Platini: No Ban For Failing FFP This Time Around

[john@staustell]

I agree with you Ted.

I would point out we have been 'talking' to UEFA for years, so nothing should come out of the blue.

Also we have hired some very expensive 'experts' in this field to guide us through, so if we get stitched up now we can fuck them off straight away and get their salaries paid back. Wouldn't want a situation where you or I could have done just as well!

[DoomMerchant]

There's only one John68!


















cuz all the rest of the old cunts died like 10-15 years ago.

cheers

[Blue Since 76]

No offence, John68, but are you good or bad luck when you're posting? Just that there's an important couple of weeks coming up and we don't want anything rocking the Voodoo which got to Stevie G.

[ruralblue]

No offence, John68, but are you good or bad luck when you're posting? Just that there's an important couple of weeks coming up and we don't want anything rocking the Voodoo which got to Stevie G.

Oi!!!!!!

John was here before football was even invented and yonks before mcfc started to exist. He keeps disappearing off this place as it is and his wealth of City knowledge is amazing. Don't drive him away! ;-)

[craigmcfc]

Thanks for the kind words Jimbo...appreciated mate.

Jus fer thee, soe's yer get mi drift like. Wi spent munnie soe's wi cud gerrup wi't top clubs an earn a bob a too. Wi allus knew Yoofa wud kick ar arses but if wi got munnie in fust, wi'd bi quids in as like as not.
Once wi got there, if Yoofa nobbut jus gi us a gentle kick, wi'd onli bi fooked fer a year mebbe like as not., burafter that wi'd bi as appy as a yarshermun wi'ya sheep an a pair o wellies.

Hope that makes it clear for you Jimbo.

Crystal for me lad, good to see you back.

[craigmcfc]

I'd also like to add that despite the well made arguments in this thread, the outcome still has me concerned.

Mind you, I still think City will lose when we're three up.

[Wooders]

I'd also like to add that despite the well made arguments in this thread, the outcome still has me concerned. Mind you, I still think City will lose when we're three up.

You are right to be concerned - we've had our wings clipped by this and it's niaive to think that we won't need to spend to remain in the title picture, even with the current squad

[john68]

Thank you Gents.

Ted,
Just a thought Mates about a legal challenge. The impending case (Striani/Dupont) is not due in a French court until Jan 2015.
My thoughts are that were City ever going to mount our own legal challege against FFPR, we would have already done so some time ago. Instead, City chose to make reasonable efforts to comply with the regulations. That does not preclude a possible challenge should City deem any sanction or decision against us unjust. Nor would it stop City defending ourselves against a possible appeal by Arsenal, Spurs, Everton or the rags in the near future.
Another factor in any legal challenge is that it would appear to be that any legal challenge by us can only be made in the Court of Sports Arbitration. I'm not sure why and have been unable to find any explanation, but it may be that clubs or the ECA have already agreed that. If anyone can add info to that, I would appreciate it.

John,
You are wholly right about City's continuous dialogue with UeFA throughout all this and also the level of FFPR expertise City have employed. There is absolutely no doubt that City are fully aware of every aspect and legality of the regulations. That make me all the more certain that City's policy (regarding FFPR) has been adopted knowingly and deliberately,without the necessity of any legal challenges.
Any legal challenge by City would put us in direct confrontation with UeFA and the most powerful and richest clubs in the World. These are organisations that City need and have to deal with on a daily basis. We are already pretty friendless, maybe better to take another route....(see below)

[john68]

Earlier, I asserted that, (notwithstanding any appeal by another club against their perception of the leniency of any sanction against City) by accepting the sort term(1 year) sanction, City had in the longer term effectively won the FFPRs war.

Consider that City are sanctioned with both a salary cap and a cutting of the playing quota. This will only have an effect next season when the squads are submitted. Consider also that any financial dealings(transfers, sponsorships, sales of image rights, commercial/matchday/broadcast income) will show in next years balance sheet. That gives City a full year and 2 transfer windows to get our sheet to balance.

We are looking at somewhere about a £50M shortfall...and a long time to sort it.

Sanctions, what sanctions?
(and not a legal challenge or confrontation in sight)

[JamieMCFC]

Another factor in any legal challenge is that it would appear to be that any legal challenge by us can only be made in the Court of Sports Arbitration. I'm not sure why and have been unable to find any explanation, but it may be that clubs or the ECA have already agreed that. If anyone can add info to that, I would appreciate it.

That is a FIFA statute

66 Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)
1. FIFA recognises the independent Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) with
headquarters in Lausanne (Switzerland) to resolve disputes between FIFA,
Members, Confederations, Leagues, Clubs, Players, Officials and licensed
match agents and players’ agents.
2. The provisions of the CAS Code of Sports-related Arbitration shall apply to
the proceedings. CAS shall primarily apply the various regulations of FIFA and,
additionally, Swiss law.

67 Jurisdiction of CAS
1. Appeals against final decisions passed by FIFA’s legal bodies and against
decisions passed by Confederations, Members or Leagues shall be lodged with
CAS within 21 days of notification of the decision in question.
2. Recourse may only be made to CAS after all other internal channels have
been exhausted.
3. CAS, however, does not deal with appeals arising from:
a) violations of the Laws of the Game;
b) suspensions of up to four matches or up to three months (with the
exception of doping decisions);
c) decisions against which an appeal to an independent and duly
constituted arbitration tribunal recognised under the rules of an
Association or Confederation may be made.
4. The appeal shall not have a suspensive effect. The appropriate FIFA body or,
alternatively, CAS may order the appeal to have a suspensive effect.
5. FIFA is entitled to appeal to CAS against any internally final and binding
doping-related decision passed in particular by the Confederations, Members
or Leagues in accordance with the provisions set out in the FIFA Anti-Doping
Regulations.
6. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) is entitled to appeal to CAS against
any internally final and binding doping-related decision passed in particular
by FIFA, the Confederations, Members or Leagues in accordance with the
provisions set out in the FIFA Anti-Doping Regulations.

68 Obligation
1. The Confederations, Members and Leagues shall agree to recognise CAS as
an independent judicial authority and to ensure that their members, affiliated
Players and Officials comply with the decisions passed by CAS. The same
obligation shall apply to licensed match and players’ agents.
2. Recourse to ordinary courts of law is prohibited unless specifically provided
for in the FIFA regulations. Recourse to ordinary courts of law for all types of
provisional measures is also prohibited.
3. The Associations shall insert a clause in their statutes or regulations,
stipulating that it is prohibited to take disputes in the Association or disputes
affecting Leagues, members of Leagues, Clubs, members of Clubs, Players,
Officials and other Association Officials to ordinary courts of law, unless the
FIFA regulations or binding legal provisions specifically provide for or stipulate
recourse to ordinary courts of law. Instead of recourse to ordinary courts of
law, provision shall be made for arbitration. Such disputes shall be taken to an
independent and duly constituted arbitration tribunal recognised under the
rules of the Association or Confederation or to CAS.
The Associations shall also ensure that this stipulation is implemented in the
Association, if necessary by imposing a binding obligation on its members.
The Associations shall impose sanctions on any party that fails to respect this
obligation and ensure that any appeal against such sanctions shall likewise be
strictly submitted to arbitration, and not to ordinary courts of law.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/AFFeder ... eutral.pdf

[mr_nool]

Thank you Gents.

Ted,
Just a thought Mates about a legal challenge. The impending case (Striani/Dupont) is not due in a French court until Jan 2015.
My thoughts are that were City ever going to mount our own legal challege against FFPR, we would have already done so some time ago. Instead, City chose to make reasonable efforts to comply with the regulations. That does not preclude a possible challenge should City deem any sanction or decision against us unjust. Nor would it stop City defending ourselves against a possible appeal by Arsenal, Spurs, Everton or the rags in the near future.
Another factor in any legal challenge is that it would appear to be that any legal challenge by us can only be made in the Court of Sports Arbitration. I'm not sure why and have been unable to find any explanation, but it may be that clubs or the ECA have already agreed that. If anyone can add info to that, I would appreciate it.

John,
You are wholly right about City's continuous dialogue with UeFA throughout all this and also the level of FFPR expertise City have employed. There is absolutely no doubt that City are fully aware of every aspect and legality of the regulations. That make me all the more certain that City's policy (regarding FFPR) has been adopted knowingly and deliberately,without the necessity of any legal challenges.
Any legal challenge by City would put us in direct confrontation with UeFA and the most powerful and richest clubs in the World. These are organisations that City need and have to deal with on a daily basis. We are already pretty friendless, maybe better to take another route....(see below)

It's great to have you back, mate!
Regarding our owner's stance on FFP, we simply have nothing to win (at the moment) by being non-compliant. Our owner's motive for owning MCFC is not primarily to make money or to get a thrill. It's about great PR for Abu Dhabi. Challenging UEFA the FFP will make us the Bad Guy with a capital G. The FFP is a holy cow, no matter how shady the actual motivation behind it may be.

[DoomMerchant]

It's great to have you back, mate!
Regarding our owner's stance on FFP, we simply have nothing to win (at the moment) by being non-compliant. Our owner's motive for owning MCFC is not primarily to make money or to get a thrill. It's about great PR for Abu Dhabi. Challenging UEFA the FFP will make us the Bad Guy with a capital G. The FFP is a holy cow, no matter how shady the actual motivation behind it may be.

I disagree...with everything except the capital G part.

[john68]

Thanks Jamie, That certainly clarifies that then. It seems the CAS or nowt.

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

All they are doing is trying to slap us in the wrist while avoiding lenghty legal battle which THEY ARE GUARANTEED TO LOSE. Whether FFP is good system or not is one thing but giving these competitive bans is against principles of free economy and free competition. Just like Bosman ruling, all it takes is one powerhouse Club to take them to court. Platini is mouthy cunt but in reality shit scared of Sheik and cr3w and their army of lawyers.

[Beefymcfc]

When do we find out the sanctions and what could they be?

[Ted Hughes]

Thanks Jamie, That certainly clarifies that then. It seems the CAS or nowt.

If you notice, that FIFA statute also refers to player's agents so would apply to Striani if they followed it.

FFP is a financial, more than a sporting matter.

[Ted Hughes]

All they are doing is trying to slap us in the wrist while avoiding lenghty legal battle which THEY ARE GUARANTEED TO LOSE. Whether FFP is good system or not is one thing but giving these competitive bans is against principles of free economy and free competition. Just like Bosman ruling, all it takes is one powerhouse Club to take them to court. Platini is mouthy cunt but in reality shit scared of Sheik and cr3w and their army of lawyers.

I agree.

Where this really stinks to high heaven is that a person would NOT come up with this legislation if it was designed to 'protect' clubs against financial difficulties or help clubs to survive such.

There would be much tougher legislation in many ways & one thing you would do is try to stop the kind of takeover the Glazers have made where they financially handicapped one of Europe's biggest profit making clubs.

Quite a few people have actually let slip the real reasons for ffp in recent times. Including the ex CEO from Liverpool who mentioned us as being one of the main targets of the legislation.

Platini himself has aknowledged that 'big' clubs will continue to spend huge amounts of money & inflate wages but basically says 'that's ok' provided they can afford it & that the competition will never be equal. So if it's ok for 'big' clubs to spend money & win everything, why is it not ok for us to also spend money, if we have it ?

There is only one difference between us spending & the others spending; they don't want us to.

That is not mentioned in any of the stated objectives of ffp.

[Wonderwall]

Earlier, I asserted that, (notwithstanding any appeal by another club against their perception of the leniency of any sanction against City) by accepting the sort term(1 year) sanction, City had in the longer term effectively won the FFPRs war.

Consider that City are sanctioned with both a salary cap and a cutting of the playing quota. This will only have an effect next season when the squads are submitted. Consider also that any financial dealings(transfers, sponsorships, sales of image rights, commercial/matchday/broadcast income) will show in next years balance sheet. That gives City a full year and 2 transfer windows to get our sheet to balance.

We are looking at somewhere about a £50M shortfall...and a long time to sort it.

Sanctions, what sanctions?
(and not a legal challenge or confrontation in sight)

about time you came home you FB whore, good to have you back :-)

[gillie]

Now being reported only nine clubs have been in breach of FFP PSG is one but others not named as yet.

[Saul Goodman]

Now being reported only nine clubs have been in breach of FFP PSG is one but others not named as yet.

Surely 1 or 2 have to be Russian clubs