Jump to content

Man |City and Financial fair play


Shipley Ram

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Manchester City are a medium sized club, perhaps bigger than Derby, but certainly no bigger than the likes of Everton, Newcastle or Leeds. They have owners who have invested not only in the first team and bringing them Premier League titles and historically good teams, but also in an academy infrastructure and marketing approach that will see them eventually stand on their own two feet alongside the 'historically' successful sides. 

The key is the word 'historically'. People follow Man Utd and Liverpool worldwide for no other reason that they were successful at the key points in history when football went through surges due to a greater reach. If teams are no longer afforded the opportunity to complete with these on a financial standpoint then the status quo will never change, perhaps that is what the hierarchy want - it allows them to eventually peddle the line that a domestic league is no longer fit for purposes for the elite sides in order to continue growth then a European league needs to created with no relegation, i.e. an NFL version of European football. The money afforded to the chosen clubs, i.e. United/Liverpool/Real/Barcelona, would eclipse what they're able to bring in now. Money focuses the direction of travel in all walks of life. 

I am totally against FFP in its current form, because the punishments are ironically heavy fines and it doesn't even necessarily impact the biggest spenders and clubs with the biggest wage bill. It's not financial fair play - it's a vehicle to keep status quo. The most off putting part of football.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ambitious said:

I am totally against FFP in its current form, because the punishments are ironically heavy fines and it doesn't even necessarily impact the biggest spenders and clubs with the biggest wage bill. It's not financial fair play - it's a vehicle to keep status quo. The most off putting part of football.  

For me it should be simple. If an Owner is prepared to cover any losses made and can demonstrate that they are prepared to cover them without any requirement for them being paid back then they should be fine. If the losses are elsewhere, loans, banks etc then FFP should kick in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Paul71 said:

For me it should be simple. If an Owner is prepared to cover any losses made and can demonstrate that they are prepared to cover them without any requirement for them being paid back then they should be fine. If the losses are elsewhere, loans, banks etc then FFP should kick in.

Absolutely but very difficult to be successfully monitored 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

Absolutely but very difficult to be successfully monitored 

Well true, considering the EFL are clearly incompetent anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...