DawesRoad Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 What a joke, imagine if it was Chelsea, would we get away with an appeal or not get slaughtered for offering FIFA a payoff to stop us getting done for breaking financial fair play?
stevo Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 What a joke, imagine if it was Chelsea, would we get away with an appeal or not get slaughtered for offering FIFA a payoff to stop us getting done for breaking financial fair play? Unreal, but typical.
theblueone Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 Alright then. Maybe Roman should dust off his cheque book for the summer... Seriously, screw playing to a different set of rules to them when they don't even get punished for it.
Zeta Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 FPP always was a joke. It's just another way to take money off of clubs and their owners and line the wallets of the fat cats in FIFA and UEFA
Zola's Love Child Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 Apparently 20 clubs have failed FFP. Kind of reminds me of the quote "you owe your bank a hundred pounds, you have aproblem. But if you owe a million, it has." FFP is setup to be able to make an example of one or two teams who don't comply - however if there is mass lack of compliance (like in this situation), then it is inpossible to enforce with anything other than fines. UEFA can't completely decimate their own competition, and I've the feeling that clubs know that.
theblueone Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 (edited) Apparently 20 clubs have failed FFP. Kind of reminds me of the quote "you owe your bank a hundred pounds, you have aproblem. But if you owe a million, it has." FFP is setup to be able to make an example of one or two teams who don't comply - however if there is mass lack of compliance (like in this situation), then it is inpossible to enforce with anything other than fines. UEFA can't completely decimate their own competition, and I've the feeling that clubs know that. Well said. Then maybe we should join the other clubs instead of screwing ourselves over the principles of a bunch of spineless, powerless hypocrites. Edited April 28, 2014 by theblueone
big blue Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 it set precedence now, so I can't see any club being worried by the threat of sanctions anymore.
theblueone Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 Exactly. They had the chance but no they've shown how toothless they are on it.. Poor move.
Kage Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 Did anyone actually think that they would punish Barca?
Lane Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 (edited) Apparently 20 clubs have failed FFP. Kind of reminds me of the quote "you owe your bank a hundred pounds, you have aproblem. But if you owe a million, it has." FFP is setup to be able to make an example of one or two teams who don't comply - however if there is mass lack of compliance (like in this situation), then it is inpossible to enforce with anything other than fines. UEFA can't completely decimate their own competition, and I've the feeling that clubs know that. Fines? So the penalty for spending too much money is to pay money. Like a cliche dad from a movie, that forces you to smoke an entire carton aften finding out you smoke. You cant make this up Edited April 28, 2014 by Lane
TJB Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 Shouldn't the thread title be PSG and Man City get away with it?
Adam Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 We've all known all along that FFP hasn't got teeth. What are they going to do, kick Barca/Citeh out of the UCL? Yeah ok.
Englishman Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 So was that the real purpose of FFP, to generate a bit of extra cash for UEFA?
Fatty_Speeding Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 Shouldn't the thread title be PSG and Man City get away with it? PSG have been hit with a squad size reduction. Man City a fine of sorts.
SeanpaulSmillie Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 So what was the thing with Malaga last year? Thought that was FFP but it might've been something completely different.
Zola's Love Child Posted April 29, 2014 Posted April 29, 2014 Fines? So the penalty for spending too much money is to pay money.Like a cliche dad from a movie, that forces you to smoke an entire carton aften finding out you smoke. You cant make this up I believe "you can't make this up" is UEFA's corporate mission statement actually ;) It is going to take half a decade of punishment escalation for UEFA to actually start kicking teams out of the competition. The clubs know it, the fans know it and UEFA know it. Until then they'll happily take the fines, make threatening sounds in the media about unsafe business model and take he moral high ground.
BavarianAfrican12 Posted April 29, 2014 Posted April 29, 2014 (edited) What else is new....:( Edited April 29, 2014 by BavarianAfrican12
SydneyChelsea Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 I don't want to be the guy that rains on everyone's schadenfreude but to see ShedEnd fans engaged in the same desperately biased analysis as literary luminaries such as Adrian Durham hurts a bit to be honest. Firstly I think serious congratulations belongs to the original poster for melding two disparate issues from two different jurisdictions into one all-encompassing, rage inducing axis of evil conspiracy theory. Let's start with Barcelona; currently they are wanted by both FIFA and the Spanish government for two unrelated issues. FIFA are prosecuting Barcelona because they have broken the laws regarding the movement of under-18 players. As Chelsea found out in 2010, Fifa take a shoot-first-question-later approach to this issue. And also as we found out, FIFA are willing to give concessions to a club while due process takes place (FC Sion). How boring reality is when you strip away drama! Secondly with Man City- it's probably what Zola said. If I were to speculate I'd say PSG and City's relative lack of success is helping them. Since they haven't dominated Europe as expected there would be little pressure from direct rivals on UEFA to enforce penalties especially as there now is a precedent for leniency.
SydneyChelsea Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 Also Lane- in England the penalty for a club going insolvent is a fine. Lol.
AnIrishTrueBlue Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 Barca appealed and have a temporary relief, we got the same benefit RE Kakuta I do believe City and PSG should have been slaughtered for breaking it.
Stim Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 Barca appealed and have a temporary relief, we got the same benefit RE Kakuta I do believe No, we were convicted before any proof was presented. We complained about that, it got suspended til after trial. Trial found no wrongdoing on our part. There is proof of barcas wrong doing, which is where the difference lies between their case and ours.
dkw Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 As stim says, the difference is we were convicted and sentenced without the chance to defend ourselves or give evidence then we requested hearing and the chance yo fight it. That's when the ban was lifted.
SydneyChelsea Posted April 30, 2014 Posted April 30, 2014 No, we were convicted before any proof was presented. We complained about that, it got suspended til after trial. Trial found no wrongdoing on our part. There is proof of barcas wrong doing, which is where the difference lies between their case and ours. Well that's simply not true: http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/apr/02/barcelona-transfer-ban-fifa-fine The cases are virtually identical in terms of their treatment. You're seeing what you'd like to see. The precedent set by FC Sion (who were later found guilty) means that the sentence is effectively suspended until appeal is finalised. We were convicted on the basis of Lens' evidence. Lens believed they had sufficient evidence to prove Chelsea had induced Kakuta to break his contract with them, which would have held true IF Lens had a valid contract with Kakuta in the first place. FIFA assumed the contract was valid, Chelsea proved it wasn't on appeal at the CAS. Backbiter wrote a fantastic analysis of the case on these forums if you'd like to look it up. Judging from Barcelona's statement, however, they look utterly screwed and to make it all the more sweeter it may actually not even be their direct fault given the system and the transfers were ratified by the Spanish FA. The Barcelona and RFEF camps are claiming that Spain and La Masia would offer the kids a better education than if they remained in their home countries. FIFA, who are under intense political pressure from FIFPro to reform the transfer and ownership system, will not look kindly on an argument which amounts to little more than colonialist chest-beating.
Recommended Posts