Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

'Financial Fair Play' ratified

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    'Financial Fair Play' ratified

    Big-spending football clubs to be banned under new UEFA guidelines

    From Philippe Grelard in Nyon Switzerland
    September 16, 2009

    Big spending by mega-rich clubs could soon be a thing of the past after UEFA ratified an initiative obliging European clubs not to spend beyond their means.

    UEFA's 'Financial Fair Play' concept, which was ratified by the its Executive Committee in Switzerland on Tuesday, will prevent indebted clubs from competing in European cup competitions and is set to come into force in 2012.

    At a time of global financial insecurity the European football market appeared an oasis of fiscal optimism this summer, with transfer records being broken at an unprecedented rate.

    Several European clubs, notably Real Madrid and Manchester City, spent up big in the transfer window, which has sparked a reaction from UEFA.

    UEFA now wants European sides to spend only what they raise from football-related income such as tickets sales and television revenue.

    A statement on the UEFA website read: "The main purpose of the Financial Fair Play concept is to improve the financial fairness in European competitions and the long-term stability of club football across the continent.

    "In order to achieve this goal, a set of measures will be put in place including: the obligation for clubs whose turnover is over a certain threshold, over a period of time, to balance their books or break even, (ie clubs cannot repeatedly spend more than the generated revenues); to give guidance on salaries and transfer spending; to provide an indicator on the sustainability of the levels of debt; and the obligation for clubs to honour their commitments at all times."

    UEFA president Michel Platini has previously called for an end to "success on credit", whereby clubs amass huge debts in a bid for short-term gain and become reliant on future income.

    Platini announced last month that by the 2012-13 season, UEFA hopes to be able to examine club accounts for the previous two seasons.

    From 2013-14, he added, sanctions could be imposed on clubs by an independent panel, ranging from fines to suspension from European competition.

    UEFA announced on Tuesday that this panel would be chaired by former Belgian prime minister Jean-Luc Dehaene.

    The Barclays Premier League pre-empted UEFA's stance by introducing its own financial measures earlier this week, obliging their clubs to submit their accounts to independent scrutiny on a yearly basis.

    "It is absolutely essential that these clubs are run as viable, going concerns," said Barclays Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore.

    "We would far rather intervene than risk a club going into administration."

    Scudamore's move drew unqualified praise from Platini.

    "This decision is exactly what UEFA wants," said Platini.

    "I would like to thank Scudamore for this English 'Financial Fair Play'."

    Real Madrid were by far the biggest spenders in the trasfer window as returning president Florentino Perez launched his latest project to lead the club back to the pinnacle of the European game after seeing them comprehensively put in the shade by rivals Barcelona last season.

    In June they broke the world transfer record twice in the space of a week, bringing in Kaka for AC Milan for 65 million euros (A$110 million) before landing Portuguese winger Cristiano Ronaldo from Manchester United for 94 million euros (A$159 million).

    French striker Karim Benzema, Spanish midfielder Xabi Alonso and defenders Raul Albiol and Alvaro Arbeloa all followed as Real's transformation into football's answer to the Harlem Globetrotters gathered pace.

    Real's transfer activity has thrust Spain's La Liga into the global spotlight but the Barclays Premier League remains Europe's top league in terms of TV revenue and worldwide appeal.

    Leading the charge this summer were Manchester City, bank-rolled by owner Sheikh Mansour, who spent almost 135 million euros (A$229 million) on new players in a bid to break into the self-perpetuating cash cow that is the English top flight's 'Big Four'.

    Chelsea, Liverpool and Manchester United - who make up the foursome alongside Arsenal - have all been taken over by foreign investors in recent years.

    Together, the three clubs have amassed around 1.13 billion euros (A$1.92 billion) of debt in a bid to remain competitive at the very highest level, but it is this kind of debt accumulation that European governing body UEFA now hopes to outlaw.

    Agence France-Presse
    HP: http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,...-23215,00.html

    Could be some interesting times ahead.

    It's gunna badly affect a lot of us, but mancs, chelsea and RM will be absolutely screwed trying to clear their debt in 5 years.

    Thouh I'm sure RM will get round it by their training ground being rezoned again or something similiar.
    Last edited by EwarWoo; 16-09-09, 07:02 AM.

    #2
    A very good initiative - will help save football in the long run!

    But debt is allowed as long as it is up against some actual values as I understand it - say a stadium, houses or whatever.

    But I wonder how they will enforce it. If its only about looking at the bottom line, then the super rich owners can just inject cash straight in the clubs leaving no debts. The it is us and the scum - not city/real/chelsea that will be left screwed.

    So wonder if some other factors will play a part and which!??

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Darkon View Post
      A very good initiative - will help save football in the long run!

      But debt is allowed as long as it is up against some actual values as I understand it - say a stadium, houses or whatever.

      But I wonder how they will enforce it. If its only about looking at the bottom line, then the super rich owners can just inject cash straight in the clubs leaving no debts. The it is us and the scum - not city/real/chelsea that will be left screwed.

      So wonder if some other factors will play a part and which!??
      Well, it does imply purely from valid income sources, and states that they'll be studying the books. However I'm sure there's ways round it.

      i.e., Chelsea - Sponsored by Abrmomirich Inc @ 200m a years.

      Could be very hard to enforce even if they do ban direct injections.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by EwarWoo View Post
        HP: http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,...-23215,00.html

        Could be some interesting times ahead.

        It's gunna badly affect a lot of us, but mancs, chelsea and RM will be absolutely screwed trying to clear their debt in 5 years.


        Thouh I'm sure RM will get round it by their training ground being rezoned again or something similiar.
        It doesn't actually say they have to though as far as I can see. So long as you are servicing your debt and don't repeatedly spend more than you bring in on transfers and wages it looks like you will be good. Convenient that the measures have a two years scope and will come in well after this summer's madness from Real Madrid will have to be questioned.
        "The man who never alters his opinion is like standing water, and breeds reptiles of the mind."
        -- William Blake

        Comment


          #5
          I like Platini.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by fredo View Post
            I like Platini.
            Platini is a cock

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Assassin View Post
              Platini is a cock
              Why? If you're going to slate someone like that, please state your reasons.

              Comment


                #8
                I can't quite decide about Platini. I think he has some good ideas and has mostly implemented his key ideas (like this one) in quite a sensible manner in terms of timscale and practicality. However I think he often goes to far in his rhetoric against us and large English clubs in a number of areas while seeming to take little/no action against the crowd problems elsewhere and has continued the laughable UEFA policies with regards to punishing teams for racist abuse.
                "The man who never alters his opinion is like standing water, and breeds reptiles of the mind."
                -- William Blake

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Assassin View Post
                  Fredo is a cock
                  .
                  Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.



                  May the Lord bless this post.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by fredo View Post
                    I like Platini.
                    i like platini as well, he has some good ideas how to make european football more interesting and how to spread quality, not just to the top 5 leagues, but to some others too, and with the national champions having an easier way into the CL he has achieved just that.

                    now it's time to ban under 18 transfers.

                    he's had some problems, as has anyone in that position, and he maybe a bit bias to italy, and a bit blind to the problems there, but he is trying to do good stuff and for me to pros outweigh the cons.

                    my only concern is that clubs may not take his "reforms" in an appreciative manner, and start a kind of super league, and that would be the end of football imo.
                    Jürgen Klopp

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by dww View Post
                      It doesn't actually say they have to though as far as I can see. So long as you are servicing your debt and don't repeatedly spend more than you bring in on transfers and wages it looks like you will be good. Convenient that the measures have a two years scope and will come in well after this summer's madness from Real Madrid will have to be questioned.
                      Ah, K, I only skimmed it, I was at work when I read it, looks like I got the wrong impression.

                      I was looking forward to United and Chelsea being ****ed

                      Originally posted by SlovenianKopite View Post
                      now it's time to ban under 18 transfers.
                      That will really change the quota scheme. No under 18 transfers = no foreign "homegrown" players. I could see it coming in as 17 to leave that open otherwise it will meet too much objection.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by EwarWoo View Post
                        Ah, K, I only skimmed it, I was at work when I read it, looks like I got the wrong impression.

                        I was looking forward to United and Chelsea being ****ed


                        That will really change the quota scheme. No under 18 transfers = no foreign "homegrown" players. I could see it coming in as 17 to leave that open otherwise it will meet too much objection.
                        But it would be very good for football in general if under 18 transfers where banned... however the EU rules don't allow it, so the only way around it really would be to set up a 3 year rule at the age of 18, og a 5 year rule at 21.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X