I doubt it sticks. City can afford the best lawyers money can buy, as well as bribes. Can see CAS reducing on appeal to no bad and a fine of 2.4mill, suspended of course.

2 hours ago, axman2526 said:

I doubt it sticks. City can afford the best lawyers money can buy, as well as bribes. Can see CAS reducing on appeal to no bad and a fine of 2.4mill, suspended of course.

Quite possibly. You would imagine UEFA would know they would appeal and so would make their case as airtight as possible.

FFP will be dead if they lose. Which wouldn't be a bad thing. Fees have gone up exponentially during the period it has been in. Driven mainly by the Oligarchy of big clubs who make a consistent profit like Barca, Madrid and United and the agents. This has then flowed through to everyone else. It was always flawed and this doesn't change that.

Surely City will immediately lodge an appeal to the court of arbitration for sport and this will be suspended and then their lawyers will get it overturned or massively reduced? Seems to me the celebrations are a bit premature.

This [emoji1483][emoji1483][emoji1483][emoji1483] they will never do a two season ban not going to happen CAS will overturn it

Personally, I hate FFP. I think it was designed for one thing, to keep the same elite clubs at the top forever. With FFP, there is almost zero chance of any club outside the top clubs growing to become a top club themselves. They may have a year or two competing now and again, but they would never be able to compete in the long run.

Most clubs just can't compete financially with the biggest clubs in the world like Man United, Liverpool, Real Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus, and they never will as long as FFP exists, it's impossible.

FINALLY, it's about f**king time something was done about that club 

18 minutes ago, Scott Harris said:

Personally, I hate FFP. I think it was designed for one thing, to keep the same elite clubs at the top forever. With FFP, there is almost zero chance of any club outside the top clubs growing to become a top club themselves. They may have a year or two competing now and again, but they would never be able to compete in the long run.

Most clubs just can't compete financially with the biggest clubs in the world like Man United, Liverpool, Real Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus, and they never will as long as FFP exists, it's impossible.

It's had a backward effect, all it's done is keep the elite clubs elite and the lesser clubs lesser, City and PSG have been allowed to break the rules for years, they can make a loss of 500 million and still be allowed to spend 300 million in the transfer window. 

Edited February 15, 20206 yr by Slojo

12 minutes ago, Slojo said:

It's had a backward effect, all it's done is keep the elite clubs elite and the lesser clubs lesser, City and PSG have been allowed to break the rules for years, they can make a loss of 500 million and still be allowed to spend 300 million in the transfer window. 

Yep, this is why I hate it. Nothing can ever really change with FFP. Look at United, they haven't been winning anything for years now and are often struggling to finish in the top 4, but they can still spend a sh*t ton of money on players  to get them out of trouble because of their status. If we were as badly managed as United have been throughout most of the past decade, we wouldn't have won anything and would likely have become a mid table team. United really should be competing at the top every year, FFP is perfect for a club like them.

I don't know how PSG have managed to escape a ban after signing Neymar for £200m and Mbappe for £130m+ a season later.

I just read a blurb about point deductions in the league too ???

8 hours ago, axman2526 said:

I doubt it sticks. City can afford the best lawyers money can buy, as well as bribes. Can see CAS reducing on appeal to no bad and a fine of 2.4mill, suspended of course.

I'm pretty sure it sticks. They are bang to rights against the rules and have been shown to be evading them. It might get reduced (for what grounds I don't know) but it won't be stopped completely. 

It's been obvious for years. How can anyone explain city making £232m to our £170m in commercial activities. They have a smaller fan base than us, they make less in match day revenue, but somehow commercially they are significantly more successful. Not a chance. 

6 hours ago, Scott Harris said:

Yep, this is why I hate it. Nothing can ever really change with FFP. Look at United, they haven't been winning anything for years now and are often struggling to finish in the top 4, but they can still spend a sh*t ton of money on players  to get them out of trouble because of their status. If we were as badly managed as United have been throughout most of the past decade, we wouldn't have won anything and would likely have become a mid table team. United really should be competing at the top every year, FFP is perfect for a club like them.

I don't know how PSG have managed to escape a ban after signing Neymar for £200m and Mbappe for £130m+ a season later.

PSGs moment will no doubt come at some point. It has to. Agree totally on United though. FFP has done nothing to stop them spending a fortune even while sucking. In doing so they've driven up the fees for everyone else.

6 hours ago, Scott Harris said:

Yep, this is why I hate it. Nothing can ever really change with FFP. Look at United, they haven't been winning anything for years now and are often struggling to finish in the top 4, but they can still spend a sh*t ton of money on players  to get them out of trouble because of their status. If we were as badly managed as United have been throughout most of the past decade, we wouldn't have won anything and would likely have become a mid table team. United really should be competing at the top every year, FFP is perfect for a club like them.

I don't know how PSG have managed to escape a ban after signing Neymar for £200m and Mbappe for £130m+ a season later.

Good shout.

6 hours ago, Scott Harris said:

Yep, this is why I hate it. Nothing can ever really change with FFP. Look at United, they haven't been winning anything for years now and are often struggling to finish in the top 4, but they can still spend a sh*t ton of money on players  to get them out of trouble because of their status. If we were as badly managed as United have been throughout most of the past decade, we wouldn't have won anything and would likely have become a mid table team. United really should be competing at the top every year, FFP is perfect for a club like them.

I don't know how PSG have managed to escape a ban after signing Neymar for £200m and Mbappe for £130m+ a season later.

Check this. It's PSG transfer history. Tell me how the f**k they do it. 

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/fc-paris-saint-germain/alletransfers/verein/583

7 hours ago, Scott Harris said:

Personally, I hate FFP. I think it was designed for one thing, to keep the same elite clubs at the top forever. With FFP, there is almost zero chance of any club outside the top clubs growing to become a top club themselves. They may have a year or two competing now and again, but they would never be able to compete in the long run.

Most clubs just can't compete financially with the biggest clubs in the world like Man United, Liverpool, Real Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus, and they never will as long as FFP exists, it's impossible.

It amazes me that people think it's about protecting clubs with little money from spending what they don't have, it's exactly as you described it, it's all about the big clubs ring fencing so no one can break the status quo. Roman came in and scared them, so the ffp was invented as a way of stopping anymore. The rules allow owners to leverage clubs against loans and debt but don't allow an individual to put his iwn money in, how is that fair? 

41 minutes ago, dkw said:

It amazes me that people think it's about protecting clubs with little money from spending what they don't have, it's exactly as you described it, it's all about the big clubs ring fencing so no one can break the status quo. Roman came in and scared them, so the ffp was invented as a way of stopping anymore. The rules allow owners to leverage clubs against loans and debt but don't allow an individual to put his iwn money in, how is that fair? 

Not sure I see this the same way.

I actually think this makes it harder for even big clubs and think it has been a factor with Madrid and not selling Bale. I think the thing is even big clubs with sugar daddies or groups of sugar daddies cannot just buy the league anymore unless they build the revenue base too.

Saying this I am not sure how it impacts clubs getting to the EPL, I guess they are constrained the same way and does that act as a barrier to potentially becoming a big club not sure.

In theory these rules as I understand them should prevent clubs spending beyond their means and putting the club at risk of administration.

 

If the evidence against City is admissible and from what I’m reading it should be given that it is was in the public domain, I don’t see what leg City have to stand on.

a) whether you agree with FFP or not, they are the rules and City agreed to abide by them. They could have taken UEFA to Court when these rules came into place or not taken part in UEFA’s competitions if they had objections, unlikely as that would be. It is a weak case to have agreed to a set of rules and then in retrospect attack them after being caught trying to subvert them. 

Could a higher court find FFP unlawful? I’m not sure. Surely UEFA’s case that it can set its own rules is pretty strong.

b) this isn’t merely a breach of FFP. If they had submitted legitimate accounts and been found guilty of a breach that is one thing. However, they have allegedly been submitting false accounts in order to circumvent the rules. This is much more significant.

c) They might have a case that the punishment is disproportionate and that is harder to gauge. 

All that said, I have no idea how the CAS operates so I won’t be taking anything for granted.

The fallout from this is going to run and run.

Edited February 15, 20206 yr by Zagger

assuming the ban is implemented does anyone know what this means for the PL if City finish in the top 4? Will 5th place get a CL spot?

the other thought I have on this is, it's a little absurd to ban City for 2 seasons from next season when they could win the CL this season. Wouldn't be a great outcome for UEFA to have a "banned" club as reigning CL winners - maybe UEFA will advise their refs to make sure City don't progress and we'll see some interesting decisions on the field but would it not be better to disqualify them immediately and give a 1 year ban for 2020/21???    

2 hours ago, dkw said:

It amazes me that people think it's about protecting clubs with little money from spending what they don't have, it's exactly as you described it, it's all about the big clubs ring fencing so no one can break the status quo. Roman came in and scared them, so the ffp was invented as a way of stopping anymore. The rules allow owners to leverage clubs against loans and debt but don't allow an individual to put his iwn money in, how is that fair? 

Roman was a big advocate of FFP. Being a shrewd business man, he realised that our club had to be self financing eventually and by backing FFP he in effect was ring fencing his own investments. City's starting base was a lot lower than ours and has required substantial amounts to build its brand. At this point it would be very difficult for another team to break into the European Elite, even with a mega rich new owner.

 

Massive news and has big ramifications for the rest of the season.

Assuming the CL ban is upheld, we give ourselves a massive chance to qualify for the Champions League and consolidate the good work that's been produced by Frank thus far.

Interesting times ahead for City.

• Will the appeal be successful?
• Will Pep stay at the club beyond this season?
• Will there be a mass exodus by the playing squad?
• How do they go about rebuilding their squad successfully despite the ban?
• Will further punishments be awaiting them on the domestic front such as points deduction?
• Could the City owners consider selling?

Many unanswered questions, but the next few weeks and months are going to be intriguing. A lot of clubs will be cheering this decision today.

17 hours ago, Scott Harris said:

City fans are hilarious

"Why hasn't PSG and Chelsea been looked into"........it hasn't crossed their minds that maybe their club has done something wrong and other clubs haven't.

Maybe because we've never been under investigation for breaching our FFP obligations and have been in compliance of the rules for years.

Opposition supporters used to complain about us, but we look very tame compared to Manchester City and PSG.

5 hours ago, Spiller86 said:

PSGs moment will no doubt come at some point. It has to. Agree totally on United though. FFP has done nothing to stop them spending a fortune even while sucking. In doing so they've driven up the fees for everyone else.

United are not exactly in a great place despite all the money they have.

You won't hear it much in the media unless you actively search for it, but they have growing debts with a 55.5% increase in debt on last year.

On FFP, I'm indifferent to it. I don't hate it the way others do and can understand the reasoning behind it's implementations despite it's obvious flaws.

Isn't Utds spending largely based on revenue from merchandising and if so, you can only trade on your 'magnificent' past for so long.

2 hours ago, charierre said:

Roman was a big advocate of FFP. Being a shrewd business man, he realised that our club had to be self financing eventually and by backing FFP he in effect was ring fencing his own investments. City's starting base was a lot lower than ours and has required substantial amounts to build its brand. At this point it would be very difficult for another team to break into the European Elite, even with a mega rich new owner.

Exactly, I remember when it was revealed that roman was backing ffp and opposition fans and idiot sports writers claimed it was proof he was wanting to sell the club. The fact is we are n I w dining at the top table and he is happy that ffp will keep that exclusivity now, no club will ever be able to rise up to that level. 

I see that some fans, mainly Liverpool and United fans, are begging for City's trophies to removed because they won them through cheating the system. They want them removed from City and rewarded to their clubs instead. That is pathetic, they have no shame.

If City were to have their titles removed, then they should be removed from existence, not given to the team that were 2nd best. I would hate to be given those titles, they would feel tainted and wouldn't really feel like something we earned.

Edited February 15, 20206 yr by Scott Harris

All their Champions League trophies should be rescinded.