Why would we all hate Platini?
Bye Bye FFP?
because he is quick to jump on the nouveau riche and Arsenal, and has said absolutely nothing about Barca's off-the-book payments to Neymar's dad. f#ck him so hard. i have no time for this hypocrisy
Claudius wrote:Evoh, how are PSG supposed to compete with Madrid and Barca?
You have two options - give them the leeway to make as much money as Madrid and Barca; or cut Madrid/Barca's ability to make money
They have the leeway to make as much legitimate money as anyone. Everybody does.
PSG are the only big club in one of the worlds biggest, richest, most glamerous cities. In a country with an illustrious footballing history. There is nothing stopping them investing heavily in infrastructure, youth development and the like, and growing the club over a long period.
Tbh, i don't even mind City, PSG etc buying some great players and building strong teams. But i can't stand the way they hoard quality players because they have this fundamental 'kid in a toy shop' need to buy 3 or 4 expensive players on massive wages every summer.
and this is different from early 2000s Galacticos how? in 2005, each of Chelsea, Arsenal, United and Liverpool would have given everything to be able to boast one of Zidane, Figo, Ronaldo, Roberto Carlos, etc. it's been happening. we just care cos it's new money. i refer to Sean Carter...
New money, they looking down on me
Blue bloods they trying to clown on me
You can turn up your nose high society
Never gone turn down the homie
Eh? Plenty of people have been moaning about the way Real and Barca have done business. However that's another matter entirely. Real are the richest club in the world either way, and most of their recent money has come from TV deals, not billionairs. i.e. it's the clubs money.
Its different because Madrid played all of those players. Chelsea have 23 players on loan, a number of whom are full iinternationals, including the likes of Courtois and Lukaku.
That's before you even mention the £20-30m footballers who barely make their match day squads, while earning 150k a week.
otfgoon wrote:Eh? Plenty of people have been moaning about the way Real and Barca have done business. However that's another matter entirely. Real are the richest club in the world either way, and most of their recent money has come from TV deals, not billionairs. i.e. it's the clubs money.
Most of Reals money came from state coffers as they were Franco's team, Barcacelona similarly are the quasi Catalonian NT, there was nothing faiir about how either of them became giants of the game.
Timothy wrote:Its different because Madrid played all of those players. Chelsea have 23 players on loan, a number of whom are full iinternationals, including the likes of Courtois and Lukaku.
That's before you even mention the £20-30m footballers who barely make their match day squads, while earning 150k a week.
the difference is Madrid was spending 50m pounds on those guys. this goes back to the discussion i was having yesterday about how you build a team. you can have a few 50m pound players and lots of 5m pound players or just tons of 20m pound players. i think this is where Sir Alex has stuffed up United a bit. he over-invested in the 20m pound players instead of trusting in his youth system to give him the 5m pound players.
The posts where you guys alone disagree would fill a hundred page thread.
Biggus, Klaus, I'm going to delete your recent posts.
If either of you see this as a breach of some inalienable right 
please take the matter up on a PM.
Not a discussion for the main forums Biggus.
Post migrated elsewhere.
Burnwinter wrote:
a thread? we could have a whole section of the forum for these two
:hat: :dulaoohtobe: :egg:
Think it would be more like
:hat: :dulaoohtobe: :mad:
I didn't know this. Basically, if a club is deemed to NOT comply with the FFP, UEFA and the club have an opportunity to come to a settlement which would STILL allow the club to participate in UEFA competitions.
It sounds ludicrous to me, but should that happen, then OTHER clubs "directly affected" (think Liverpool, Everton, Tottenham or Man U who could end up fourth and fifth), can appeal the decision to send City to a UEFA tribunal.
Either way, UEFA are expected to announce which clubs meet, and do not meet, the FFP in May or early June. That will certainly be VERY interesting!
I think it's reasonable, however you'd have to look at it on a case by case basis. If a club shows that it's genuinely tried to curb it's spending in order to comply and just needs a bit more time then it's fair to give them a bit more time with a limited sanction. However clubs like City and PSG have shown a complete disregard for the FFP, and seem like they're trying to beef up their squads as much as possible hoping before the rules come into full force, then real sanctions will be needed in my opinion. If not a ban from the CL then at least a transfer embargo.
The appeal process is interesting though, can imagine things getting quite nasty. Reckon it would be in the interest of all the clubs, even Chelsea, to push UEFA to sanction City.
Yup. That's the way I see it too. However, according to that article only clubs that are directly affected by a decision, should it go in favor of Man City, are eligible to appeal a decision. The most likely scenario would be the club that ends up fourth behind Man City to appeal not having to play a qualifying round for the CL, and the club finishing fifth for missing out on the CL.
So its who's directly affected in terms or Euro qualification rather than directly affected, period?
Mourinho saying until FFP is implemented they won't be able to compete with Man City. You couldn't make this up, he does love his mind games. I bet if Wenger was in his position saying this the media would of been calling him mad by now.
Biggest hypocrite in football.
What a clown.