Manchester City could face a Uefa ban from Champions League for a season

thestaggy

Honorary Master
Joined
May 11, 2011
Messages
14,287
#1
Uefa investigators want Manchester City to be banned from the Champions League for a season if they are found guilty of breaking financial rules.

However, according to one well-placed source, a final decision is yet to be made by chief investigator Yves Leterme.

The former Belgian prime minister, chairman of the investigatory panel of Uefa's independent financial control board, is set to make a recommendation this week.

With no vote in such cases, the final say lies with him but several of his colleagues are understood to have firmly expressed the view at a recent meeting that a season-long ban would be a suitable punishment if City are found guilty.
What are City alleged to have done?

Leterme and his team have been looking at evidence first uncovered in a series of leaks published by the German newspaper Der Spiegel last year.

The reports alleged that Manchester City had broken Financial Fair Play regulations by inflating the value of a multimillion-pound sponsorship deal. City were fined £49m in 2014 for a previous breach of regulations.

The Premier League champions denied any wrongdoing, and Uefa said it could not comment on an ongoing investigation, but according to the New York Times, investigators now want rules upheld and City punished with a ban.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/48265079

Fake a$$ team.
 

Hamish McPanji

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Messages
37,788
#4
Their financials have always been fake. By the time UEFA or the FA get around to checking they will already have acquired enough glory supporters to be profitable
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
45,733
#5
The reports alleged that Manchester City had broken Financial Fair Play regulations by inflating the value of a multimillion-pound sponsorship deal. City were fined £49m in 2014 for a previous breach of regulations.
Why is that wrong?
 

mercurial

MyBB Legend
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
37,882
#9
More interestingly, if this ban takes place and Arsenal beat Chelsea in the Europa League final, Man United will get a spot in the UEFA CL next season. Undeservedly so.
 

thestaggy

Honorary Master
Joined
May 11, 2011
Messages
14,287
#11
Aren’t they all?
They're lying about their funding. Their oil daddy is pumping personal money in to them. The likes of United, Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs can actually support themselves based on the income they generate.

Pull City's oil daddy and they end up as a West Ham, Newcastle or Everton.
 

Spizz

Goat Botherer
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
23,286
#12
It's to prevent unfair competition. A team has to be seen to want to be profitable rather then some rich bastids expensive toy.
The irony of course being that the “Champions” League has destroyed competition in Europe for all but a small elite thanks to UEFA.
 

Spizz

Goat Botherer
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
23,286
#13
They're lying about their funding. Their oil daddy is pumping personal money in to them. The likes of United, Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs can actually support themselves based on the income they generate.

Pull City's oil daddy and they end up as a West Ham, Newcastle or Everton.
You say that like it’s unfair?

The only difference is that these other clubs you mention got a couple of years head start on TV money and foreign “supporters” while City were down the divisions.

It really is funny to see people from other countries looking down their nose at City or any other club when they themselves picked their own team randomly a year or two earlier.
 

thestaggy

Honorary Master
Joined
May 11, 2011
Messages
14,287
#14
Why is that wrong?
It is to stop oil tycoons, Russian oligarchs and Far East billionaires from spending their personal money and buying success on behalf of their clubs.

These actions are deemed anti-competition as they have lead to spiraling transfer costs; excessive wages and huge performance gaps between clubs.

The clubs have to fund and sustain themselves.
 

mercurial

MyBB Legend
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
37,882
#15
You say that like it’s unfair?

The only difference is that these other clubs you mention got a couple of years head start on TV money and foreign “supporters” while City were down the divisions.

It really is funny to see people from other countries looking down their nose at City or any other club when they themselves picked their own team randomly a year or two earlier.
Hey everyone, look! A shitty fan!
 

Spizz

Goat Botherer
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
23,286
#16
It is to stop oil tycoons, Russian oligarchs and Far East billionaires from spending their personal money and buying success on behalf of their clubs.

These actions are deemed anti-competition as they have lead to spiraling transfer costs; excessive wages and huge performance gaps between clubs.

The clubs have to fund and sustain themselves.
Yet funny how they all have billionaire foreign owners :erm:
 

thestaggy

Honorary Master
Joined
May 11, 2011
Messages
14,287
#18
You say that like it’s unfair?

The only difference is that these other clubs you mention got a couple of years head start on TV money and foreign “supporters” while City were down the divisions.
I forgot to add how it can backfire on the benefiting clubs as well.

Take Dr. Tony Xia at Aston Villa. He launched his reign with wide smiles and a tirade of big promises on Twitter, backed up by a John Terry-headlined splurge on the most expensive squad the Championship has ever seen. Fast-forward a couple of years: promotion has evaded his playing staff, and now the social media content is all about "difficult times", Financial Fair Play "challenges" and the like, as tax payments are missed. Sad face.
https://www.fourfourtwo.com/features/why-party-over-footballs-sad-billionaire-owners

Billionaire comes in. Spends his money on behalf of the club. Financial Fair Play comes in to play and the club has to start accounting for the inflated spending. Club can't account for spending. Billionaire gets bored/frustrated. Billionaire pulls out. Club left to cover hugely inflated wage bill without sugar money. Club is also on the hook for unpaid taxes thanks to bored/disinterested billionaire. Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs come knocking. Administrators are called in. Club is stripped of anything worth value, this can include selling of the stadium and training grounds.

Sunderland are a great example. Foreign owner took over. Pumped huge money in to the club in the shape of personal loans. Spent a fortune on players and wages. No results. Sunderland get relegated to the second tier. Owner wants out but he wants his money back, so the asking price for the club far exceeds its actual value. No buyers. Owner is no longer spending his own money on the club and the club is also servicing the personal loans. Sunderland gets relegated for the second successive season and is now in the third tier.

It really is funny to see people from other countries looking down their nose at City or any other club when they themselves picked their own team randomly a year or two earlier.
Yeah, that is why Sunderland fans hated their American owner that got them in to trouble.

That is why the Aston Villa fans turned on American Randy Lerner when he spent his own money getting them on to the cusp of Europe, only to stop spending and get them in to a financial mess that ultimately resulted in their relegation.

These tycoons are terrible for football.
 
Last edited:

Spizz

Goat Botherer
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
23,286
#20
They breached rules. What's so hard to understand? Every club has to abide by them...
Sure, I just find it ironic that for most football fans in Europe, UEFA have ruined football by creating an elite and now they talk about unfair advantage over money.
 
Top