FFP

[Drummond]

Everton meanwhile, were done for not complying with FFP

A Premier League statement said: “Following a five-day hearing last month, the commission determined that Everton FC’s PSR [profit and sustainability rules] calculation for the relevant period resulted in a loss of £124.5m, as contended by the Premier League, which exceeded the threshold of £105m permitted under the PSRs. The commission concluded that a sporting sanction in the form of a 10-point deduction should be imposed. That sanction has immediate effect.”

Which is wholly different, they basically just lost more money than they were allowed to, whereas City are accused of basically being completely dishonest and trying to hide payments etc.

[Smithy]

That wouldn't be a shock. I'm actually really iffy about deciding sporting events in the courts or tribunals. This feels a bit like tax law, where everything is so complex that the opportunities to create opaque and entangled - but probably legal - workarounds are infinite.

If the football authorities really wanted to stop the cheating or bending of rules, salary caps, squad sizes including loans, multiple ownership bans, real-time transparency and the like would be the way to go. Much fairer than docking a club points seasons after the offence.

I haven't actually read the FFP rules, so I don't know how complex the rules are, or how tightly defined they are, but it does feel a bit like Formula One. In that the the rules are defined, and then the teams find as many creative ways as they can circumvent them while "technically" still being on the right side.  These things often end up the courts, because there is no other way to settle a disagreement between two parties who have a fundamentally different interpretations of the words on a page.

I don't even really properly understand the "breaches" that Man City have been accused of, only that there are a lot of them.  They certainly give the impression they've found a legal loophole that others haven't exploited. I hope they're wrong.

Man City and Chelsea are both, in the main, accused of making payments to players outside their officials contracts. This isn't loopholes or remotely subtle, they've done things like booking a player as a 'consultant' for something and then paying them vast sums for the service despite there being no evidence that the player either did anything or would even be capable of doing what they were paid for. They know it's dodgy as fuck because the payments made from a 3rd party and went to either another 3rd party or to a hidden/off-shore \accounts.

It's pretty much the exact same trick that Saracens tried to pull off in the rugby who were punished with a points deduction that was designed to ensure relegation, that's a better precedent to look at than what has happened with Everton.

Thanks Paul, that's the clearest/most succinct explanation I've seen of what they are accused of actually doing.  It does make the mind boggle though, that if Man City's "official" wage bill is over £400m, what are they ACTUALLY paying these players?

I'm guessing anyone in receipt of this money hasn't broken any rules as long as they declare it correctly to the tax man? I mean, the players aren't obliged to declare the sources of all their income to the premier league?

[chrisw1]

It's all pretty disgusting.  I feel for Everton.  If every other club was whiter than white then there would be no real problem with the penalty.  But it's absolutely laughable when Man City have financially doped for 10 years and destroyed competitive football as we knew it in the process.

There's almost no punishment that would be severe enough for Man City.  They have created their infrastructure and billion-pound value squad based on years of cheating.  It would take an unprecedented points deduction for them to be relegated.  Even then they'd get over relegation and be back in the top 4 in a couple of seasons.  And they'd still sit there with the benefits of the legacy they have created.

The only thing that would come close to hurting them would be relegation to Division 4 and a long transfer ban.  Even the, I think they'd be over it in no time.

And the football authorities just sat back and let it happen.  Bastards.

[Drummond]

If Grealish is on the rumoured £350k per week, he won't be the only one, and Haaland is on considerably more. They've made record profits this year apparently, it just doesn't add up.

[ChicagoLion]

That wouldn't be a shock. I'm actually really iffy about deciding sporting events in the courts or tribunals. This feels a bit like tax law, where everything is so complex that the opportunities to create opaque and entangled - but probably legal - workarounds are infinite.

If the football authorities really wanted to stop the cheating or bending of rules, salary caps, squad sizes including loans, multiple ownership bans, real-time transparency and the like would be the way to go. Much fairer than docking a club points seasons after the offence.

I haven't actually read the FFP rules, so I don't know how complex the rules are, or how tightly defined they are, but it does feel a bit like Formula One. In that the the rules are defined, and then the teams find as many creative ways as they can circumvent them while "technically" still being on the right side.  These things often end up the courts, because there is no other way to settle a disagreement between two parties who have a fundamentally different interpretations of the words on a page.

I don't even really properly understand the "breaches" that Man City have been accused of, only that there are a lot of them.  They certainly give the impression they've found a legal loophole that others haven't exploited. I hope they're wrong.

Man City and Chelsea are both, in the main, accused of making payments to players outside their officials contracts. This isn't loopholes or remotely subtle, they've done things like booking a player as a 'consultant' for something and then paying them vast sums for the service despite there being no evidence that the player either did anything or would even be capable of doing what they were paid for. They know it's dodgy as fuck because the payments made from a 3rd party and went to either another 3rd party or to a hidden/off-shore \accounts.

It's pretty much the exact same trick that Saracens tried to pull off in the rugby who were punished with a points deduction that was designed to ensure relegation, that's a better precedent to look at than what has happened with Everton.

Thanks Paul, that's the clearest/most succinct explanation I've seen of what they are accused of actually doing.  It does make the mind boggle though, that if Man City's "official" wage bill is over £400m, what are they ACTUALLY paying these players?

I'm guessing anyone in receipt of this money hasn't broken any rules as long as they declare it correctly to the tax man? I mean, the players aren't obliged to declare the sources of all their income to the premier league?

If the players knowingly receive money into an account that should have been declared by the club to the PL then they are involved in deception which is a crime.

[nick harper]

If Grealish is on the rumoured £350k per week, he won't be the only one, and Haaland is on considerably more. They've made record profits this year apparently, it just doesn't add up.

I’m not surprised they’re profitable now given all the player sales, and some home grown at that, they’ve made in the last couple of years. It’s the illegal way they’ve fast-tracked themselves into this position that is disgraceful.

I read it could be 2 years before the case is heard due to their lack of co-operation and how lawyered up they are.

[chrisw1]

If Grealish is on the rumoured £350k per week, he won't be the only one, and Haaland is on considerably more. They've made record profits this year apparently, it just doesn't add up.

I’m not surprised they’re profitable now given all the player sales, and some home grown at that, they’ve made in the last couple of years. It’s the illegal way they’ve fast-tracked themselves into this position that is disgraceful.

I read it could be 2 years before the case is heard due to their lack of co-operation and how lawyered up they are.

This is the key point.  A points deduction or relegation will hardly touch them because of the position they have cheated their way into.

[Dante Lavelli]

I also suspect that there would be quite a lot of noise along the lines of “you’re preventing us fans of seeing our heroes haaland, grealish etc” too.

Sky need the tv revenue, so does the FA (is that who gets the tv money?), so there’s plenty if important stakeholders that will happily see it buried.

[Smithy]

If Grealish is on the rumoured £350k per week, he won't be the only one, and Haaland is on considerably more. They've made record profits this year apparently, it just doesn't add up.

I’m not surprised they’re profitable now given all the player sales, and some home grown at that, they’ve made in the last couple of years. It’s the illegal way they’ve fast-tracked themselves into this position that is disgraceful.

I read it could be 2 years before the case is heard due to their lack of co-operation and how lawyered up they are.

This is the key point.  A points deduction or relegation will hardly touch them because of the position they have cheated their way into.

Absolutely, any team could make a profit once it has illegally acquired a billion-dollar squad.  It's much like Chelsea, in that they bought their way to success before FFP became a thing, and it gave them a head start the rest didn't have. 

People also forget that Man City were bought three years before FFP came into force (five years before it came into force in the premier league), and in that time they made Robinho the most expensive player in history, plus the likes of Teves, Lescott, Jo, Adebayor, Santa Cruz, Toure (both), Dzeko, Balotelli, Silva, Milner, plus plenty more - all bought for sums in the £20m-35m range, and all bought before FFP was even a thing.

Their net spend in the first three years before FFP came in was £350m-ish. That would be a lot today. And that's at a time when the world record transfer was £40m.  In today's transfer money that's easily over a billion.  None of that broke the rules of the time, but it meant they had players they could transfer for big fees to allow them to keep spending within the FFP rules.  And that head start STILL wasn't enough, because it sounds like they've still been breaking them with under-the-table payments, and I hope the book gets thrown at them.

[johnc]

I also suspect that there would be quite a lot of noise along the lines of “you’re preventing us fans of seeing our heroes haaland, grealish etc” too.

Sky need the tv revenue, so does the FA (is that who gets the tv money?), so there’s plenty if important stakeholders that will happily see it buried.

I am not sure this can be buried. Man City are a financial behemoth. Everton can't be the fall guys for what is going on elsewhere. Maybe this is why they wanted a super league so there could be none of this nonsense about trying to put a brake on their spending

[ChicagoLion]

I also suspect that there would be quite a lot of noise along the lines of “you’re preventing us fans of seeing our heroes haaland, grealish etc” too.

Sky need the tv revenue, so does the FA (is that who gets the tv money?), so there’s plenty if important stakeholders that will happily see it buried.

I keep seeing this but I am not so sure.
There will have to be a settlement which involves Liverpool and Manure who are pushing for this. These clubs have huge global fan base and Sky the PL need them on board, if not the whole thing implodes.

The PL could end up in the same situation Serie A did, from the dominant league in Europe to a fragmented and declining organisation.

This is all down too piss poor leadership and a dreadful governance process at the PL/FA.

I dont see how they keep the PL from fragmenting.

[Dante Lavelli]

The last sentence is why they could try and bury it: the hope that the integrity of the league is maintained (or at least no one scratches beneath the surface).

You’re right that It’d take a Liverpool/United to bring the whole thing down, but I’m not sure they’d do it as it could mess up the ecosystem that they live in.

[sid1964]

is that why Boro wanted us to have a points deduction because of our FFP losses?

[pauliewalnuts]

I also suspect that there would be quite a lot of noise along the lines of “you’re preventing us fans of seeing our heroes haaland, grealish etc” too.

Sky need the tv revenue, so does the FA (is that who gets the tv money?), so there’s plenty if important stakeholders that will happily see it buried.

I am not sure this can be buried. Man City are a financial behemoth. Everton can't be the fall guys for what is going on elsewhere. Maybe this is why they wanted a super league so there could be none of this nonsense about trying to put a brake on their spending

I agree, there is no way they can now bury this.

If they've punished Everton pretty strongly, it's going to bring the Chelsea and Man City situations to the fore (already is) and put the PL in a situation where those clubs' cases can't be swept under the carpet.

[Footy-Vill]

I also suspect that there would be quite a lot of noise along the lines of “you’re preventing us fans of seeing our heroes haaland, grealish etc” too.

Sky need the tv revenue, so does the FA (is that who gets the tv money?), so there’s plenty if important stakeholders that will happily see it buried.

I am not sure this can be buried. Man City are a financial behemoth. Everton can't be the fall guys for what is going on elsewhere. Maybe this is why they wanted a super league so there could be none of this nonsense about trying to put a brake on their spending

I agree, there is no way they can now bury this.

If they've punished Everton pretty strongly, it's going to bring the Chelsea and Man City situations to the fore (already is) and put the PL in a situation where those clubs' cases can't be swept under the carpet.

My understanding and theory

I am confident that justice will be served.
Manchester City have been refusing to cooperate and they have used delaying tactics, this will result in only adding to the punishment.

I believe they will face thus in two years around 2025, and it is no coincidence that Guardiola signed a two-year deal extension and will leave in 2025.
After this time then Man City will face consequences. That's my reckoning.
They are not looking into Pep's tenure. The FFP issue are charges before that.
And it appears to be an agreement to protect his legacy before Man City are demoted.