Financial Fair Play

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Château NoHo said:
www.fotmob.com

UEFA confirm punishments for FFP violations; Barcelona, Chelsea & Man City on watchlist

www.fotmob.com www.fotmob.com

UEFA announced on Friday that eight teams will be fined for failing to meet their break-even requirements, with Monaco (€0.3m), Marseille (€0.3m), Besiktas (€0.6m), AC Milan (€2m), Juventus (€3.5m), Inter (€4m), Roma (€5m) and PSG (€10m) ordered to either pay up immediately or have these sums deducted from their prize pool from this season.

Further breaches would see each respective side charged again, with PSG handed the biggest punishment of another €55m payment if they don't break even.

Surprisingly, UEFA found that sides from England and Spain all met their criteria and would not be punished. However, they insisted that 19 clubs - Borussia Dortmund, Chelsea, Barcelona, Basel, Union Berlin, Fenerbahce, Feyenoord, Leicester City, Manchester City, Lyon, Rangers, Real Betis, Royal Antwerp, Sevilla, Lazio, Napoli, Trabzonspor, Wolfsburg and West Ham United - have been placed on a watchlist as they either only scraped their requirements or 'benefited from historical positive break-even results'.

These 19 clubs have been informed that they will not be given such leeway when their 2023 financial year results are analysed.
Click to expand...
Who knew UEFA were bi-lingual. English and Bollocks in the same sentence. Impressive
 
fogueres

fogueres

Why does nobody say anything to PSG, Manchester City etc? The PSG "mask" everything by taking money from the sponsor who is then the same as the owner. This is called "circumventing the rules" while the bodies that should control close their eyes....
 
Spursidol said:
Will take 3 years to implement new regs. 90 % in first year.

So ALMOST NO cost controls next year - pretty much only Everton may be affected by a 90% cost control.

And most clubs will be able to live within 80% (which I assume to be the limit in year 2).

Totally a sell out to the larger clubs.

But assuming Spurs revenues are circa £500m - £600m in a season unaffected by covid (which I think they could be) our rivals would be ManCity, ManU, Liverpool in revenue terms as even Chelsea and Woolwich couldn't compete (unless of course fake sponsorship deals come back). So from a Spurs pov we'd be fine in 3 years time with 70% ....
Click to expand...
A Spurs spend of 70% will only happen if UEFA institutes a floor of 70%.
 
www.fotmob.com

UEFA confirm punishments for FFP violations; Barcelona, Chelsea & Man City on watchlist

www.fotmob.com www.fotmob.com

UEFA announced on Friday that eight teams will be fined for failing to meet their break-even requirements, with Monaco (€0.3m), Marseille (€0.3m), Besiktas (€0.6m), AC Milan (€2m), Juventus (€3.5m), Inter (€4m), Roma (€5m) and PSG (€10m) ordered to either pay up immediately or have these sums deducted from their prize pool from this season.

Further breaches would see each respective side charged again, with PSG handed the biggest punishment of another €55m payment if they don't break even.

Surprisingly, UEFA found that sides from England and Spain all met their criteria and would not be punished. However, they insisted that 19 clubs - Borussia Dortmund, Chelsea, Barcelona, Basel, Union Berlin, Fenerbahce, Feyenoord, Leicester City, Manchester City, Lyon, Rangers, Real Betis, Royal Antwerp, Sevilla, Lazio, Napoli, Trabzonspor, Wolfsburg and West Ham United - have been placed on a watchlist as they either only scraped their requirements or 'benefited from historical positive break-even results'.

These 19 clubs have been informed that they will not be given such leeway when their 2023 financial year results are analysed.
 
Today in the Gazzetta dello sport statistics on the clubs that have spent more in the last 10 years: Manchester City and PSG...ahead

Mercato, chi ha speso di più negli ultimi dieci anni? City e Psg, flop miliardari



2-ke7G-U2609754935830tD-350x467@Gazzetta-Web_zoom.jpg


Market, who has spent more in the last ten years? City and Psg, billionaires flop
In the decade the clubs of Manchester, Barça, Real, Psg and Chelsea have spent 20% of the turnover of the world market. A resounding flop for the Citizens and the Parisians, a bittersweet budget for Barça. Real has spent less but has won more in Europe. And immediately behind Juve.

The richness of the world transfer market in the last ten years has been concentrated in the hands of six clubs. Manchester City, Barcelona, Paris Saint Germain, Chelsea, Manchester United and Real Madrid (in order of spending) in the recent decade have invested in the market operations 7 billion and twenty million, a figure of just over 20% of the volume d world market business (estimated at around 35 billion euros, the calculations are naturally approximate). At the wheel of the six giants follow Liverpool and Juventus: the budget of the Reds talks about 930 million spent, that of the bianconeri of 920 million, but the Agnelli club has consistently counterbalanced the outputs with excellent revenues derived from also excellent sales. Behind them opens the chasm, with a club patrol (including the Italians Inter, Milan and Rome) much but much more behind: estimated spending budget within a range between 600 and 700 million in the decade. First consideration: the imbalance jumps to the eye, even if clubs like Inter and Atletico Madrid remain light years away from the expense of the first class. That now, when it comes to the market, they run for themselves.

THE TOYS OF THE SHEIKS - There is then a second obligatory reflection. A question mark as big as a house: spending more offers the certainty of winning? Schools of thought are conflicting, we could discuss them for hours. We remain however to the data, to the facts. And let's take, for example, the two most sensational cases. The first is that of Manchester City. In the last ten years, the Citiziens have been the toy of Sheikh Mansur, who has poured in sensational investments and never seen until today in the history of football. Only for the transfer market, we are talking about an expenditure of 1584 million euros in ten years, with the record set in the current season by the requests of Guardiola cost 317.5 million. Results? Poverissimi: the bulletin board of the English has welcomed two Premier, several national cups, but several reserved spaces have remained empty. Above all, in Europe there was an unprecedented flop. The second case-school is that of Paris Saint Germain. Here too we meet the desires of the sheikh, Nasser Ghanim Al-Khelaif in this case, who spends without worrying about winning. True: the PSG is back to winning in Ligue1, but the 5 titles in 10 years of France can justify 1150 million spending? Against the cosmic zero in Europe.


SPANISH, CATALAN, ENGLISH - In the ranking of those who spent the most there could not be Barcelona and Real Madrid. But with distinctions. The planning of Florentino Perez has produced for Real galactics the best yield between costs and results: they are, in fact, the last of the class among the six biggest spenders (977 million invested in the market), but in Europe they are the ones that have collected more with 3 Champions (less at home: 2 Liga loot) and have the way paved towards the Kiev final in May. Moving from Madrid to Catalonia, there is a Barcelona before and after the sunset of the generation of the Xavi, Iniesta, Mascherano and company. In the last two years, in fact, in Barcelona they have resumed spending above their standards to compensate for the sudden constipation of Cantera, which struggles to churn out new champions of absolute level, and to rebuild a winning technical project in Europe. After the indigestion of titles of Liga made (8 times out of 10) and the 3 Champions (the last one however arrived in 2015). The circle closes with two other Englishmen: Chelsea with its 1137 million invested and Manchester United with 1018 million. Do you invest well with your hand? He won very little Manchester United, with his three times in Premier and a Europa League. Better, but not so much the Blues: 3 Premier, a Europa League and a Champions. As much as they spent ...
Mario Pagliara
 
Jurgen's Binnman said:
I would bet money that it won’t happen. Sadly. They’ll buy their way out of trouble again, like they always do.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't bet against it. We all KNEW that ridiculous amounts were paid in "sponsorship" by client companies, now it looks like they've found the evidence.

I think they could well get a ban because there are more important and more influential clubs in EUFA that they need to keep onside. City play pretty stuff, but they're hardly Euro Royalty.

Furthermore, if they do find the evidence and ban them, where does that leave the PL? Financial doping on that scale would mean massive fines at least.
 
What really irks with all of this FFP is that it actually masks the real problem.

A country, yep an entire country “Sports Washing” on an unprecedented scale. And no one in any position of influence is calling them out ! Football is small fry to these people, they don’t earn money from football, but it gives them an taint of respectability they could not get from the reality of their society.

City cheated. And cheating in Sport is acceptable how ? Ask Ben Johnson, Lance Armstrong or Marion Jones what legacy cheating in sport leaves you with. That’s the gaze that City should get, when those of us with Sanity see them dancing about on Sky TV on Sunday our reaction should be nothing short of vilification.

beyond that dancing, is the smile of a ruling class that essentially counters what we recognise as of value to our free society, and for the sake of money all those City employees lose how much of their soul and turn a blind eye, and the Media too. It’s utterly ridiculous.

Is Pep a “legend” because he wins a sporting prize with every conceivable advantage to do so?

Or is Pep a two faced bastard who for money provides a mask of respect to a regime that kills homosexuals, imprisons women who elect to have an abortion, or can be so inhuman as to disallow a woman with breast cancer necessary treatment because she disagreed with the policy of the Emirati and let’s not worry about all the others who “forcibly disappear” should they challenge the rulers.

FFP is important, but City Group have gone way beyond rules to achieve what they have. Remember the threat made that they would ruin UEFA if they were punished. Even that got almost no traction, why ?

Money money money, Hey it’s all good. Stirling is a cracking player and here’s Noel Gallagher to sing us a nice tune, look the other way.
 
bus-conductor said:

UEFA looking to introduce Financial Fair Play reform – Get French Football News

www.getfootballnewsfrance.com www.getfootballnewsfrance.com

RMC Sport report this evening that UEFA are looking to introduce new reforms to the Financial Fair Play rules.

European football’s governing body is said to want to show how essential FFP is as a tool to preserve continental football and that it helped several clubs survive the Covid-19 pandemic.

The aim, for UEFA, is to increase clubs’ control on their finances. Teams will be asked to improve their own equity. Should this be negative, they will need to improve it by 10% a year or face sanctions. The objective is to increase the responsibility of the shareholders, increase the solidity of their assets and make sure losses are covered by capital stock so as to avoid resorting to debt.

Among the new measures, clubs’ accounts would now be assessed for the current year rather than the previous one. Specifically, transfer fees, agent commission and wage bills would be monitored. Team will be able to invest according to a percentage of their turnover.

The deficit clubs are allowed to sustain over three years will be doubled from €30m to €60m as long as it is covered by the owner, so as to soften the financial blow of missing qualification for European competition.

The sanctions available to UEFA should clubs fail to comply will be the same as the system currently in place. This includes fines, player bans from the Champions League and squad list reductions, loss of points (from 2024 the Champions League will be a league table) or an outright exclusion from the competition.

The European Club Association, whose president is Paris Saint-Germain’s Nasser Al-Khelaifi, are in favour of the reform, even if certain details are still to be discussed. UEFA are likely to vote on the proposal during its executive committee meeting on May 10 and would come into play from July, with a grace period until 2024 before the new Champions League format.
Click to expand...
Translation :

When the pumped up fake plastic clubs break this rule, we will fine them and maybe kick them out of Europe.

The pumped up fake plastic clubs will then take us to court, employ 100 top lawyers, pay a gazillion quid for them, get our sanctions over ruled and there's fuck all we can do about it.
 
Château NoHo said:
UEFA announced on Friday that eight teams will be fined for failing to meet their break-even requirements, with Monaco (€0.3m), Marseille (€0.3m), Besiktas (€0.6m), AC Milan (€2m), Juventus (€3.5m), Inter (€4m), Roma (€5m) and PSG (€10m) ordered to either pay up immediately or have these sums deducted from their prize pool from this season.
Click to expand...

Oh boy, however will these clubs recover!
 
I don't pretend to understand FFP, but seems to me that the rules are easily bypassed by any club that is run by an oil rich country or oligarch, as the fines certainly are not related to their income.
Absolute waste of time!
 
There are two facets to FFP (well many facets, but they can be broken into two main facets in terms of what everyone talks about). A bug chunk of FFP regulation is very admirable, aimed at creating better run football clubs, transparency of accounting, sustainable fiscal management, better regulation of all aspects of financial management (transfer payments, player payments etc etc).

The piece of FFP that everyone gets hot under the collar about though is the spending power of a couple of clubs that have emerged as rich in the last decade or so.

But this section of the FFP legislation was never about being "Fair", it was cobbled together to appease the ECA (formerly G14 - group of football's uber clubs) who were desperately trying to preserve the hegemony they'd built up over decades, which was now under threat. They used implied threats like the possibility of a breakaway "European Super League" to ransom UEFA into doing something about the "new money" clubs that threatened their gravy train.

This sector of FFP is just pernicious bullshit. The whole point of FFP was to try and protect the institutions of football club from poor fiscal management, but there is much less risk to someone like City having owners prepared to invest their huge resources in them, than there is to ManU being massively debt leveraged against the club itself by the Glazers.

Who cares if the owners also want to sink shitloads of their own money into "sponsorship" as well? That money is not a loan, it is not placing the cubs in fiscal danger.

The fact is, the likes of Juve, Bayern, Real, Barca and ManU knew that the biggest threat to their ability to press home the advantage they'd had for decades and continue to print money year on year was by oligarch owners with their new money clubs, and set about making sure a these "new money" clubs had their hands tied.

The F’s of FFP



.
 
Last edited:
asterdroid said:
Interesting, your papers are making headlines of FFP while ours are focusing on the superleague rumour.
Click to expand...
Yes you are right. English newspapers have chosen a different line (super league) than Italian and Spanish (PSG's Financial Fair Play and Manchester City). Perhaps the British do not want to attack the emir.
 
Hasn't their owner already said (i might have read it here) that he would rather spend 30 million on a top legal team than give any to EUFA? They will get out of this ,and just receive a telling off.The financial fair play is a joke.it was never going to make a difference.
I hope i'm wrong, but...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom