaint with UEFA. That's like complaining that someone can afford Jordan's when you can only afford the Bootleg, when in the past you could afford the Jordan's too. :LOL:
 

Japhet

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2010
Messages
6,384
La Ligament calling for investigation into PSG and Manchester City, which whilst I feel this is needed as their spending is disgusting, La Liga have a bit of a cheek considering st one point their government was bailing their clubs out of debt whilst they still kept spending massive money on players...

It was OK when the Spanish were helping themselves to all the available talent, but as soon as they get plundered the toys come straight out of the pram.
 
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
53
I'm guessing Barca are throwing Man Citys name into this as the are worried that they will make a play for Messi next summer. If they haven't already started. If they start kicking and screaming now it may effect what City can do next year
 

-Afri-Coy-

Active Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Messages
497
I'm guessing Barca are throwing Man Citys name into this as the are worried that they will make a play for Messi next summer. If they haven't already started. If they start kicking and screaming now it may effect what City can do next year
Unfortunately if they do get Messi to sign with them, the rest of the PL can forget about getting close to the title. It might be a more physical league, but Messi is not human and we all know that.
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
31,300
It was OK when the Spanish were helping themselves to all the available talent, but as soon as they get plundered the toys come straight out of the pram.
Nail-head. Ronaldo, messi and suarez haven't got long left. The prem is super rich. La liga already suffering from being a two team league are shitting themselves that they will go the way of italy.
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,494
It was OK when the Spanish were helping themselves to all the available talent, but as soon as they get plundered the toys come straight out of the pram.
Nail-head. Ronaldo, messi and suarez haven't got long left. The prem is super rich. La liga already suffering from being a two team league are shitting themselves that they will go the way of italy.

This is exactly why the G14's (ECA) attempt (through it's lobbying of UEFA to restrict gifting by owners) to preserve their hegemony was bollocks and should not be supported.

Much of FFP's other regulations about good fiscal governance are extremely valid and viable, but there is absolutely no threat to host clubs from generous owners, the only threat was to the status of the old money uber clubs.

Personally I loved seeing Barcelona bent over by PSG. It's what football desperately needs. Competition, because not only does this spread the talent, it actually has a positive knock on effect for all of us when a handful of clubs or one in each league can't just stockpile every single outstanding player.

I've probably linked this before to you but if you haven't read it, I wrote a piece about it - https://forensiconions.wordpress.com/2015/09/24/the-fs-of-ffp/
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
31,300
This is exactly why the G14's (ECA) attempt (through it's lobbying of UEFA to restrict gifting by owners) to preserve their hegemony was bollocks and should not be supported.

Much of FFP's other regulations about good fiscal governance are extremely valid and viable, but there is absolutely no threat to host clubs from generous owners, the only threat was to the status of the old money uber clubs.

Personally I loved seeing Barcelona bent over by PSG. It's what football desperately needs. Competition, because not only does this spread the talent, it actually has a positive knock on effect for all of us when a handful of clubs or one in each league can't just stockpile every single outstanding player.

I've probably linked this before to you but if you haven't read it, I wrote a piece about it - https://forensiconions.wordpress.com/2015/09/24/the-fs-of-ffp/
What about a limit on wages to say 70% of turnover? Then even if the benefactor dies, loses interest, loses money etc... the club will be safe.
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,494
What about a limit on wages to say 70% of turnover? Then even if the benefactor dies, loses interest, loses money etc... the club will be safe.
I believe the limit is already part of FFP, and it's less than 70%, but I could be wrong. The bottom line is, generous owners gifting or, as in the case of the oil clubs (City/PSG) using their ownership of other corporations to sponsor etc, is never going to leave their clubs in peril, worst case scenario they'd be left with playing assets worth hundreds of millions that they could sell to pay off any wage debt they'd be left with. Monaco are a perfect example. As soon as the owners divorce and FFP kicked in and threatened them they quickly converted some of their assets, switched their modus operandi and have not suffered one bit for it.
 

DCSPUR

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2005
Messages
2,913
This is exactly why the G14's (ECA) attempt (through it's lobbying of UEFA to restrict gifting by owners) to preserve their hegemony was bollocks and should not be supported.

Much of FFP's other regulations about good fiscal governance are extremely valid and viable, but there is absolutely no threat to host clubs from generous owners, the only threat was to the status of the old money uber clubs.

Personally I loved seeing Barcelona bent over by PSG. It's what football desperately needs. Competition, because not only does this spread the talent, it actually has a positive knock on effect for all of us when a handful of clubs or one in each league can't just stockpile every single outstanding player.

I've probably linked this before to you but if you haven't read it, I wrote a piece about it - https://forensiconions.wordpress.com/2015/09/24/the-fs-of-ffp/
good blog!!!
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
31,300
I believe the limit is already part of FFP, and it's less than 70%, but I could be wrong. The bottom line is, generous owners gifting or, as in the case of the oil clubs (City/PSG) using their ownership of other corporations to sponsor etc, is never going to leave their clubs in peril, worst case scenario they'd be left with playing assets worth hundreds of millions that they could sell to pay off any wage debt they'd be left with. Monaco are a perfect example. As soon as the owners divorce and FFP kicked in and threatened them they quickly converted some of their assets, switched their modus operandi and have not suffered one bit for it.
Monaco are a club that it worked for. There are many that it didn't hence the reason that the majority of clubs in europe voted in ffp in the first place.
It wasn't big clubs. It was mostly smaller clubs that voted it in. Over 80% of clubs in britain. Because they were dying. Now they are in better financial shape than before ffp.
Yes it kept the big clubs on top to an extent (although there are exceptions like us) but how many smaller clubs would you sacrifice to let oil barons play with football teams?
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,494
Monaco are a club that it worked for. There are many that it didn't hence the reason that the majority of clubs in europe voted in ffp in the first place.
It wasn't big clubs. It was mostly smaller clubs that voted it in. Over 80% of clubs in britain. Because they were dying. Now they are in better financial shape than before ffp.
Yes it kept the big clubs on top to an extent (although there are exceptions like us) but how many smaller clubs would you sacrifice to let oil barons play with football teams?

The owner contribution thing was a piece of legislation that was inserted into a much bigger body of legislation at the behest of the uber clubs, which was then voted on by all clubs, smaller clubs voted for it because most of it (FFP legislation) makes a hell of a lot of sense, and because many of them thought that it might help level the playing field, not just strengthen the domination of the handful of uber clubs that wanted to preserve their status.
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
31,300
The owner contribution thing was a piece of legislation that was inserted into a much bigger body of legislation at the behest of the uber clubs, which was then voted on by all clubs, smaller clubs voted for it because most of it (FFP legislation) makes a hell of a lot of sense, and because many of them thought that it might help level the playing field, not just strengthen the domination of the handful of uber clubs that wanted to preserve their status.
There are many versions of ffp across europe. They were voted in because they made sense as you say. For the survival of many clubs.
So what would be your alternative?
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,494
There are many versions of ffp across europe. They were voted in because they made sense as you say. For the survival of many clubs.
So what would be your alternative?

Keep everything in FFP legislation except the limits on what owners can effectively "gift" clubs.

FFP was designed originally to improve the fiscal management of clubs and protect them from reckless owners or chairman and unmanageable debt.

A benevolent owner is not a threat to a club's existence.
 
Top