Football leaks

Sebastalona

Distinguished Member
My initial reaction was this story must be absolute dynamite for you to have made your 8th post in 2 years.

I’ll read it after my kebab.
 

Miss Mandy

Moderator
Instead of just posting links to other sites, why don't you post your thoughts? That's how discussion forums work. You've not even summerized the 'football leaks' so you're not going to get much interest. Many users are on limited data connections so they're not going to follow random links with no explanation about them.
 

Leo31291

Distinguished Member
Shock horror footballs governing body turn a blind eye when there's money on the table. Can't see much being done but if I were one of the clubs to have been punished by FFP I would take Uefa to court.
 

mitch

Distinguished Member
Shock horror footballs governing body turn a blind eye when there's money on the table. Can't see much being done but if I were one of the clubs to have been punished by FFP I would take Uefa to court.
Pretty soon someone will challenge FFP in court and the whole thing will come crashing down.
 

gamerste

Well-known Member
Instead of just posting links to other sites, why don't you post your thoughts? That's how discussion forums work. You've not even summerized the 'football leaks' so you're not going to get much interest. Many users are on limited data connections so they're not going to follow random links with no explanation about them.
It's the publication that has recently reported the Ronaldo rape case,along with numerous other football related concerns.
I imagined most people who follow football had recently heard of the German news outlet Der Spiegel.
The actual links posted give an idea of what's involved.
Der Spiegel have 70 million documents to go through.
There is a lot to take in and read.
Giving people the information first to make their own summary, thus engages discussion.

As for limited data connection it's 2 web pages posted at a time most people would be commuting home from work.
I get sites will be filtered and blocked through work but as I say 2 web pages to a reputable site.
 

gamerste

Well-known Member
City and PSG fiddling the books? fudge me, never would have seen that coming
All football fans knew it was happening.
However knowing something and proving something are completely different things.
There is proof that the French president asked the Qataris to buy PSG and his mate Platini will make sure they get the world cup.
City and PSG broke the rules,UEFA banned other clubs and sanctioned other clubs but helped these 2 clubs avoid seriois sanctions.

The FIFA president who has just arrived in office, is as corrupt as the guy he replaced.
From the top football is like a mafiosa corporation.
In all previous 29 cases that this collaborative journalist group have worked on.
Including tax evasion of Messi Ronaldo Mourinho.
The Ronaldo rape claim.
And a host of other things,that they have not been sued by anyone speaks volumes of the legitimacy of these leaks.
 

Abbeygoo

Distinguished Member
That was a very interesting read, thanks for posting the links.

Just shows that FFP is an illegal restriction of trade and the moment it is challenged, UEFA back down.

Most revealing part of the link was the reason that FFP was brought in. Was it to save clubs from going bankrupt? Nope, obviously that doesn’t work anyway.

It was to ensure the status quo was maintained and to protect the existing top teams around Europe at the time.

That’s probably the most criminal thing about this whole sorry affair.
 

alan280170

Distinguished Member
Always knew FFP was a sham, brought in to protect a cartel of clubs, same as the CL.

Companies are liquidated every day. Why should football be different, market forces and all that.
 

Sebastalona

Distinguished Member
Reading this article does nothing to alter my long held belief that those in power in the upper echelons of the game are nothing but self serving crooks.
 

Leo31291

Distinguished Member
Power corrupts. I imagine it's like any other job. You live in a bubble where you cut corners, go against protocol, make your life a little easier, before you know it, you've got a couple million in your back pocket, whoops.
 

maverick177uk

Distinguished Member
That was a very interesting read, thanks for posting the links.

Just shows that FFP is an illegal restriction of trade and the moment it is challenged, UEFA back down.

Most revealing part of the link was the reason that FFP was brought in. Was it to save clubs from going bankrupt? Nope, obviously that doesn’t work anyway.

It was to ensure the status quo was maintained and to protect the existing top teams around Europe at the time.

That’s probably the most criminal thing about this whole sorry affair.
Been saying this for years and people just laugh, I always bring up the fact if it’s to help clubs not to be in debt how is that untied years ago could be £500 million in the red, surely that should have been a huge fine.
 

Abbeygoo

Distinguished Member
To protect the status quo. The only reason it was introduced and it failed.
 

TayWax

Distinguished Member
So we can pick and choose which rules we follow depending on how much we can pay to the rule makers?

Whether you agree with the rules or not they are there. You can argue the legality of them as well, but football seems to be above most legal systems anyway (you can see that with the lenient to non existent punishment of drunk drivers and tax frauds). Plenty of clubs have been banned from European competition for far less than what City and PSG have done. Difference being that they don't have epic amounts of money to give to the ****s who currently run football to ensure that the same punishment isn't doled out to them.
 

gamerste

Well-known Member
Been saying this for years and people just laugh, I always bring up the fact if it’s to help clubs not to be in debt how is that untied years ago could be £500 million in the red, surely that should have been a huge fine.
But Manchester United can service that debt by being the brand that they are.
Every club has debt but they are the richest club in the world.
When they sign sponsorship deals they set the precedent for everyone else.
What PSG and Manchester City have done is sign sponsorship deals with companies or countries that are owned or have a conflicting interest with the club owners.
It's financial doping.
As one of the report says PSG sponsoring deal with Qatari tourism economically was worth 2.5 million per annum.
Yet PSG got 250mil per year.
 

Abbeygoo

Distinguished Member
The point that everyone keeps missing is that these rules were brought in after the top clubs, like United and Real Madrid, had been splashing the cash for years with no restriction. Where was FFP before then?

I’m thinking of opening a restaurant across the road from a Nando’s and want to break their stranglehold on the domestic market.

I need to buy a building, pay for staff to run it, an expensive chef, a brilliant manager to coordinate it all and also need to spend thousands marketing it and trying to overtake the restaurant over the road.

I don’t need to borrow any money though because I have several other successful businesses that I can use the cash from.

The government have now just told me I can’t spend my own money and it’s not fair on Nando’s.

Restriction of trade.
 

TayWax

Distinguished Member
Don't you have to agree to UEFA's rules to be a member of a UEFA competition tho? They could make playing the game with a square shaped ball if they want. Doesn't mean you can come along go "fudge that, we have more money than you, we're going to play with a round ball because it suits us"

Or maybe you can :smashin:
 

gamerste

Well-known Member
The point that everyone keeps missing is that these rules were brought in after the top clubs, like United and Real Madrid, had been splashing the cash for years with no restriction. Where was FFP before then?

I’m thinking of opening a restaurant across the road from a Nando’s and want to break their stranglehold on the domestic market.

I need to buy a building, pay for staff to run it, an expensive chef, a brilliant manager to coordinate it all and also need to spend thousands marketing it and trying to overtake the restaurant over the road.

I don’t need to borrow any money though because I have several other successful businesses that I can use the cash from.

The government have now just told me I can’t spend my own money and it’s not fair on Nando’s.

Restriction of trade.
I get that and I agree about the status quo.
But other clubs have been hit hard with FFP sanctions, QPR where fined 40million.
Why are PSG and City different to QPR. The only difference is 40mil fine. Will be paid within the hour.
Rules are there and everyone agreed with the rules and signed up.
FFP was about the amount of debts around clubs.
So nobody could asset strip a club like Portsmouth.
Now if the owners of PSG and City suddenly walked away from the club's and called the money back.
What would happen to both clubs.
 

Abbeygoo

Distinguished Member
I get that and I agree about the status quo.
But other clubs have been hit hard with FFP sanctions, QPR where fined 40million.
Why are PSG and City different to QPR. The only difference is 40mil fine. Will be paid within the hour.
Rules are there and everyone agreed with the rules and signed up.
FFP was about the amount of debts around clubs.
So nobody could asset strip a club like Portsmouth.
Now if the owners of PSG and City suddenly walked away from the club's and called the money back.
What would happen to both clubs.
First of all City were hit with sanctions - from memory it was a £50m fine (or thereabouts) which was deducted from prize money along with a restriction on our net spend during a transfer window and also a restriction on the squad size in UEFA competition one year.

And your last point is so wide of the mark - City's don't owe the owner any money, unlike say Chelsea, as the money invested into the club was invested as equity not debt - so it can not be "called back" if the owner walked away, which isn't going to happen.
 

maverick177uk

Distinguished Member
Also City got uefa in to tell them how to do their accounts so they wouldn’t get a fine, submitted the books and uefa changed the goalposts the owners were fuming and that’s why part of the fine was paid back. As Abbey said it didn’t bother them before City and PSG but then the status quo was ok, face it, uefa don’t care if City goes to the wall as long as their darlings are ok, you just have to look at how the co efficient# were done to see it’s all for the big boys.
 

gamerste

Well-known Member
And your last point is so wide of the mark - City's don't owe the owner any money, unlike say Chelsea, as the money invested into the club was invested as equity not debt - so it can not be "called back" if the owner walked away, which isn't going to happen.
Financial sanctions to man city are pointless.

If the owner was to walk away we all know he isn't.
(They need a western image vehicle to move away from their appaling human rights violations.)
Then surely the fake sponsorship deals go with them.
Meaning Manchester City in it's current guise would cease to exist in my opinion.
Which I hope would never be the case.

Moving away from the status quo line.
How many top flight clubs would continue at their current pace if their owner simply decided to move on.

Just noticed you support Manchester City.
Could I ask if you feel your club has been a tad naughty in circumventing the rules.
 

gamerste

Well-known Member
Also City got uefa in to tell them how to do their accounts so they wouldn’t get a fine, submitted the books and uefa changed the goalposts the owners were fuming and that’s why part of the fine was paid back. As Abbey said it didn’t bother them before City and PSG but then the status quo was ok, face it, uefa don’t care if City goes to the wall as long as their darlings are ok, you just have to look at how the co efficient# were done to see it’s all for the big boys.
It's not about one club for me city PSG it's irrelevant,it's the not following of the rules.
And UEFA fudging the rules to benefit themselves and others.
Surely city and psg are part of the status quo.
My own team had a transfer embargo in 2015.
 

Similar threads

The latest video from AVForums

LG CX 4K OLED TV Review: The best TV of 2020?

Trending threads

Latest News

New H.266 video codec promises 50 percent data saving
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Toshiba launches UL20 4K HDR TVs from £299
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
LG GX soundbar launches in UK
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Sky Q updates smart features and adds Disney Plus in HDR
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Philips online events to replace IFA 2020 attendance
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom