| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems 09:17 - Jun 6 with 3069 views | unstableblue |
… clubs are backing them - according to papers this morning. Chelsea, Villa and unsurprisingly Newcastle.
It’s not really a law suit more arbitration, but could go to the courts.
The original ‘Associated Party Transaction’ rules were rushed in around the Newcastle Saudi takeover. But it seems it’s the sponsorship funding element they are trying to overturn.
Most Premier League clubs are against it, and by its nature and with rumours it may effect the latest EFl deal (not sure how) then all other English football clubs.
Bringing essentially anti-competition / anti-business sentiment to football doesn’t stack up. The pyramid needs flattening, the sports live on variety and the excitement of not knowing who might win a game or league. Take the NFL and the draft pick.
To suggest that it’s good that a US or Middle Eastern mega owner can inflate sponsorship contributions by being the main sponsor (or an affiliate) is perverse.
I’m not exactly clear how it affect FFP??? Does it blow FFP out of the water.
It’s like if Ed Sheeran decided to put his entire wealth into a two year deal for lowly Ipswich. We’d suddenly be a top six club.
Go on Ed - DO IT |  |
| |  |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 09:28 - Jun 6 with 2965 views | Steve_M |
Chelsea are a dreadful club too and Newcastle are also a nation-state owned sportswashing project so their support is unsurprising. Villa apparently can't spend a fortune to compete in the Champions League so are upset too, although one might think that not following the example of Ridsdale-era Leeds is a good thing.
Barney Ronay called City's approach Trumpian yesterday and it largely is:
https://www.theguardian.com/football/article/2024/jun/05/manchester-citys-trumpi
Also:
"We must ask again why it is deemed unacceptable for a PR-hungry state to own the Daily Telegraph, but fine for a PR-hungry state to own a Premier League club." |  |
| |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 09:31 - Jun 6 with 2928 views | TheMover |
I think part of the issue is the actual sponsor, for example, if the owners of the club decide to sponsor the under 18's kit for £40 million through a company that they own is that fair? Technically it is probably within the rules but...
Part of the problem of state owned football clubs [sigh] |  | | |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 09:38 - Jun 6 with 2857 views | unstableblue |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 09:28 - Jun 6 by Steve_M |
Chelsea are a dreadful club too and Newcastle are also a nation-state owned sportswashing project so their support is unsurprising. Villa apparently can't spend a fortune to compete in the Champions League so are upset too, although one might think that not following the example of Ridsdale-era Leeds is a good thing.
Barney Ronay called City's approach Trumpian yesterday and it largely is:
https://www.theguardian.com/football/article/2024/jun/05/manchester-citys-trumpi
Also:
"We must ask again why it is deemed unacceptable for a PR-hungry state to own the Daily Telegraph, but fine for a PR-hungry state to own a Premier League club." |
I saw some commentary that this Man City case, will set a precedent to support their case against the 115 legacy FFP charges.
But my understanding was Man City are in quite a strong position due to when those dodgy remuneration packages happened. | |
| |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 09:42 - Jun 6 with 2833 views | redrickstuhaart |
FFP is already nearly dead with the proposal to make the cap 5 times tv income, which is a level only spent by the likes of Man City anyway. The playing field will become ever less even. | | | |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 09:50 - Jun 6 with 2780 views | Marshalls_Mullet |
FFP is only there to protect the cartel of the legacy clubs.
It prevents growth of other clubs.
Football did ok before FFP came along. |  |
| |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 09:53 - Jun 6 with 2748 views | redrickstuhaart |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 09:50 - Jun 6 by Marshalls_Mullet |
FFP is only there to protect the cartel of the legacy clubs.
It prevents growth of other clubs.
Football did ok before FFP came along. |
Properly implemented FFP would have value. It would stop the likes of Chelsea just outspending everyone else by having an owner prepared to pay, thereby forcing up the market massively and creating an uneven playing field.
Its not been implemented well. And it was also linked in with other stuff like the EPPP stuff which pushes all the talent towards the biggest clubs early on, with massive financial advantage for them. | | | |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 10:35 - Jun 6 with 2590 views | bluefunk |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 09:42 - Jun 6 by redrickstuhaart |
FFP is already nearly dead with the proposal to make the cap 5 times tv income, which is a level only spent by the likes of Man City anyway. The playing field will become ever less even. |
The proposal is to limit expenditure to 5 times the level of tv income received by the club receiving the least, so not quite as you indicated. |  | | |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 10:47 - Jun 6 with 2529 views | redrickstuhaart |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 10:35 - Jun 6 by bluefunk |
The proposal is to limit expenditure to 5 times the level of tv income received by the club receiving the least, so not quite as you indicated. |
I neglected to reference the specifics. But the point is still absolutely correct. No one spends at that level outside the top couple of spenders. So it just green lights them to carry on. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 12:16 - Jun 6 with 2276 views | RegencyBlue |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 09:38 - Jun 6 by unstableblue |
I saw some commentary that this Man City case, will set a precedent to support their case against the 115 legacy FFP charges.
But my understanding was Man City are in quite a strong position due to when those dodgy remuneration packages happened. |
It’s a preemptive strike to help with the charges they face!
If they get away with this it will muddy the waters so much the PL will either back off completely or water down any punishment so much as to make it meaningless.
The timing is no accident. |  | | |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 12:37 - Jun 6 with 2182 views | bsw72 |
Remember when football was about, well, football?
FA made a rod for their own back when they created the Premier League, thinking they would control the English clubs and but the size/power of the organisations who now own English clubs have pulled the rug from under them. |  | | |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 12:54 - Jun 6 with 2095 views | TexacoCup |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 09:50 - Jun 6 by Marshalls_Mullet |
FFP is only there to protect the cartel of the legacy clubs.
It prevents growth of other clubs.
Football did ok before FFP came along. |
Hit the down arrow by mistake, soz |  | | |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 12:59 - Jun 6 with 2058 views | BseaBlue |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 10:47 - Jun 6 by redrickstuhaart |
I neglected to reference the specifics. But the point is still absolutely correct. No one spends at that level outside the top couple of spenders. So it just green lights them to carry on. |
What, so we arent going to spend £500 million? Boooooooooo. Ashton out. |  | | |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 13:16 - Jun 6 with 1974 views | ElderGrizzly |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 10:47 - Jun 6 by redrickstuhaart |
I neglected to reference the specifics. But the point is still absolutely correct. No one spends at that level outside the top couple of spenders. So it just green lights them to carry on. |
The lowest club still gets something like £140m, so spending 'limited' to £700m a season... |  | | |
| The Man City ‘law suit’ sounds terrible for English football… but it seems on 17:19 - Jun 6 with 1637 views | Mark |
What a sad situation football has got into. Those fans who can afford the premium TV subscriptions pay through the nose to watch Man City win the Premier League in front of massive flashing adverts, with VAR in use too. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
