Man City Banned From Europe

Status
Not open for further replies.
the problem I have with this is that in terms of Champ League City aint that big of a club, they have mega money and are being hindered by FFP like we are. If this was Real Madrid, Barca , Liverpool or any of the elite within football no way would they get a 2 year ban (possibly) as UEFA need these clubs to draw in revenue for their competition so now way would they kick them out.

in my opinion FFP is designed to keep the elite the elite and stop anybody challenging them.
 
In lay terms, City have been really really dumb and almost gone out of their way to make no attempts to cover their tracks. That is the only reason they are in trouble. On the flip, even in spite of this they know the law just does not stand up to ECHR regulations. You cannot legislate for unfair competition and honestly expect that not to be overturned at a legal level.

I mean I know I used the tennis analogy but I will do so again. Imagine if the WTA said, for fairness they are going to limit the amount players can spend on travel, to stop some players going first class and others having to bunk in the back of a truck. They could probably get away with it (difficult but they'd probably be ok). If you then started to say though, that you are actually allowed to spend more, depending on your revenue that year this wouldn't work. This seems to then be doubled down upon, by saying that if player y acquires the sponsorship of player x to allow them to then spend as much, they are going to penalise them. Any court is just going to say thats a racketed in breach of the founding principles of law.

In this case, if a tennis player said, do you now what, I'm being the same plane ticket as Rodger Federer, if they were punished for doing so, it just wouldn't hold. Forget that they signed up to private games rules, those things hold no power once you move into the legal field.

City seem very confident to me. I don't think they care as much about the mud thrown at them. It is not their job to be liked, respected and judged as a credible arbiter. If they look like cheats, it really doesn't matter. Most people hated Manchester United and thought they were cheats, it has no relevance. UEFA it does though. If they look to be tarnished it eats away at their credibility. We all expect a rule making and arbiter to be above that.

I think City know they can take this deep, and credibility is hit for UEFA. As it's credibility is hit more, more pressure comes onto FFP. If FFP falls they have all manner of problems. Firstly the City's of this world start spending enormously again, and they may also then sue to say the system never worked to begin with (even if they lose this the first time round). Secondly the more traditional elite clubs are going to kick off big time, as any controls they have disappears, expect enormous pressure for a break away super league.

This might sound really outrageous, and it's by no means the most likely model but don't rule out FIFA (or an alternative association) licensing such a league with a handful of their own teams. North America, or the Gulf association could well consider it. Bring 12-14 across and have 4-6 of your own teams. Franchise it, give Juventus a base in a major America city where they can play some games. We are already seeing some African and Oceanic team playing home fixtures in Europe. It seems a big stretch but it's really not.

This is high stakes poker. If I'm honest I think UEFA look quite hysterical in this episode and are panicking a bit. I think settling this issue and getting city to play better lip service to a set of rules that are probably unenforceable and exist on the basis of good will is their best ploy. It will mean being prepared to treat City as a bit of a test case though.

The surprise for me mate, is that Uefa has actually picked this fight. I know there was a ground swell around it after the German articles and ive no doubt City have been riding rough shot over both the Uefa and PL rules. I do however find it inconceivable that Uefa cant distinguish that their rules are not laws and if challenged laws supersede, rules and rules may not always comply with the law themselves, you used the Uefa process as a kangaroo court, it really is. Looks to me like Uefa could be on shaky ground if this escalates, though i still feel a cozy solution is going to be found and status quo preserved with City just being fined.
 
Thanks buddy.

To me what is happening is a split within the ruling elites of football. Poulantzas writes a lot about this in terms of the political field. That the state is not made up of a single body or social class, but rather an amalgamation of different social forces. He also rightly stipulates that the "ruling class" has different social bases (so for example your big landowner and hedge hund manager are both ruling class in this country, but in different ways).

You kind of see this more clearly with the UEFA spat. There are different forces being represented. One who want FFP to be implemented extremely harshly, others who want it kicked out.

From an Everton perspective the ling term trend would probably be better if it disappeared. However in the short term, City being punished would also benefit us. Really we have to hope that the process is long and arduous and the different factions tear lumps out of each other. The more brutal the better.

There's been a lot of talk of how City won't want this to go to open court. Potentially yes. But UEFA won't either. Every decision they've ever made is going to be poured over in detail. It sounds a nightmare to me.

This will go a lot wider as well. I am seeing Liverpool fans wanting City punished from the PL. If they did that, I believe the season they won it we finished 5th, so could feasibly say had it not been for City we'd have finished 4th and got CL football. Expect a law suit. Expect a law suit against City if that happens, but also potentially the PL for not implementing the rules properly. Expect the side who came 18th to put a legal challenge in on a similar basis. Football will not come out well if UEFA don't cut a deal with City. They are not the only ones with skeletons in their cupboards with this. Once it gets into open court as well, there is then the power to start opening up all documents.

This is City's power card with this. If (and it's an if) they get it suspended, then they will alert UEFA to the possibility that they will appeal not just to CAS but also probably to the ECHR after it. There was a case recently that took over 10 years to settle. In all honesty that was straightforward compared to this one. It would be quite natural for this to take substantially longer than the period above to resolve as a result of that. City's expense on lawyers will be enormous. It's a huge risk for UEFA if they cannot get a clear win that they may have to pay those costs.

I now in the Usmanov thread a few weeks back, someone completely disregarded the idea that this could ever end up at the ECHR (or even CAS). Once you start messing about with these things the pathetic kangaroo court UEFA govern just gets discarded to the bin, as the irrelevency it is.

There is also a world where both lose. City lose, but they pour so much dirt over UEFA and FFP that the public basically state they are sick of it and don't want it anymore. That could well be part of the strategy.
That's a point. Relegation.
 

The NFL in the US operates a draft pick system which see's the club finishing bottom getting the first pick of the best new talent. Not sure if that could ever happen here, but at least it offers a chance at levelling the playing field.

Don't follow the NFL but their draft system has always intrigued me. Presumably the player who is drafted first is the best young player available and is drafted by the worst performing team. Does that player HAVE to sign with the team that drafts him or can he reject them?
 
Don't follow the NFL but their draft system has always intrigued me. Presumably the player who is drafted first is the best young player available and is drafted by the worst performing team. Does that player HAVE to sign with the team that drafts him or can he reject them?

I don’t think they can reject but maybe just opt out of the draft? Not sure. In a league without relegations like in the NBA it’s the easiest way to make a league competitive top to bottom. Would never work in football of course.
 
I don’t think they can reject but maybe just opt out of the draft? Not sure. In a league without relegations like in the NBA it’s the easiest way to make a league competitive top to bottom. Would never work in football of course.

No, I don't think you can ever make some one sign a contract. Peyton Manning forced the San Diego Chargers to trade away the first pick in the draft by saying he would not sign with them. The Chargers ended up with Ryan Leaf, one of the most infamous busts in NFL history. In the NBA, Kobe Bryant scared teams away from drafting him by saying he would go play in the Italian league if he wasn't drafted by the Lakers, who had the 13th pick (although he was considered a risky selection at the time). But there really is no way for young players to get in to either league without making themselves available to be drafted.
 
the problem I have with this is that in terms of Champ League City aint that big of a club, they have mega money and are being hindered by FFP like we are. If this was Real Madrid, Barca , Liverpool or any of the elite within football no way would they get a 2 year ban (possibly) as UEFA need these clubs to draw in revenue for their competition so now way would they kick them out.

in my opinion FFP is designed to keep the elite the elite and stop anybody challenging them.

Spot on.

A team like Barcelona gets way more then the best Czech Rep team just for qualifying for the champions league due to their leagues co efficient.

They should get the same amount of money but it's all rigged to give the biggest revenue producing teams the best chance of winning every competition.

All UEFA care about is keeping the elite teams in every competition as long as possible to maximize their revenue streams.

Used to be one off games in the Champions League but they made it two legged, to lessen the chances of a smaller team knocking out an elite team with a big squad.

What annoys me the most is that fans of non elite teams just take it and don't try to do anything about it. There should be protests until UEFA do something about it but people are mugs at the end of the day and lap up the rubbish UEFA feed them.
 

No, I don't think you can ever make some one sign a contract. Peyton Manning forced the San Diego Chargers to trade away the first pick in the draft by saying he would not sign with them. The Chargers ended up with Ryan Leaf, one of the most infamous busts in NFL history. In the NBA, Kobe Bryant scared teams away from drafting him by saying he would go play in the Italian league if he wasn't drafted by the Lakers, who had the 13th pick (although he was considered a risky selection at the time). But there really is no way for young players to get in to either league without making themselves available to be drafted.
Eli Manning. Peyton, the far far better player and brother, had no problem going to whomever drafted him
 
Don't understand those who are on City's side in this - we are a bigger club than them (much bigger!) and they because of their corruption, cheating are blocking us from making progress - I hope UEFA kick them out of the CL, PL deduct points off them and i'm confident under Ancelotti, Moshy and (maybe!) Uzzy we will overtake them in a classy, honest and transparent way - the Everton way.
 
Don't understand those who are on City's side in this - we are a bigger club than them (much bigger!) and they because of their corruption, cheating are blocking us from making progress - I hope UEFA kick them out of the CL, PL deduct points off them and i'm confident under Ancelotti, Moshy and (maybe!) Uzzy we will overtake them in a classy, honest and transparent way - the Everton way.
Not at all. If you look a little deeper at the situation the true corruption is the pretense of FFP in the first place. It was brought in to prevent clubs like city, psg, dare i say it us from competing in the champions league. It was brought in to protect the likes of manure, Barca, real, juve, inter and the rest of them from losing their seat at the top table. City have done wonders for this league, we have seen the best football ever played in the top division from them. There is more quality across the board, more competition and we theyve destroyed the apple cart of manure, arsenal and chelsea dominating the league. Theyve invested massive money in regeneration of a run down area of manchester providing who knows how many long term jobs and youth pathways there. Yeah theyve spent a few Bob to do so and looks like theyve made a bit of a pigs ear in terms of their documentation but what genuine corruption can they be accused of? Spending money to be able to trade in line with the teams they are trying to beat? So they broke a rule that's set by the elite to protect the elite. A rule that surely breaches trade laws anyway. City are brilliant and I hope they take the proven corrupt UEFA to the cleaners. Along with whatever that may mean for a super league and the rest of it.

Edit - and there is no difference in what we are doing, in terms of USM, megafon etc vs etihad. We just dont have Usmanov tied directly to the club/board.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top