Reader Comments (22)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer


Michael Kenrick
1 Posted 13/07/2020 at 09:48:39
Hmmm... does this put a big hole in FFP below the waterline, I wonder?

Sort of thing I need to defer to Paul the Esk to get his take on. But I cannot abide Twitter, so if anyone sees anything, please post!

Martin Nicholls
2 Posted 13/07/2020 at 09:54:05
Good point Michael - if he's of a mind to do so, this decision might allow Moshiri to provide Carlo with the money he needs, via a lucrative Usmanov sponsorship deal!
Michael Kenrick
3 Posted 13/07/2020 at 10:00:09
Interesting reaction from Uefa:

"Uefa notes that the CAS panel found that there was insufficient conclusive evidence to uphold all of the CFCB's conclusions in this specific case and that many of the alleged breaches were time-barred due to the 5-year time period foreseen in the Uefa regulations."

So, they lost on points, to a 'technicality', then? That would suggest FFP remains intact, especially as part of the fine remains in place, confirming they did some naughty things that merited a slap on the wrist.

John Raftery
4 Posted 13/07/2020 at 10:16:40
Possibly a case of City being too big to fail. I suspect a smaller club with less financial clout would have had any appeal summarily dismissed.
Barry Rathbone
5 Posted 13/07/2020 at 10:19:52
Delighted.

City collapsing would leave the field open for another era of monkey island domination a thought more blood curdling than runaway covid

Peter Mills
6 Posted 13/07/2020 at 11:16:22
It's pissed off the rs, so that's a plus.
Anthony Murphy
7 Posted 13/07/2020 at 11:31:39
Some other, less wealthy club will be made an example of soon...
Thomas Lennon
8 Posted 13/07/2020 at 11:33:56
I have often wondered why evidence in a case such as this is time-limited. They got away with this because the prosecuting party used evidence that had timed out after five years. Why? If there is evidence that 'sponsorship' from 12th July 2015 was not true sponsorship on 12th July 2020 why is it useless on 13th July 2020?

Given the large amount of time it takes to collect the evidence about something that happened years ago and present a case, then presumably a lot of time is allowed for the defence to organise their rebuttal, a rule like FFP is dead, and furthermore there is now precedent to follow.

Unless they can change the rules, much of FFP as a criminal offence in this form must be dead.

Steve Ferns
9 Posted 13/07/2020 at 11:50:53
Barry, #5 couldn't agree more. Even if by some miracle we won every remaining game and scraped 8th, I'll be glad we miss out on Europe.

Seeing Man City dismantled and Liverpool to be unopposed over the next few years, or more, would be unbearable. Plus we'd only embarrass ourselves in Europe again.

Jay Woods
10 Posted 13/07/2020 at 11:55:58
Why would ANY Evertonian be upset about this? FFP only ever was a device to rig the system to exclude new blood from the elites' table and has zero to do with altruistic notions of fairness and protecting clubs from predatory investors.

I'll break it down into simplest terms: the established elite clubs, such as United and LFC, rose to preeminence in European football just as TV was exposing more people around the world to the beautiful game. That meant those clubs were "first to market" in building fanbases beyond their own backyards, so that when Sky TV money came along, they were well poised to exploit their global fanbases via the sale of mechandise, growing their brand at a rate the likes of City, Chelsea and ourselves could only dream of.

The ONLY way we could ever hope to make up that ground is through a means of bridging the fanbase gap, i.e., through the help of a generous benefactor. The whole purpose of FFP is to shut down or greatly limit that possibility, with the unambiguous but well obfuscated aim of maintaining the status quo in European football, with Real Madrid, Barca, Bayern, Juve, United, LFC, et al dividing the spoils between them and keeping newcomers like City - or Everton - from winning the European Cup. Ever.

Accordingly, no Toffeeman in his right mind should support FFP or take any pleasure in City or anyone else being punished for its breaches.

Michael Kenrick
11 Posted 13/07/2020 at 12:17:05
Jay Woods,

I must be missing something. I don't see many Evertonians who are upset with this. The rest of your post jives with how most contributors to this site have despised FFP on numerous previous threads.

Still, good reminder for any readers who may not be familiar with this particular snake-pit.

Danny O’Neill
12 Posted 13/07/2020 at 21:49:12
I have to admit as to never really looking into the detail of FFP, so I comment on this half educated at best.

Initially I thought it sounded like a good initiative that could potentially level the playing field.

However, in hindsight and typical of UEFA, FFP is really there to maintain the elite "club" of Europe and try to prevent young upstarts like City challenging their status. The Champions League concept was the start of that, FFP seems to be a continuation dressed up as something that makes things more equal. All clubs are equal but some are more equal than others.

Patrick McFarlane
13 Posted 15/07/2020 at 00:40:35
Interesting that Everton FC were not part of the group that Martin Samuel writes about in his article about the reaction to the decision to overturn Man City's European ban.

They did not waste time, the cartel. Within hours of the Court of Arbitration announcement, there was a remote scrambling of Manchester City's elite rivals and a discussion about the next plan of action.

This is not over. There is still a Premier League investigation into City ongoing.

There is still the chance to pressure and influence those proceedings, as was attempted with UEFA's case, when nine leading Premier League clubs — Arsenal, Manchester United, Liverpool, Tottenham, Chelsea, Leicester, Wolves, Newcastle and Burnley — wrote to CAS on March 9 to argue City should be excluded from Europe while their appeal was heard. They hadn't a clue.

Hateful 8

Danny O’Neill
14 Posted 15/07/2020 at 06:56:48
Patrick, that group looks like the usual suspects you would expect (Arsenal, Manchester United, Liverpool, Tottenham & Chelsea), plus a couple of lackeys. A bit like those not so cool kids who want to be in the gang and hang out with the cool kids.

That's the cynic in me. In fairness, with the exception of Newcastle, all have near term European hopes that would have been assisted with a ban on Man City, I suppose.

Colin Glassar
15 Posted 15/07/2020 at 08:25:33
Great news. FFP is dead and (almost) buried! The super rich cartel will now face further competition from emerging clubs who won't be held back by this ridiculous policy.

Mr Usmanov can now come down from the fence and turn us into a football superpower.

John Keating
16 Posted 15/07/2020 at 12:58:50
Patrick, correct – a group of the named 8.

Can you really believe that Liverpool FC – as part of the group of 8 – would want the authorities to take divine retribution on Man City for wrongdoing?

That being the case, those bastards should have been banned for life after Heysel!!
Obviously Klopp, as spokesman, hasn't a clue....

Brian Harrison
17 Posted 15/07/2020 at 13:10:48
Amazing, a club is taken to court by the corrupt Uefa and win their case, yet those who would have benefited from a Man City ban couldn't wait to have a go. Guardiola is right to have a go at the responses from the Furlough FC clubs, after these clubs both wanting to use taxpayers money to pay their staff.

Didn't Furlough FC get found guilty of hacking the computer at Man City and were fined ٟ million, how come this didn't warrant a ban? I guess we learned nothing from the Leverson inquiry about hacking by national newspapers.

I would love City to win the FA Cup and the Champions League to go with their League Cup trophy, then that would quite clearly state who were the team of the year for 2020.

Rob Halligan
18 Posted 15/07/2020 at 13:34:38
1) Broke the FFP rules from 2011 until 2013, and even charged for it.

2) Hacked Man City's scouting systems and illegally entered it on numerous occasions.

3) Illegally approached Virgil Van Dijk without Southampton's permission.

No prizes for guessing who I'm talking about. Uefa, you've got the wrong club!!

Danny O’Neill
19 Posted 15/07/2020 at 13:54:39
If there's one club that should not get actively involved in trying to push for another to be banned from European football, it is Liverpool given their form in that space.

But then again, historical recollection is selective and airbrushed.

Tom Bowers
20 Posted 15/07/2020 at 14:01:05
Two managers I can't stand, Klopp and Mourhino, who both didn't want Man City back in Europe... Why? What are they afraid of? They both talk a load of crap, like Trump. Mourinho in particular is the worst person to listen to in an interview. I will be glad when Spurs fire him – and they will.
John Kavanagh
21 Posted 15/07/2020 at 17:46:29
Don't forget how Uefa also failed to take any proper action over the attack on the Man City coach. If that had been Everton supporters, we'd have been banned for 50 years.

Because Uefa will now be looking for another club to make an example of to show they mean business with FFP, we have every reason to worry. Look at what happened with the draw and the refereeing last time we dared to try and crash the Champions League private party.

John Zapa
22 Posted 22/07/2020 at 16:22:41
FFP still has its merits. I don't believe that it was made to stop clubs like City, PSG or Everton to join the establishment of top European clubs. FFP only limits the losses the clubs can make in a 3 year period, but it doesnt stop the billionaire owners from putting in as much money into parts of the club like a new stadium, training facilities and a few other exceptions.

FFP was designed to stop a Leeds type situation from happening again. In a way, Its to protect the club from it's own irresponsible owners and poor club management.

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.


About these ads



© ToffeeWeb