Kurtz wrote:

Hey as an Arsenal fan I think (could be wrong) Arsenal benefits or is not hurt by FFP. We're a massive club whose debt is slowly but surely getting paid off and have growing revenues and buying power, a modern stadium, and we play in the cash cow called the PL. "Living within our means" allows us to spend a lot. As DiabyKungFu said FFP is just some rich guys preventing/hindering other rich guys from threatening them. My preference is for Arsenal to dominate by adapting to and exploiting whatever regulations, however inane, are out there.

But thats only because Wenger is a twat and refuses to invest properly in the team.
But he is one of a kind, I don't think any other manager can do what he does, what happens when he leaves and theres no more of this 4th place bollocks and we either have to try seriously to succeed or sink down?

http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2014/may/20/manchester-city-transfer-yaya-toure-ffp

In a Champions League squad, eight would normally have to be homegrown: divided into four who are “home trained” – at City – and four “association trained” – at another domestic club. But City are working on the basis that, with a reduced squad, only five need be in that category. Uefa has not confirmed this.

Interesting.

This makes sense in the wake of the Milner rumours.

I doubt Uefa will cave in to that nonsense though. It's not really a punishment, it's an advantage.

I can't read any FFP news without thinking MAYBE CITY CAN'T SIGN SAGNA. Like a goddamn lunatic.

innervisionscm wrote:

http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2014/may/20/manchester-city-transfer-yaya-toure-ffp

In a Champions League squad, eight would normally have to be homegrown: divided into four who are “home trained” – at City – and four “association trained” – at another domestic club. But City are working on the basis that, with a reduced squad, only five need be in that category. Uefa has not confirmed this.

Interesting.

That assumption from City makes no sense at all. At the very least you'd imagine it's reduced proportionally, in which case it'd be down to 7 rather than 8.

In a 25 man squad you can register 17 foreign players; the remaining 8 squad spaces are reserved for club trained (4) and association trained (4) players. It's not clear whether 8 spaces will still be reserved in City's 21 man squad.

I don't know where the Guardian gets 5 from though.

Sideshow Bob to PSG for 50m. 😆

Since PSG accepted UEFA's decisions, and they are likely to be harder than what Man City got, I can only assume they are looking to sell a few high profile players too. I think Cavani may actually be on the market this summer.

If they are happy to spend £40m+ on Luiz god knows what they'd want for Cavani!

Thank fuck they have a £49m spending cap, god knows what their chief transfer fixer upper, Pénis Droit, would have offered otherwise!

Fucking Chelsea, how did they get 80m-90m for Luiz and Mata? We would have been offered 10-15 each.

otfgoon wrote:

Thank fuck they have a £49m spending cap, god knows what their chief transfer fixer upper, Pénis Droit, would have offered otherwise!

😆

spaceman spiff wrote:

Fucking Chelsea, how did they get 80m-90m for Luiz and Mata? We would have been offered 10-15 each.

Big money for De Bruyne too, and if Lukaku's on the move he'll fetch a large fee as well.

They're getting 50m for Luiz? What the fuck?

More like £40m I believe.

Still, an inquisitive journalist might want to have a look to see if there was any quid-pro-quo going on.

Does have a whiff of "well we've already been sanctioned for FFP so let's overpay for another billionaire-backed club's wantaway" about it ... we'll have to see if Chelsea return the favour in a year or two.

I was thinking more in terms of an 'unrelated' transaction between another two of their companies.

Could be that in the short term, trouble is then the 50m spend still sits on PSG's books for FFP purposes.