Following Manchester City‘s protracted battle with UEFA’s Financial Fair Play regulations it came to light yesterday that following an agreement between clubs and European football’s governing body, the money brought in from Manchester City’s fine would be distributed amongst clubs involved in UEFA competitions, including those already fairly wealthy clubs within the Premier League.
City were fined a fee in the region of £50million due to their breach of the regulations although according to Martyn Ziegler in The Independent, the club will only have to pay £20million of that if the club comply with the rules in the upcoming years.
This money will be shared amongst clubs who have been FFP compliant, but is this the correct place for the money to go?
Bayern Munich chairman Karl-Heinz Rummenigge said the concept of FFP compliant clubs receiving a share of the fine had been agreed by UEFA, however, there are a number of clubs including Manchester United, Chelsea and Arsenal who will receive money which in truth they don’t need.
The concept of FFP is to firstly ensure that there are no repeats of the situations we saw at Portsmouth and Leeds United where a club’s spending far outweighs its income over a sustained period thus forcing the club into financial meltdown at a later date.
Secondly the measures are in place to keep the European game fair to a certain degree. However, handing even more money to the rich is hardly doing that is it?
There are more clubs in need of a slight financial boost than the likes of Chelsea and United, but this is not to say the money recouped from City’s fine should be a form of charity but to ensure the future development of clubs it is important that the money should be used in a positive manner.
Ben Rumsby’s report in The Telegraph states clubs are set to earn around £210,000 from the measures currently in place. For some clubs at the lower end of the European scale this would be a jackpot. Of course handing out money on a no strings attached basis would breed different issues but at a time when clubs are finding it difficult to not only balance the books but also allocate funding to certain areas this small bonus payment would, to some, be a godsend.
Youth development is a hugely important part of football and one which UEFA has not ignored with record funding going towards projects related to developing football at lower levels. However, even more could be done, particularly with individual clubs, using the money brought into UEFA through City and other clubs’ respective fines.
Restrictions could be placed on the money being shared which would require it to be spent entirely on developing the younger levels of football at a club as well as the youth infrastructure i.e. facilities and more specialised coaching.
Clubs could then focus spending their own revenue on areas of short-term improvements for example, the first-team whilst simultaneously improving their future at no extra and impossible cost to them. In terms of FFP in the long-term this would be a benefit as in theory clubs would produce far better players at an increased rate meaning future high spending on transfers would be less necessary.
Of course on the other hand there will be those who say the fines should go to City’s rivals otherwise it wouldn’t be a true punishment but that isn’t what the process is about.
The money should be kept in football and used for further development of the game where it is needed most. Can anybody truly say the likes of Chelsea, United or even Real Madrid are going to benefit from a payment of just under a quarter of a million pounds?
There will be a meeting this October to discuss any potential changes to the FFP system and whether there are better ways for the money to be used and I for one hope there will be a change of tact and the majority of the money will go to the future good of the game in places which need it.
200+ Channels With Sports & News
- Starting price: $33/mo. for fubo Latino Package
- Watch Premier League, World Cup, Euro 2024 & more
Live & On Demand TV Streaming
- Price: $35/mo. for Sling Blue
- Watch Premier League, World Cup & MLS
Many Sports & ESPN Originals
- Price: $9.99/mo. (or get ESPN+, Hulu & Disney+ for $13.99/mo.)
- Features Bundesliga, LaLiga, Championship, & more
2,000+ soccer games per year
- Price: $4.99/mo
- Features Champions League, Serie A, Europa League & NWSL
175 Premier League Games & PL TV
- Starting price: $4.99/mo. for Peacock Premium
- Watch 175 exclusive EPL games per season
110+ channels, live & on-demand
- Price: $59.95/mo. for Plus Package
- Includes FOX, FS1, ESPN, TUDN & more
14 Comments
Leave a Reply
Leave a Reply
SOCCER TV SCHEDULES APP
 |
 |
STREAMING OFFERS
 Includes: Premier League + 84 Sports Channels | |
| 7-Day Free Trial | |
 Includes: Bundesliga & La Liga | |
| Sign Up |
|
Includes: Champions League & Serie A | |
| 7-Day Free Trial | |
Includes: Premier League | |
| Sign Up |
|
 Includes: USA, NBC, FOX, FS1 + more | |
| Browse Offers |
|
Jake
September 11, 2014 at 3:34 pm
So What’s the purpose of having it if they just let one of the biggest offenders go for nothing.
If they don’t want to comply with FFP then they don’t have to compete in the Champions League. They can simply skip the competition. 30 teams have to follow the rules while 2 don’t?
Scrap it totally if you’re not going to enforce it period. The money should go to the other clubs in the offenders domestic league. Those are the teams most effected and if City knew that they’d be Liverpool, Chelsea, and Arsenal a larger portion they’d sort themselves out immediately.
yespage
September 11, 2014 at 3:38 pm
Exclusion from The Champions League would certainly cost a team a lot of revenue, without even having to fine them. In fact, that may be the obvious avenue to take… keeps UEFA from getting their paws on more cash and truly punishes a team for going overboard.
Flyvanescence
September 11, 2014 at 4:40 pm
The purpose of having it is to keep the big clubs big and close the gate behind them. Its got Bayern’s paws all over it, and ask any German football fan how much they care about all the other clubs.
You as a United fan take winning for granted. What FFP effectively does is tell all the fans of all the clubs not in the top tier or two that they will never get to experience what City fans got to experience. Point to Dortmund if you like, but in Germany there is only 1 established big club. A well run club can break into the Champions League and build from there, although it would take years, a lot of luck and still be very difficult. In England there are 5. No small club can work its way up gradually and break into the Champions League any more. (Tottenham and Everton are big clubs.)
Again, if you are indignant about what City and Chelsea did, put yourself in their fans’ shoes. The only fans who support FFP are fans of the already established clubs who are scared of new competition.
The Bosman lawyer is ready to challenge FFP as it goes completely against free trade laws and (along with several other lawyers) is “100% confident” it will be struck down.
Jake
September 11, 2014 at 6:34 pm
That’s a really good point. But as I said what’s the purpose of the rule if you don’t enforce it?
I’ve never taken winning for granted because it’s unsustainable.
Even that Great Barcelona side couldn’t dominate for as long as a side with such talent the y possess.
My problem with what they’ve done is now by reducing the punishments they’ve solved nothing and it doesn’t make sense to have the rule.
At the current rate United are spending at should they ever fall foul of FFP I’d expect United to be punished.
brn442
September 12, 2014 at 12:40 pm
Well said Fly,
Leave it up to a Frenchman for not the first time in history, create an ostensibly egalitarian system that does the exact opposite by entrenching the rich and established.
No one wants to see another Portsmouth, Leeds, Fiorentina, or Napoli but those Clubs’ troubles were a result of poor management not over-spending in of itself.
King Colin
September 11, 2014 at 1:43 pm
It should be given back to City with interest as they didn’t fail FFP until Platini moved the goalposts.
christian
September 11, 2014 at 1:31 pm
Well United get some money out of Europe this season.
Matt
September 12, 2014 at 3:27 pm
Dammit, well done.
Informer
September 11, 2014 at 12:34 pm
Well, personally I find the rules farcical and legally flawed – and fear for UEFA if/when a good lawyer takes them to court. But putting that aside for a minute, the monye should go to impoverished communities around the world and facilities. FFP has been accused of empowering the already established clubs and by handing it out to those already in Europe, rather than the less fortunate, this only seems to reinforce that argument.
Aaron
September 11, 2014 at 1:36 pm
Do you really trust UEFA to do that? Who oversees the disbursements? What are the criteria? Would it be a lottery, application, or grant process? Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for it as an idea, but (1) I wouldn’t trust UEFA to hold a sack of beans much less piles of money, and, (2) there has to be a program/system in place to ensure the money is soundly managed and distributed. It isn’t a push-button kind of thing.
yespage
September 11, 2014 at 12:24 pm
Shouldn’t it go to the opponents of the team in their domestic league? You could split it even or weight it based on either the other club’s FFP standing or inversely on general revenue for a club (ie, the smaller clubs get more money).
Aaron
September 11, 2014 at 1:38 pm
OK, but playing devil’s advocate, why should big clubs who do play within the rules not see some of the reward for their work? Furthermore, since they are the perennial challengers to the offenders wouldn’t it be more incentive for the likes of City to follow the guidelines if they end up having to pay their direct competition a portion of their fine? Just asking, not promoting.
yespage
September 11, 2014 at 3:35 pm
That is why I offered two possibilities, one that paid out based on the other domestic competitors FFP standing or based inversely on revenue. The first idea would fall into the area you are talking about.
Bishopville Red
September 11, 2014 at 12:13 pm
The money should go to grassroots football. Every amateur club in England registered with the FA and running programs under the age of 12 should get a share. Period.
SB