Its Going To Get Ugly / Ganging up [MERGED]

[blue long time]

I,m sure that we can argue a strong case against these clubs who do not want investment into a club if it is not generated by football income. This could be compared to supermarkets who generate more income than corner shops.The corner shops will only get bigger if they can get more funds to enable them to grow or the status quo is maintained. Why have four divisions of football if this is the case . No club would be able to break the monopoly. There again ...that is the aim of these same clubs. We should be able to persuade other clubs to fight against these probably illegal proposals. It would be pleasant to know what our club is proposing in opposition to them.Why would a majority of clubs vote for financial constraints which would for ever condemn them to season after season defeats at those same clubs who have shared the lions share of spoils between them for years

[City64]

Wow !

Amazingly open journalism from the M.E.N.

Very refreshing and welcome ..... well done to them !

[spiny]

Martin Samuel in the mail today with another demolition of the EPL FFP proposals. He replies to comments on his recent article.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... ccess.html

Cracking read. Too much to print. Here is the intro and a taster sample

First of all, thanks. Having written about financial fair play for years and been told variously that I’m obsessed, it’s a dry subject and nobody’s interested, it was slightly gratifying to press the word count button on the replies to the column and see the figure 41,438.

Gratifying and daunting because I’ve then got to read them all and then decide which ones to answer. Apologies if you’re not included here, but if you print each one of 40,000 plus words and reply in kind, well you know. We’ve all got jobs to go to. I’ve done my best. You’re not absent because we didn’t agree. As you will see, I’ve tried to include many of the dissenting arguments.

Strap yourselves in folks. We’re going to be here a while. Martin.


I hope the market remains open to investment with a limited level of protectionism aimed at stopping clubs like Portsmouth going into meltdown. Daddywoodland, Leeds.

Ah, the sweet voice of reason. It’s too late for that mate, I think you’ll find.

'And the modern era’s greatest achievement would never have happened?’ Really? Blackburn Rovers winning the league in 1995 was the greatest achievement? Arsene Wenger building a side for less than £40m and going an entire season unbeaten, a feat which had not been done for over 100 years previously, when there were about 12 teams instead of 20? Get a grip. Inzagi, Dublin.

Don’t they do arithmetic in Ireland any more? Thierry Henry £11m, Dennis Bergkamp £7.5m, Sylvain Wiltord £13m, Jose Reyes £10.5m, so that’s £42m right there and we’re only through the forward line. Having watched Arsenal for much of that wonderful season, I’m pretty sure they had a defence, a midfield and a goalkeeper too, and that the best player was Robert Pires, who cost a further £6m. Lauren was £7.2m, Gilberto Silva £4.5m, so let’s leave it there, shall we? Every team, to some extent, buys the title, including lovely Arsenal. The moment they could not buy at the same level, success dried up. Blackburn’s season was exceptional because they also overcame all the disadvantages of being a smaller club, something Arsenal have never known.

What's the difference between financial and chemical doping, Martin? Czerwonadupa, Wembley.

Well, one is a process for cheating by the consumption of performance-enhancing drugs, which is illegal, the other is a catchphrase made up by idiots to explain the process of investing in a business to enable it to grow. Glad to be of assistance.

Excellent idea, Mr Samuel. While we are at it let us scrap any idea of FFP completely and allow the entire Premier League to be bought up by oligarchs and Sheiks. Then we can watch teams of extravagantly expensive foreign imports and the competition for their services will drive salaries and transfer fees ever higher. This will really encourage clubs to invest in domestic talent. The four signatories of the letter to Richard Scudamore are all clubs which grew organically over years or decades: they were not suddenly presented with hundreds of millions like Chelsea or Manchester City. GzzzaEsq, London.

Is this the moment for the Manchester United history lesson? John H Davies is the man who formed Manchester United from Newton Heath in 1902, when the club was burdened with a debt of £2,670 and faced liquidation. For the time, his investment was immense, buying players and improving the ground. James Gibson was another chairman whose investment was disproportionate. He spent £40,000 during the Great Depression and rebuilt Old Trafford after the war. These seem trifling amounts now but equate to millions, in real terms. Nobody is advocating a whole league of billionaire owners, but the point is that every club has needed to make a great leap at some point in its history. In the days of Davies and Gibson the finance required for these moves was more realistic. Chelsea and Manchester City did not create the circumstances in which only £500m was good enough; the organisations and clubs that now seek to judge them did. So there is no moral difference. As for inflated salaries, look at the progression of record transfers. You’ll find Manchester United, Arsenal and Liverpool did as much to inflate the market as Chelsea and Manchester City.

Financial fair play means that a wealthy owner cannot put his own money into a club, but the Glazers can put Manchester United in hock to the banks for millions without penalty. How on earth is that financially sound? Of course it isn't. It's just an anti-competitive scheme to maintain the status quo dreamt up by Bayern, United, Real Madrid and Barçelona. It is no coincidence that the very lines of income that are OK under FFP are the ones where the established clubs fare best. There are lots of major companies that make losses. As long as those losses are sustainable because they have a strong balance sheet, nobody in financial circles is the least bit worried. Paris Saint-Germain seem to be ignoring it. I can only think that they have taken sound legal advice and have resolved to take the whole thing to EU competition authorities as soon as Michel Platini and his mates try to enforce it. Big Blue, Manchester.

Randy Lerner, the chairman of Aston Villa, said pretty much the same to me earlier in the season. He said the FFP rules focus on one specific part of the balance sheet as if it is the whole picture. One wonders why.

Utter nonsense. Financial fair play should be bought in ASAP to bring a more level playing field. Martin Samuel fails to address the point that Man City and Chelsea have contributed hugely to the inflation of players wages, which in turn is fed through to fans by increasing ticket prices: simple economics. If you look back to the Eighties and Nineties there were many teams competing and winning trophies, such as Aston Villa and Nottingham Forest. FFP properly implemented would allow managers of clubs outside the top four to mount a challenge, particularly if player wages were reduced or even capped. Jay1200, Sydney, Australia.

So let’s go back to Jay’s golden Eighties and Nineties. A few highlights. Stan Collymore (Nottingham Forest to Liverpool), £8.5m, British transfer record. Dennis Bergkamp (Inter Milan to Arsenal), £7.5m, British transfer record. Andy Cole (Newcastle United to Manchester United), £7m, British transfer record. Jaap Stam (PSV Eindhoven to Manchester United), £10.75m, record for a defender, record foreign signing. Sander Westerveld (Vitesse Arnhem to Liverpool), £4m, record for a goalkeeper. Marc Overmars (Ajax to Arsenal), £7m, record for a winger. Dean Saunders (Derby County to Liverpool), £2.9m, British transfer record. Bryan Robson (West Bromwich Albion to Manchester United), £1.5m, British transfer record. But you’re right, it is only Manchester City and Chelsea that have been forcing prices up.

Every club should earn what they get, not buy it. Look at Borussia Dortmund, they've done it and believe it or not that could happen in England if the playing field was fairer. Thatguyoverthere, Galway.

Dortmund were kept afloat by a loan from Bayern Munich that was so above board it wasn’t disclosed for 10 years. Before that, they were in a financial black hole every bit as disastrous as Leeds. This is their resurgence, not the way it has always been. Bill makes a very valid point about the way stadiums are financed on the continent. We have tied ourselves in knots over the City of Manchester Stadium and the London Olympic Stadium here, yet German or French governments offer direct assistance to clubs on infrastructure, rebuilding and relocation.

So, in other words, if a club owner invested heavily in the 20th century, that's perfectly acceptable. But if they've invested in the 21st century then that's not financially fair? Harry, Newcastle.

Got it in one, H.

[spiny]

Maybe the tide of popular opinion is turning against the self proclaimed elite. More press against FFP and in particular against the rag establishment. Lets hope it backfires on them.

[Cocacolajojo1]

I've picked out my favourites. Some really good answers from Samuel.

Surely these new rules help small clubs? They will destroy the illusion that being bankrolled has any benefits in the long term. Where are Blackburn now? They are where Manchester City and Chelsea will probably be when the money taps close. JR1994, Hastings.

And if so, so what? Is that what you want, a league in which nobody can ever fail and get relegated? Why does it matter where Blackburn are now? That was nothing to do with Jack Walker. The company was sold to poor owners who made a series of key management mistakes. It happens. Most relegated clubs have got either the football or the finance wrong at some time, and often both. So clubs move up and down the league, which is why if Cardiff City are promoted they will be the 46th club of the Premier League era. And what help to a small club is it to be expected to compete with Manchester United but to have a fraction of their budget available?

Yeah, I don't know when safe budgeting and accounting became a core factor in how we value football clubs.

Successful teams like Arsenal, Manchester United and Liverpool have been built up on the back of support of their fans. Decades of loyally supporting their clubs, watching the club grow and the stadium improved, are suddenly turned over by a rival having a foreign dictator spending hundreds of millions of in ill-gotten gains on their latest plaything. This repellent injection of money bypasses decades of development undergone by other clubs. Only one word for it: cheating. Brianconwy, Conwy.

Oh, cut the sanctimony mate. There is not a single elite club that did not at one time invest to the very limit of its means, and in some cases beyond, as a way of growing the business. Just because that happened before you were alive or took an interest in football does not make it any less significant. And why does it matter whether the owner is foreign? Aren’t they foreign at Liverpool, United and Arsenal, too?

The success of Manchester United, Arsenal and Liverpool was founded on visionary football people like Sir Matt Busby, Herbert Chapman and Bill Shankly and their current financial power is a result of that. Over the years, they have built up the fan base and infrastructure to make them the leading clubs in the country. Chelsea and City's recent success is entirely the result of a foreign owner spending an obscene amount of money. Apparently Martin Samuel prefers the latter but he knows it is difficult to defend so he pulls out Jack Walker as an example instead. Presumably even he knows that it was at least 10 years since a local millionaire could afford to buy the title for his club. Today it takes a multi-billionaire with money to burn which you will only find in countries where they don't have the mechanisms for redistributing the wealth that we have in western democracies. I'm struggling to see why turning the Premier League into a fantasy football league for those kind of people is a good thing. Hans, London.

If Sir Matt Busby’s vision was so enduringly successful, how come Manchester United went from 1967 to 1993 without winning the league, and were relegated in that time? Sir Alex Ferguson built the modern Manchester United and his success coincided with a financial sea change in English football, making one club disproportionately powerful and advantaged. We can only hope that, when he goes, the next guy really messes up, because if he doesn’t, with Michel Platini’s rules in place, one club will keep getting stronger and stronger. Why this is unfair is that the elite position of the clubs you mention is a moment in time but it is a moment that they are seizing to alter football irrevocably and ensure their superiority through the ages. It is the richest clubs, in league with UEFA, who have ensured that the money required to succeed in football these days is beyond the average local businessman. They made the top of the table a territory for only the wealthy, and now they bleat that wealthy people are buying their way in. And don’t tell me what I prefer, Hans. I prefer room for all. And change. Because it’s interesting.

Blackburn bought the title, they didn't win it. Clubs that buy it don't win it and are remembered in a different way to the others. Everyone will feel the same about the success that Manchester City and Chelsea have had. It is as hollow as you can get, with a big fat # by every trophy. Stephen, London.

So there will be a # next to Manchester United this year, to indicate the difference was Robin van Persie. And a # next to the titles that were down to Cristiano Ronaldo. And a # next to Arsenal’s Invincibles for the signing of Thierry Henry. And next to the Double because of Dennis Bergkamp. And one next to Liverpool’s achievements for Kenny Dalglish, yes? Grow up.

[Cocacolajojo1]

More:

I am an Arsenal fan. Financial fair play will benefit Manchester United, not us, and make second the best we can hope for. If spending is only linked to revenue no-one can live with United. Maybe if Ivan Gazidis did his job properly instead of just preaching about financial austerity, while earning £2.1m a year, we might be able to challenge United without these new flawed regulations. Also, it is a bit rich of us to complain about Manchester City's money but accept their inflated transfer fees. We've pocketed £70m from them since 2008, more than we've made from Emirates. Maybe City should be our shirt sponsors. KennyA87, London.

I love letters like this, when a person is not swayed by club self-interest. The day after I wrote this piece I got a text from an international footballer, a legend at one of the four elite clubs mentioned, agreeing with the anti-FFP stance. On so many subjects, club allegiances shine through, so when someone goes against the grain, it stands out. You’re spot on, Kenny. Why sign up to be second fiddle to Manchester United? How dare Gazidis lecture on financial sobriety while drawing £2.1m for selling Arsenal’s best player every season? And if Arsenal don’t like Manchester City’s methods, don’t take Manchester City’s money. That would be more of a principled stand than some elite club coup.

To be truly fair all clubs should be restricted to the percentages of the club with the smallest turnover. That way there will be a level playing field and all executives would be restricted to paying the basic wage of the smallest club. Restrict everything to the finances of the smallest. Ghostrider, Fareham

This article is arguing that the only way to compete is by bringing in a billionaire owner, but what about the teams without? They are truly in trouble. A decade ago Spurs would have had a realistic shot at the League, bringing in good young players like Gareth Bale and spending money wisely. What hope have they of getting ahead of moneybags Manchester City though? None and they never will as things stand. So what are you arguing for? A world where the team that spends the most wins and everyone else just worries about finding a new investor? Crazy. And in what world can Arsenal be the bad guys for opposing billionaire owners and focusing on organic growth. How did Arsenal become such a big club in the first place? On the training pitch, and that's a lesson for every club. Taiwo Temilade, London.

No, my argument is that the elite clubs have made it so wealth is all that matters and are now horrified that billionaires want to play their game. Don’t you see that just as Manchester City and Chelsea are said to be thwarting Tottenham, so Tottenham thwarted Southampton by buying Gareth Bale. Some clubs will always be bigger, just don’t enshrine it in law. As for how Arsenal became such a big club, where do want to start? The dubious process by which they entered the top division, the day they poached Huddersfield Town’s manager, breaking the British transfer record for Dennis Bergkamp, or that training field stuff. Because I’m sure they have trained every day through their history, they just haven’t always won the league. So it might not be that alone.

The only club run in a good, proper and fair way in the top five is Spurs. Londonli, London.

The lot embroiled in the Olympic Stadium hacking scandal, due in court later this year, yes?

The problem the others have is that Manchester City already have a very good squad and it only needs topping up each year. With the introduction of the new training facility and infrastructure investment the horse is already safe in the stable, but other clubs won’t be able to follow. KL, Manchester.

True. City insist they will be all right but Everton, for instance, could be made unsellable.


'From former Arsenal captain, Tony Adams: 'I think that a significant factor, 90 per cent, in why we achieved so much is that Danny Fiszman invested £50m in the club and we were able to go to the next level. I got my first decent contract at the club, so did David Seaman, we were able to bring in Dennis Bergkamp and that was before Arsène Wenger arrived. David Platt, Patrick Vieira, Nicolas Anelka came, and we were able to pay top players from around the world.' Simon, Manchester.

And there it is, from the mouth of Arsenal’s great captain and from Simon, who appeared to take every pro FFP post as a personal slight. Every club, at some time, needs to invest, to expand, to take that next step. The hypocrisy over attitudes to Manchester City and Chelsea rankles because it is the judgemental elite that have made this so financially prohibitive in the first place. You may think Arsenal rose to prominence organically but I’d say Tony knows the truth.

[Duckman]

[quote="Cocacolajojo"].../quote]

awesome stuff. Samuel loves his job.

[john68]

What the fuck is happening? For the very first time in my living memory, our club are getting some good press.

I sincerely hope that our media have reached a point where they consider the final grab for total control a step too far.

[Swales4ever]

What the fuck is happening? For the very first time in my living memory, our club are getting some good press.

I sincerely hope that our media have reached a point where they consider the final grab for total control a step too far.

Perhaps You won't realize it, because it was just anticipated by the clueless italian wum who once explained why Mancini was not a caretaker, nor a negative catenaccio nightmare from the italian past, but You have been told that CIty now have a professional senior CEO and a professional senior sporting director.
Amongst the benefits, You are starting to see what professionals can do.
or perhaps some insider at the Club have suggested You that those journalists, all the sudden, have seen the light of the TRUTH and the GOOD?

piss funny.
next stop, the first market summer window, professionally run (i.e. get targets at market price)

The Clueless WUM has sponken, once again (also because is getting sick of idiocy)

btw, Mods, may I start a fourth thread on the same subject, as in the last 2 weeks we have toppe BlueMoon on the League of Threads Starting, apparently? I mean, if this was a serious topic, it would be schizophrenic to jump from thread to thread in order to follow it.
nah, it can be true, it's just the clueless italian wum

[Slim]

What the fuck is happening? For the very first time in my living memory, our club are getting some good press.

I sincerely hope that our media have reached a point where they consider the final grab for total control a step too far.

Perhaps You won't realize it, because it was just anticipated by the clueless italian wum who once explained why Mancini was not a caretaker, nor a negative catenaccio nightmare from the italian past, but You have been told that CIty now have a professional senior CEO and a professional senior sporting director.
Amongst the benefits, You are starting to see what professionals can do.
or perhaps some insider at the Club have suggested You that those journalists, all the sudden, have seen the light of the TRUTH and the GOOD?

piss funny.
next stop, the first market summer window, professionally run (i.e. get targets at market price)

The Clueless WUM has sponken, once again (also because is getting sick of idiocy)

btw, Mods, may I start a fourth thread on the same subject, as in the last 2 weeks we have toppe BlueMoon on the League of Threads Starting, apparently? I mean, if this was a serious topic, it would be schizophrenic to jump from thread to thread in order to follow it.
nah, it can be true, it's just the clueless italian wum

Roger, I think you're a great guy and you know I am your biggest fan, why in heaven's name are you coming across like a prick all of a sudden?(I think, still trying to get a handle on your posting style, it's a great source of amusement to me) I don't think this is you and john is a well respected member around here and I have told him the same thing. We have enough cunts around here, there is no club so stop trying to join it.

[Chinners]

Roger, I think you're a great guy and you know I am your biggest fan, why in heaven's name are you coming across like a prick all of a sudden?(I think, still trying to get a handle on your posting style, it's a great source of amusement to me) I don't think this is you and john is a well respected member around here and I have told him the same thing. We have enough cunts around here, there is no club so stop trying to join it.

[youtube]IxAKFlpdcfc[/youtube]

[Beefymcfc]

What'd a miss?

Apologies for not joining in but I am enjoying the read.

[Swales4ever]

Roger, I think you're a great guy and you know I am your biggest fan, why in heaven's name are you coming across like a prick all of a sudden?(I think, still trying to get a handle on your posting style, it's a great source of amusement to me) I don't think this is you and john is a well respected member around here and I have told him the same thing. We have enough cunts around here, there is no club so stop trying to join it.

SLIM,
sentiments are well reciprocated, and felt. I am quite flattered by the use of the condom, too.

Then, there are many and many things I can wholeheartedly make to please my beloved Mancityfans.netters fella, but disrespecting the utmost opinion I have of Sir John is not amongst those.

To agree with His funny scare of the FFP joke, would not only constitute a blatant denial of everything I've have seen and learnt in the last 25 years of professional experience (or anyone's else who happened to get close enough to practically understand what runs and how is run a billion GB pounds corporate business) and neither equating to the ridiculous idea that midgets like Gill and accolades might ever come closer than a mile distance from a position whereas being able scratch the balls sack of a business giant like dr. Khaldoon Khalifa Al Mubarak (not only in terms of wealth power, but in terms of professional qualifications and experiences), but first and foremost would be a factual disrespect of one of the smartest, broadly open minds I ever had the honour and mental pleasure to encounter: Sir John68.

So please, Pal, do not ask me that: if saying that FFP is a no more than a sterile, public cry from a bunch of inadequate, desperate fallen angels, which has the same percentage of chances (=zero) to stop the rise of MCFC, than what I have in dating Angelina Jolie, makes me a leading member of the club of cunts, so be it.
I will wait, quietly, other two years of more desperate and sterile attempts, shite talked on the media, funny threads started hysterically on here, and finally I might go open and share everyone's joy and relief at, finally, realizing that 2 years have passed by, MCFC turnover has broke even and more than even, and NOTHING happened other than shite talked.

What, instead, I can promise You, in whole heart and mind, to do are:
1) stop posting the sole opinion on FFP which shall turn real in 2 years time, so that I will automatically stop from hurting the average sensibility on subject matter: I have already done my promise to John, privately, and I swear it now here, publicly;
2) commit myself to not come here, when this joke will finally be over, and for everyone to see and understand, by saying a cheap and nasty "I told You so";
3) stop laughing at anyone who starts a personal thread at every article edited on the same subject matter (and thiis point, believe me, shall require me a little effort, because I love this forum and I hate to see Bluemoaners on Mancintyfans)
4) abort my purposed amusement to start, tomorrow, the fifth or sixth thread on the same subject matter, originally intended to apply a little irony to this pathetic hysteria.

thanks for bothering and caring of my sentiments, anyway. much appreciated.

[Beefymcfc]

Q. If we paid 38 mil for Aguero, how much does UEFA and possibly PL FFP make him worth?

[Peter Doherty (AGAIG)]

Q. If we paid 38 mil for Aguero, how much does UEFA and possibly PL FFP make him worth?

Good point. These rules diminish the value of our players as well as prohibit us from spending money freely. I wouldn't be surprised if the next move was to outlaw teams in Manchester, although not those with Manchester in their name.

[Blue Since 76]

According to BBC twitter, David Gold has said Premier League clubs have voted in favour of FFP

Looks like they're all happy playing for second.

[Im_Spartacus]

According to BBC twitter, David Gold has said Premier League clubs have voted in favour of FFP

Looks like they're all happy playing for second.

They will vote in favour of a watered down solution. If they have voted for the full whack, some fucking shady deals have been done to get that through a vote

[ashton287]

From what I know of FFP it is to stop clubs spending money they don't have.

We have an awesome squad so we don't need the massive investment of the last few years anymore and we just need a player here and a player there every few windows.

We have the money for that now surely with the new deals we have in place and the sure to come newer new deals bringing more money.

Soooooo, how the fuck does FFP have any effect on us now? Is it not too late?

[Sideshow Bob]

Premier League clubs have voted overwhelmingly for spending controls including financial fair play and restrictions on salary increases, West Ham's co-owner David Gold confirmed Thursday.

Full details of the agreement will be announced by the Premier League later Thursday but Gold said that the proposals for controls had received the backing of the majority of top-flight chairmen.

"We have all voted and it was overwhelmingly supported, not by all the clubs -- some are a little concerned -- but the vast majority of the clubs voted in favor," he said.

WHAT HAVE YOU DONE YOU STUPID FUCKING CUNTS!!!

[john68]

From what I know of FFP it is to stop clubs spending money they don't have.

We have an awesome squad so we don't need the massive investment of the last few years anymore and we just need a player here and a player there every few windows.

We have the money for that now surely with the new deals we have in place and the sure to come newer new deals bringing more money.

Soooooo, how the fuck does FFP have any effect on us now? Is it not too late?

First of all, it depends whether the reports of agreement are true, then it depends on quite what the terms of the watered down agreement are and finally it depends on the time scale the clubs have agreed to. Until we know those factors for certain, we won't know how it may or may not affect us.
There is also the option that any clubs that voted against it may seek legal redress to have it all overturned in court. If some recent reports are true, then City are preparing for that and Fulham have already said they will go to court. Who know?

Until we know the details, everything is conjecture Mate but as things stand, with our near £100M deficit, we are probably the worst positioned club. Remember too that City chose a policy of compliance to the timescale set by UeFA. This domestic stuff has been dropped on our toes only recently.