Platini: No Ban For Failing FFP This Time Around

[jimtolmie_tache]

Hughes signed Kompany, Zabba, Barry, DJong, Lescott & Tevez. The fucking backbone of our trophy winning side & still part of the spine of this one.

Kompany and Zab were budget signings, *just* before the big money came in. Zabaleta signed on the day, didn't he? He was as shocked as anyone what he was walking into.

That, tbf, is where Hughes excels. How many people had even heard of Kompany before he signed? Unless you follow German or Belgian football, not many I expect. I certainly hadn't. I knew Zab because Spanish football has a far higher profile, but he was at Espanyol, not Barcelona.

I'm saying Hughes was the worst type of manager to have under the current owners. He was appointed by Thaksin basically because he knew all his money was frozen, and Hughes was probably a good choice to get the most out of a)existing players and b) any bargain signings he could think of. If the new owners had never come in, Hughes would probably have been okay, keeping us in the division and maybe getting a semi-final or two. We wouldn't have expected any more from him, given what had happened in the decade since Peter Reid was sacked.

But there was maybe too much sentiment - or maybe, too much wanting to look like nice people - on the part of ADUG to keep Hughes on for so long. And Hughes gets blinded by what he considers big names when he has big money to spend. Ade and Bridge were truly big names when they signed for us, but Hughes was too desperate to get them and gave them too comfortable contracts. I bet Kompany and Zab's first contracts weren't anything like, and we saw how hungry they were from the off, particularly Zab.

At QPR he was even more extreme. He would've been so much better off staying at Fulham, but the fact that he was blinded by the Mittal millions shows that he has a misplaced arrogance about him that makes him unsuitable for a level any higher than where he is now. He won't ever get a truly big job again, not even Everton if Martinez goes. He may get Wales again one day... that wouldn't be a bad fit considering there is no money or contracts involved.

He should have gone before the 09-10 season, to give Mancini, or another choice, the 2009 Summer transfer window, which turned out to be a wasted opportunity.

Hughes didn't give anyone a contract. Gary Cooke did.

People in the media were openly laughing when players like Adebayor were linked with City & huge money was the only way to persuade them.

Hughes was the team manager. He could and should have said "that's too much" to the demands. Just because we have/had big money, it shouldn't be thrown away. The Bridge fiasco being the worst. Presenting him on the pitch as if he was Trevor Francis, a bloody left back! If MH hadn't been spending like a man with no arms, I wouldn't have been surprised if the scouting network had come up with someone like a young Luke Shaw.

[Ted Hughes]

Hughes signed Kompany, Zabba, Barry, DJong, Lescott & Tevez. The fucking backbone of our trophy winning side & still part of the spine of this one.

Kompany and Zab were budget signings, *just* before the big money came in. Zabaleta signed on the day, didn't he? He was as shocked as anyone what he was walking into.

That, tbf, is where Hughes excels. How many people had even heard of Kompany before he signed? Unless you follow German or Belgian football, not many I expect. I certainly hadn't. I knew Zab because Spanish football has a far higher profile, but he was at Espanyol, not Barcelona.

I'm saying Hughes was the worst type of manager to have under the current owners. He was appointed by Thaksin basically because he knew all his money was frozen, and Hughes was probably a good choice to get the most out of a)existing players and b) any bargain signings he could think of. If the new owners had never come in, Hughes would probably have been okay, keeping us in the division and maybe getting a semi-final or two. We wouldn't have expected any more from him, given what had happened in the decade since Peter Reid was sacked.

But there was maybe too much sentiment - or maybe, too much wanting to look like nice people - on the part of ADUG to keep Hughes on for so long. And Hughes gets blinded by what he considers big names when he has big money to spend. Ade and Bridge were truly big names when they signed for us, but Hughes was too desperate to get them and gave them too comfortable contracts. I bet Kompany and Zab's first contracts weren't anything like, and we saw how hungry they were from the off, particularly Zab.

At QPR he was even more extreme. He would've been so much better off staying at Fulham, but the fact that he was blinded by the Mittal millions shows that he has a misplaced arrogance about him that makes him unsuitable for a level any higher than where he is now. He won't ever get a truly big job again, not even Everton if Martinez goes. He may get Wales again one day... that wouldn't be a bad fit considering there is no money or contracts involved.

He should have gone before the 09-10 season, to give Mancini, or another choice, the 2009 Summer transfer window, which turned out to be a wasted opportunity.

Hughes didn't give anyone a contract. Gary Cooke did.

People in the media were openly laughing when players like Adebayor were linked with City & huge money was the only way to persuade them.

Hughes was the team manager. He could and should have said "that's too much" to the demands. Just because we have/had big money, it shouldn't be thrown away. The Bridge fiasco being the worst. Presenting him on the pitch as if he was Trevor Francis, a bloody left back! If MH hadn't been spending like a man with no arms, I wouldn't have been surprised if the scouting network had come up with someone like a young Luke Shaw.

No he shouldn't, the CEO should tell him it was too much, to which I'm pretty sure hughes would reply 'ok' & that would be that. If they tell him he can spend fortunes on players, he will spend fortunes on players.

We tried to sign Kaka for 100 mil. That wasn't Hughes determining the deal, neither did he do the accounting for Jo, or Robinho.

They weren't ased about spending money then, nor when they let Mancini sign Balotelli, Dzeko & Aguero with Adebayor & Tevez still at the club.

[jimtolmie_tache]

Hughes signed Kompany, Zabba, Barry, DJong, Lescott & Tevez. The fucking backbone of our trophy winning side & still part of the spine of this one.

Kompany and Zab were budget signings, *just* before the big money came in. Zabaleta signed on the day, didn't he? He was as shocked as anyone what he was walking into.

That, tbf, is where Hughes excels. How many people had even heard of Kompany before he signed? Unless you follow German or Belgian football, not many I expect. I certainly hadn't. I knew Zab because Spanish football has a far higher profile, but he was at Espanyol, not Barcelona.

I'm saying Hughes was the worst type of manager to have under the current owners. He was appointed by Thaksin basically because he knew all his money was frozen, and Hughes was probably a good choice to get the most out of a)existing players and b) any bargain signings he could think of. If the new owners had never come in, Hughes would probably have been okay, keeping us in the division and maybe getting a semi-final or two. We wouldn't have expected any more from him, given what had happened in the decade since Peter Reid was sacked.

But there was maybe too much sentiment - or maybe, too much wanting to look like nice people - on the part of ADUG to keep Hughes on for so long. And Hughes gets blinded by what he considers big names when he has big money to spend. Ade and Bridge were truly big names when they signed for us, but Hughes was too desperate to get them and gave them too comfortable contracts. I bet Kompany and Zab's first contracts weren't anything like, and we saw how hungry they were from the off, particularly Zab.

At QPR he was even more extreme. He would've been so much better off staying at Fulham, but the fact that he was blinded by the Mittal millions shows that he has a misplaced arrogance about him that makes him unsuitable for a level any higher than where he is now. He won't ever get a truly big job again, not even Everton if Martinez goes. He may get Wales again one day... that wouldn't be a bad fit considering there is no money or contracts involved.

He should have gone before the 09-10 season, to give Mancini, or another choice, the 2009 Summer transfer window, which turned out to be a wasted opportunity.

Hughes didn't give anyone a contract. Gary Cooke did.

People in the media were openly laughing when players like Adebayor were linked with City & huge money was the only way to persuade them.

Hughes was the team manager. He could and should have said "that's too much" to the demands. Just because we have/had big money, it shouldn't be thrown away. The Bridge fiasco being the worst. Presenting him on the pitch as if he was Trevor Francis, a bloody left back! If MH hadn't been spending like a man with no arms, I wouldn't have been surprised if the scouting network had come up with someone like a young Luke Shaw.

No he shouldn't, the CEO should tell him it was too much, to which I'm pretty sure hughes would reply 'ok' & that would be that. If they tell him he can spend fortunes on players, he will spend fortunes on players.

We tried to sign Kaka for 100 mil. That wasn't Hughes determining the deal, neither did he do the accounting for Jo, or Robinho.

They weren't ased about spending money then, nor when they let Mancini sign Balotelli, Dzeko & Aguero with Adebayor & Tevez still at the club.

Well, Garrrrrry Cooke wasn't at QPR in Hughes' time. Hughes is the common link between the two English clubs having the most difficulty with FFP, albeit at different levels, and I don't think it's a coincidence. IMO, he acquired that MUFC arrogance which might be good in some circumstances, but in this case has left two clubs with problems long after he's gone.

[Ted Hughes]

Hughes will not bankrupt anybody.

If people tell him he can spend what he wants, he will do.

If you think Mancini would have spent less, or guaranteed better signings at that time, I think you are having a laugh.

[BookJunior]

If this is true and PSG are fine significantly less than City, I can see all hell break lose and Mansour taking UEFA to the courts as well as all the British press getting behind City because once again Platini and his corrupt cronies show their hatred for the English Football.

He has a face that has always made me want to punch him and with "FFP" my suspicions about his character are confirmed.

If I'm honest, "FFP" combined with their nonsensical seeding system makes a mockery of the idea that the winners of the CL are the Champions of Europe.

Almost in an odd way like the winners of the Eurovision Song Contest have the best song.

[carl_feedthegoat]

Hughes will not bankrupt anybody.

If people tell him he can spend what he wants, he will do.

If you think Mancini would have spent less, or guaranteed better signings at that time, I think you are having a laugh.

Licker.

[jimtolmie_tache]

If this is true and PSG are fine significantly less than City, I can see all hell break lose and Mansour taking UEFA to the courts as well as all the British press getting behind City because once again Platini and his corrupt cronies show their hatred for the English Football.

He has a face that has always made me want to punch him and with "FFP" my suspicions about his character are confirmed.

Platini seems to be the sort of person who is used to getting what he wants.

He had a player expelled from the 1982 French squad because the player had been shagging Platini's wife. I mean who did he think he was, Wayne Bridge?

I can't find the tweet right now, but the other day one of the City fans I follow posted a newspaper article about Platini turning down a transfer to Arsenal in the 80s because his 'rival in love' was suddenly set to join Spurs (but in the end didn't)! LMFAO. I think we should track this other guy down and give him a position in the club, one that sends him to UEFA HQ as often as possible as part of the FFP negotiations...

[jimtolmie_tache]

Schumacher slammed his boot into the wrong French player...

[Blue Since 76]

Hughes was the team manager. He could and should have said "that's too much" to the demands. Just because we have/had big money, it shouldn't be thrown away. The Bridge fiasco being the worst. Presenting him on the pitch as if he was Trevor Francis, a bloody left back! If MH hadn't been spending like a man with no arms, I wouldn't have been surprised if the scouting network had come up with someone like a young Luke Shaw.

A very young Luke Shaw - he'd have been 13.

Bridge was a shit signing at the time, not least as he'd proven he was happy to sit on a bench and was a waste of money in line with RSC. But it's easy to look back now and think we should have signed better players when the reality is many of them wouldn't have come.

We either bought what we did, accepting that we were over paying both in fee and wages, but they were proven players, or we took a punt on little known foreigners (Boateng and Savic?) or lesser players and hoped they were good enough. The aim was to get into the top 4 ASAP and the wasted cost of doing it was accepted.

I detested Hughes as a manager, but his team provided the backbone for a successful one

[Beefymcfc]

UEFA can suck our hairy bollocks, City have got this.

[patrickblue]

Interesting article come up on Bluemoon

http://www.euractiv.com/sections/euro-f ... -fair-play

How Manchester City could use EU competition law to beat Financial Fair Play rules

09/05/2014 - 16:25


Manchester City Football Club is considering challenging a record-breaking €60 million fine for breaching UEFA’s Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules by using EU competition law to prevent cartels and abuse of market dominance.

Despite Competition Commissioner Joaquín Almunia’s declared support for FFP, the European Commission’s antitrust department will examine any complaint made on its merits, EurActiv has learnt.

UEFA is European football’s governing body and runs the lucrative Champions League competition. Under FFP, clubs in UEFA competitions were allowed to make losses of about €45 million between 2011-13. City lost about €182 but argue that, when various exceptions are taken into account they narrowly hit the target.

Abu Dhabi-owned City was one of nine football clubs including Qatari-owned Paris St Germain to be charged with breaching the regulations. As well as a fine, City face having their Champions League squad cut from 25 players to 21.

Any complaint by City, set a deadline by UEFA of today (9 May) to accept a reduced fine or face stronger penalties, is likely be under EU treaty rules governing abuse of dominant market position and price-fixing, rather than state aid rules.

Article 101 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the EU states that a unilateral action can be anti-competitive. This rule covers decisions by associations, which would arguably include UEFA’s decision to fine City. By fining City, UEFA are giving a competitive advantage to other businesses (other football clubs), lawyers could argue.

Article 102 deals with abuse of dominant market position. City would have to establish what market, likely European football, is being dominated. Because the Champions League is so lucrative for participating clubs, there is a risk those clubs become entrenched as their financial advantage is so strong. It is only through large injections of cash that clubs like City and PSG can break the stranglehold of the established elite.

City could claim that the fine and squad cut constitutes a barrier to entry of the market but the European football market is so large it may be difficult to prove it is dominated by an elite.

Another ground for complaint is that FFP “directly or indirectly imposes unfair purchase,” that it illegally prevents City from trading as it wishes.

The concept of consumer prejudice also comes under article 102. City could argue that impairing its performance in the Champions League restrict competition with other clubs. That could lead to the established elite raising ticket prices, for example. The commission often looks favourably on consumer arguments, legal experts said.

The complaint is likely to include a number of differing aspects in a bid to convince the commission the case warrants further investigation.

Almunia’s support for FFP

Almunia’s support for FFP is based on the idea that good financial governance would prevent a breach of EU state aid rules. Those rules are designed to prevent competition in the marketplace being distorted by injections of public money.Seven Spanish clubs including Real Madrid and Barcelona and Almunia’s beloved Athletic Bilbao, were charged with breaches of state aid rules in December last year.

Almunia will be leaving his post in November when a new European Commission is appointed. His replacement may have a different view on FFP to the Spanish Socialist. The process kick-started by a complaint will likely continue beyond Almunia’s reign, especially if EU officials decide an investigation is warranted.

If the investigation goes City’s way they would be able to take that decision to a national court, and argue for recompense. Although UEFA is based in Nyon, Switzerland; the Swiss are governed by the same competition laws as EU member states. If UEFA appeals the commission decision, as would be expected, the case could take more than four years to resolve in the European Court of Justice.

PSG yesterday agreed to settle for a €25 million fine, rather than fight the UEFA charge any longer. City’s €42m-a-year sponsorship deal with Etihad and PSG’s €200m-a-year contract with the Qatar Tourism Authority were both deemed not to be a valid means for them to balance their books under FFP break-even rules

City, almost certain to claim their second English Premier League title in three years on Sunday, are understood to be furious at being bracketed with the French club. It’s been reported City argue their intention was always to comply with FFP, unlike PSG.

If the club doesn’t reach a deal, it will be referred to European football’s Club Financial Control Body, which would assess afresh whether the club failed to comply with FFP rules in their 2011-13 accounts and, if so, would likely impose an even sterner penalty.

If City do make a complaint, it will be the second made to the commission against FFP. Jean-Louis Dupont, the lawyer who successfully challenged football contract laws in the famous Bosman case made a complaint last year. Among his arguments is that FFP reduces revenue for football agents such as his client Belgian Daniel Striani.
James Crisp

[Peter Doherty (AGAIG)]

I hope there's something to this, as what appears to be happening with FFP is disgraceful. Thanks for posting.

[patrickblue]

Now this has just been posted

James Masters ‏@Masters_JamesD · 4m
BREAKING: Been told there will be no announcement today on FFP from UEFA. Confident verdicts to be given on Monday afternoon.

Which would seem logical as business in Europe will now be closed.

General consensus seems to be that City have been giving as good as they get, and that it'll end up being settled in house.

Make of it what you will.

[zuricity]

i really hope we take them to court in Brussels.

[patrickblue]

For all of you who give Niall a hard time, take a look at this.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10152361939675768

[bayblue]

For all of you who give Niall a hard time, take a look at this. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10152361939675768

Watched the recording tonight of the Wed game and thought that all round he was good; very positive about Pellegrini as well when Carragher had been manoeuvred into questioning his motivational skills. There's been a fair few times when I think he's been uber critical of us but this week wasn't one of them; maybe he just backs the odds on favourites only.

[Peter Doherty (AGAIG)]

For all of you who give Niall a hard time, take a look at this.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10152361939675768

It'd be difficult ever to say a bad word against him after watching that. Well said, Niall.

[Saul Goodman]

It'll be unfortunate if the sanctions are announced while we're having our parade

[Lee_R]

Just a quicky..

Whats peoples thoughts on fighting it a the risk of at ban from the CL?
Personally I think we should stick to our guns no matter what. They will soon cave in when they realise theyre not getting xx million

[Blue In Bolton]

I agree Lee - they can stick it up their arse as far as I am concerned. Hope the Sheikh does get his legal team on it as it is scandalous how we are being treated.