john68 wrote:MCFC1632,
I have separated this post from the other because it deals with another issue which I think is a bigger one and one that is more permanent a threat and could be more injurious to City in the longer term. Not legal but political.
I have thought for a long time that these two issues have becoming mixed, blurred and confused together, but need to be discussed and debated separately.
For almost 30 years, a small group of clubs, led by an even smaller group have sought to create a model of football competition which id financially beneficial to them, sometimes to the detriment of others. They have bullied, coerced and threatened the ruling body in order to reach their aims. They disbanded their G14 lobby group, replacing it with the ECA, a body that they dominate and control, a body that is far more politically powerful, even on the World stage. They have forced UeFA to change the structure and the financial rules of competition in Europe, with the threat of withdrawing should UeFA not comply. Having succeeded in that, they are now intent on guarding their rear to safeguard their gains.
The FFP is only the tool that are presently using and should they fail, they will undoubtedly come back and try another tack. The FFP is only the tool, the more permanent threat remains a political one and will not go away.
It is for that last reason that I think City and other clubs have sought to comply with the FFP. We may be strong on the field but remain very weak and powerless within the politics of European football. We have few friends, if any. I can understand City not wanting to rock that political boat and become even more isolated within the power corridors of football. I think City MUST work towards compliance for pragmatic, political reasons and any legal challenge would only be a last resort that could have major repercussions against us.
John - this is for me places the focus on just where it should be – I have said in many posts that Twatini is just the errand boy striving to protect the UeFA position – the threat to which comes from the (Now named) ECA.
We have seen them willing destroy generations old and well-loved and respected competitions for the sole purpose of keeping themselves in place as the ‘administrators’ and having the (old named) G14 threat of a break-away league removed.
It is important to recognise that the outcome of those changes was to ensure the protection of those clubs in terms of revenue – hence the absolute farce of ‘dropping into the Europa league'. You rightly point out that FFP is just a new mechanism – introduced to address the new threat of ‘big investors’ which is something that has come along in a manner and at a level that they had not envisaged.
The noises are already frequent from Real Madrid and others about the need to revisit how the ‘Top Clubs’ should play each other in competition to maximise media revenues. Of course we have heard much from KHR and Hoeness – and after last night you can only think that this will go up several notches. Had they lost last night to RM or Barca – or the scum – well that is just unlucky – losing to a recent ‘gatecrasher’ based on ‘big investor’ money will just focus their fears and motivate their actions. As we have seen since last week domestically with baconface and Gill repeatedly stating the need for FFP to be effective.
We should all recognise that Twatini is largely just the organ-grinder’s monkey – the people that really wield the power are the top members of the ECA – and if they accelerate their thinking (and their fears) to decide that FFP is not going to cut it – then other mechanisms will be sought.
I have a big concern about the next negotiation of European TV rights – and I wonder if this will become a focus for Florentino Pérez, KHR, and Gill etc.
When I say FFP will be made to work – I mean Twatini has to if he is to retain the administrative controls within UeFA and placate his masters in the ECA.
Eited just to say that the picture of Twatini being given his instruction from 2 of his masters speaks volumes
