Other Clubs News Discussion Thread 2 | Page 747 | Vital Football

Other Clubs News Discussion Thread 2

starchild65 said:
3 relegation places from the Championship to League One. Seems like Barnsley are taking one of them. Wigan about to be deducted 12 points which could potentially cost them but if they win their next game they could be out of the bottom 3 on goal difference. Could it be a dream come true that both Hull City (my home city club with its thousands of mouthy, glory chasing, part time plastic fans) and our dear neighbours Birmingham City might yet fall through the trap door? At least it would make our own drop more palatble knowing we are still a division higher.
Click to expand...

Glory chasing Hull City fan is not a term I have ever come across before!
 
FFP basically a sham then. It might have been CAS with the final decision but ultimately it’s down to UEFAs own rules being too flimsy to enforce which raises the question how much conviction do they really have in FFP
 
Doesn't UEFA FFP only apply to clubs who play in European competitions? And even then this is just one case where UEFA made a total balls-up; doesn't affect the general issue. As I understand it, it was a few bods at the top of UEFA raring to make an example of Man C (one bod announced Man C would be brought to book even before the initial case was heard).

Re FFP in this country, there is a good side to it. It prevents crooks from loading a club with debt way beyond what they can sensibly service. Where it goes wrong is that it's being used to enforce a level playing field by inhibiting owners from putting money into clubs, which makes life for clubs like Villa with relatively high overheads very difficult.
 
danvilla2 said:
I’m no legal expert - but as I read it in my simple head, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has overturned the ban rather than UEFA?

We’re all on the UEFA attack, but is this actually down to them?

Happy to be Randy Lernered on this one...
Click to expand...

I need to look further.

Looks like CAS have agreed they didn't comply/weren't totally forthcoming/honest with UEFA BUT that they didn't actually fudge the books - hence the fine but no ban.

It does raise serious FFP questions at all levels BUT it's unfortunately not a death knell for it. There's not much direct read across (in terms of being a precedent ala the QPR case) for the domestic regulations as it was a challenge by UEFA for the CL only really.

I might have more when I've read more. But I honestly don't think this will change a thing in reality, it just significantly weakens UEFA's hands directly in trying to further micromanage FFP for European games.

As don't forget, City had passed our own regulations here without sanction, but UEFA relied on the leaked (German paper, name escapes me - was it Bild?) claims, paperwork - some of which City claimed had been stolen, others I think they claimed were fabrications.

Just like the PL didn't act to sanction originally, unless CAS had found that City had unarguably cooked the books (thereby bringing their PL submitted figures into dispute), a follow on domestic sanction was unlikely to follow anyway.
 
Not going by the QPR attempt - the challenge falls down because member clubs okayed the introduction ultimately.

The only challenge I see working would have to ultimately prove clubs were duped into voting for it, not realising it would be a self protection matter for the bigger clubs in each division to capitalise on - thus being anti competitive.

Even then, one club on its own probably wouldn't be enough - you'd need 50+% of all member clubs to sign up to the challenge purely to angle the perception that the majority see it as anti-competitive, against the spirit of the game and leave the minority rich clubs on the other side on the coin - to ram the point home because FFP suits their existing position and stops other clubs challenging them.

I dare say the 'challengers' (to increase their chances) wouldn't go far wrong in formulating their own revised FFP plan, outlining ways owners could then spend, whilst still protecting clubs in the spirit of FFP's inception - whether that be PL/EFL held trusts to cover spending or many of the other ideas that have been discussed previously on here.

That way they can bat away any suggestions of letting owners again bankrupt clubs, by proposing a fairer system of regulation, and winning support that way as well.
 
Having read around a bit more, I'm going to hold off until I see the full CAS report, as plenty of the normal coverage in the press here has some very interesting quotes - such as:
-----
BBC version - Sky's is broadly similar as are others.
"The language that the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Cas) uses is important. Uefa noted that Cas found "insufficient conclusive evidence" to uphold all of its conclusions, not 'no evidence'. And some allegations were dismissed because they were more than five years old. And, because City were found to have failed to co-operate, this falls short of a full exoneration.
-----
Now 'insufficient conclusive evidence' because City wouldn't co-operate or because there was no conclusive evidence per se?

Charges that were timed barred without a suitable counterargument (if a counter was available) for why they shouldn't be time barred is amateurish.

That's UEFA's angling - City will have their own angle - what's important is what CAS physically said themselves - especially as we all know UEFA came into this biased and seemed determined to slam City prior to actually conducting the investigation/gathering the evidence, if my memory has the timing of that interview correct in the timeline as per McP's post about 'bringing to book'.

As per PL/EFL FFP regs - we continue to be in our own little bubble as do all other European leagues, it would take some massive voluntary changes at UEFA level FFP for their to be any kind of filter down to our own regs. Even then it wouldn't necessarily be guaranteed.

So I really don't see anything changing, even though the likes of Gary Lineker et al are giving their twopenneth worth on it's demise and UEFA's own future.

ps - correction to the above post, City remain under investigation by the PL over issues.
 
Liverpool player yes, but hard to disagree with his thrust about VAR.

Liverpool defender Andrew Robertson has criticised recent VAR decisions in the Premier League and says it has put footballers in "limbo".
https://www.skysports.com/football/...w-robertson-liverpool-defender-upset-with-var

"I believe that the referees are relying on VAR, but then VAR isn't overturning any decisions, so we are stuck in limbo. I'd prefer not to have it and just let the referee call it. If the referee called it, you'd say 'OK, he's seen it differently'."
 
Looks like we are probably off to Wycombe next season. I was at the 8-3 game, one of the craziest games I’ve seen. Slightly smaller stadium (Bournemouth apart!) than we have been used to this season! Well done to them on reaching the second tier for the first time.
 
Ricardomeister2 said:
Looks like we are probably off to Wycombe next season. I was at the 8-3 game, one of the craziest games I’ve seen. Slightly smaller stadium (Bournemouth apart!) than we have been used to this season! Well done to them on reaching the second tier for the first time.
Click to expand...

1- wtf does Gareth Ainsworth look like apart from a german 80s porn star.

2- Even our defence will cope with the pace of Akinfenwa.
 
What a game that was between the Saints and United !! Southampton were excellent. Looked as if they were the ones trying to finish in the top 4.
 
FFP for me is yet another example of media control. The media control the narrative. Why do I say this? Because it's the same media (Sky, BBC etc) that makes millions/billions in revenue from the league in which they get to show the "big games" with the "big clubs." They market these games to the ever-willing paying public and it's how they continue to make money hand-over-fist.
It is plainly obvious to someone with the ability to see outside of the mainstream media presentation of "facts" that clubs such as Man City, PSG, the two big Spanish clubs, Chelsea, and others have used excessive wealth to buy and pay players and coaches that simply nobody else can afford to.
While we as society continue to follow along with what the media wants us to believe - ie. selective release of factual information and the opinion of hand-picked, so-called experts, then we as a society will be complicit in allowing the media to take our money without accountability. As a football fan, your club owners can be as rich as you want them to be. But unless you're in that favoured "elite" group then the odd fleeting moment of success is all you can expect. Manchester City's main sponsor is Ethihad Airways, their stadium is the Ethihad Stadium and their owners just happen to be major shareholders in, yup you guessed it. To a normal person, it stinks, and no matter what presentation of accounting you give me, or what legal loophole they may have utilized it still stinks.
If you dare say too loudly that it stinks then you are a "conspiracy theorist." But if you just shake your head and pay your sky subscription and buy your newspaper then all is OK in the world.
Some have said on here that they hate the way the game has changed with all the money involved. If not for my love of Aston Villa FC I'd have stopped watching football a long time ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.