G14...UeFA...The ECA...FIFA...and CITY

[Bianchi on Ice]

Id be interested to see what the owners of PSG and Malaga are making of all this and what dialogue they have had with UEFA

[john68]

Spartacus,

You could well be right Mate, but What I see is a whole bunch of very powerful football clubs and its European ruling body, who have already clearly stated their intentions to stop what is going on at City and other new money clubs in its tracks, now getting wholehearted support from the most powerful European body of the European Union.

I am assured that UeFA have the right to set whatever terms and conditions it chooses for its Champions League entry. Politically, they could only do so with the agreement of the clubs, which, with the ECA in tow, they seemed to have. The doubt was whether they had the political or financial wherewithal to withstand any subsequent challenge from a penalised club.

That this announcement was jointly done by both UeFA and the European Commission, given the powers and influence the latter body has, makes it seem that UeFA are looking to strengthen their position in order to move forward.

I am NOT looking for any petty argument on this as legally I am unsure what, if anything, can be done to harm us. What I am looking for is information Mate and I thank you for yours.

[john68]

Spartacus,
Having had a little more time to ponder on your point about restraint of trade, could you clarify this for me please.

I don't see UeFA or anybody else attempting to govern our business strategies. I understand that as a private company, we have every right to pursue whatever financial strategies we think fit.

My question is solely about UeFA having the power to sanction us if we pursue our financial strategies outside the criteria they set for entrance to their competitions. Your point suggests not, due to restraint of trade.

The French FA already have a set of criteria for entrance each season into their top division (possibly lower divisions too) and prior to each season, the books of each club are inspected to ensure they are balanced within the FFA's criteria.
I am not certain but have been led to believe the Germans have a similar thing going on too.
In rugby League, clubs applying for SuperLeague status have to fit certain criteria laid down or be disallowed from getting a franchise.
SuperLeague clubs also have to adhere to a salary cap, laid down by the ruling body.

All the above are examples of ruling bodies laying down criteria that have to be met to gain admision to various sports competitions. Why would it then be impossible for UeFA to do the same?

Ta.

[Mingchester Mingy]

Two events that need flagging up in the last few days:

1...Reported in Friday's Chinner's Bollox, a joint statement from UeFA and the European Commission concerning "Fair Competition.
2...The agreement announced jointly by UeFA and the ECA in Istanbul on a variety of matters.

We know the FFP were designed to ensure the old G14 group secured their places at the trough by shutting the door on newcomers with new money and we also know that from their very aggressive announcement some time ago. UeFA have been continuously and slowly softening the hard tone of the words they have used, almost but not quite, backtracking. We know too that at a meeting held by legal eagles in Manchester and attended by legal representatives from most major English football clubs, it was considered that UeFA would have difficulty implementing hard line penalties such as banning clubs from competition.

Though I have yet to read through the new statement, my 1st thoughts are that UeFA have sought help from the European Commission to strengthen their hand to assert and implement their authority by going to the very top. The European Commission have the power to propose new legislation and should they do so, UeFA would then have the backing of European Law.

The EU cannot bar a private individual spending money on whatsoever they want. It is that simple, they cannot impose sanctions on football clubs for this. As i have said previously on the matter, the paralell is those businesses who invest heavily in year 1-5 for a longer term return where they may not see profit or break even for a decade. The principle being suggested would suggest that such a restriction on a football club would be unlawful as it would not be applied to other business sectors and thus is a restraint of trade

If they want to do this properly, the only real option is to introduce a continent-wide salary cap based on the standard of the league in which you play. Although it would in an instant resolve the so called "problem", it would introduce the one thing they are trying to avoid, which is that talent will just go and establish itself in the middle east and asia.

I see your point now. Crazy to think the talent would go there...but if thats where the insane salaries are , thats where people would go. Greed....ruins everything and destroys fairness. I just think it be cool to see some of the smaller clubs have a better shot at the top four once in a while...but I understand its up to them to develope and become stronger in order to get the better players.

[Im_Spartacus]

Spartacus,
Having had a little more time to ponder on your point about restraint of trade, could you clarify this for me please.

I don't see UeFA or anybody else attempting to govern our business strategies. I understand that as a private company, we have every right to pursue whatever financial strategies we think fit.

My question is solely about UeFA having the power to sanction us if we pursue our financial strategies outside the criteria they set for entrance to their competitions. Your point suggests not, due to restraint of trade.

The French FA already have a set of criteria for entrance each season into their top division (possibly lower divisions too) and prior to each season, the books of each club are inspected to ensure they are balanced within the FFA's criteria.
I am not certain but have been led to believe the Germans have a similar thing going on too.
In rugby League, clubs applying for SuperLeague status have to fit certain criteria laid down or be disallowed from getting a franchise.
SuperLeague clubs also have to adhere to a salary cap, laid down by the ruling body.

All the above are examples of ruling bodies laying down criteria that have to be met to gain admision to various sports competitions. Why would it then be impossible for UeFA to do the same?

Ta.

It wouldnt be impossible for uefa, and i think it 100% correct that uefa expect certain standards from its member clubs. I was arguing that it has nothing at all to do with the EU. A football club is, in its simplest form a business, governed by the jurisdiction and laws of primarily the nation in which it is domiciled, and then by the eu. If the eu became involved in placing barriers to investment they would be restricting the clubs ability to manage their own business.

For example, look at any business which is struggling. Entrepreneurs buy that business because they see an opportunity to invest in that businesss, change a few things and in time turn a profit either by sale or income. That is fundamentally the reason business exists. To start to say that football is a special case, would be an absolute nonsense in law because this in effect means that if your club goes into decline, it would be impossible to pull the club out of that decline by investing in better players because you would be barred from the competitions that those better players one day may bring you.

Now there is nothing to say that uefa cannot have their own entry criteria provided they are fair and consistent, but there is no way the eu could make a judgement on football as a special case to back uefa up, because they would effectively be saying that investment is a bad thing, which i believe is where it would all fall down when clubs started to make legal challenges on the basis of uefa applying the rules inconsistently.

I suppose the issue with ffp is that it appears to be a very subjective test, whereby they have, as you say, already started to dilute it by saying that a ban is only the ultimate sanction, and that teams progressing towards the goal will be allowed in. City have outwardly been very calm about ffp, which says to me hat either concessions have been made, or that city know legally the rules have little merit, as to punish city, they would also have to punish most of the other top european clubs - a situation that the eca will not tolerate.

Things like salary caps, work fine where there is a limited pool of talent, and a limited market for at talent. Eg in rugby league you either play in super league or in australia. In football, there are 5/6 top quality leagues in europe, and entrepreneurs waiting in the wings in asia to fund things like the ipl. If china ends up with a decent body of quality players, who is to say that he marketing strategies of european clubs will not fold if china can get its football fix domestically.

You only have to look at the mls to see what happens when salary restrictions are imposed, the top players end up in europe. Introduce restrictions in europe, and our leagues wil become the new mls, and asia will become he new home of football within a decade

[john@staustell]

Fascinating thread John; just a pity that the contents are so frightening for football.

If these fools would take a step back for a moment and think:

Any industry/business that bans outside investment is eventually totally doomed.