KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum Man City banned from Champions League for 2 seasons

FFP was brought in to stop clubs going into debt and spending more than their income, so we didn't get a repeat of the likes of Leeds & Portsmouth, who gambled spending money they did not have.

The problem is the rule doesn't consider teams like City, who have super rich owners who can bank roll the club, they have no debt, so that's an envious position, but they are penalised as their income is lower than their spending, even though any shortfall is covered by the owners and they have no real debt and allot of assets.

Then you look at Man Utd who have like £600 million debt and their owners taking £milllions (£30 million was what I heard this year) out of the club every year for themselves, but because their income is so high, they meet the FFP criteria, even though before the Glazers bought them they had no real debt!

FFP tends to keep small clubs small and the big clubs big, under FFP the likes of Blackburn could not have won the PL, as Jack Walkers £Millions would not have been allowed as Blackburn had very low income, same with Chelsea, Abromovich could not have bankrolled their early success, so we will end up with the same big clubs getting bigger and the smaller clubs not being able to bridge the gap.

So I can see City's argument, but they are exceptional in having very rich state owners who can bankroll them, the same rules for another chancer and they could go under, look at us with Hicks & Gillet, they piled debt and loans on us, but if they would have got Klopp as manager instead of Hodgson, their model may have worked and we are PL & CL winners with the club worth £2+ billion for their initial purchase of £200 million ?????

You can see why Uefa brought in FFP, as clubs were taking huge risks and gambling their futures, but it's very difficult to create a model for all clubs and owners to operate under. My stance is City knew the rules before they started the season, so they should stick to them, if they broke them, they should be penalised.

As for PSG, Barca, RM etc Uefa must deal with them in the same way if they broke the rules, I am sure Man City will be stating their practices as part of City's defence, this could get very messy, but Uefa must be very confident in their evidence to throw the book at City, as they must have known the reaction they would get.

Part of the reason FSG bought Liverpool was FFP, they could see with FFP coming in and Liverpools brand and history, we were going to be a big player who was available at a relatively low fee, it's turned out to be a vert wise investment.

Would that be a good thing if United finished 5th?

I think they’ll get the ban o returned so is irrelevant really.

They will try and take us down with them. Does anyone know more about this hacking stuff?

Have City been given a date for their hearing? It has to be resolved before the CL draw is made for next seasons group stages.

If City are kicked out the team finishing 5th would probably buy more players in the transfer window as they will be in the CL.

I think it will be reduced to a 1 year ban, Uefa cannot afford to lose this case and I cannot see them following through with it and finding City guilty if they did not have significant evidence, as they knew City would fight it and have the money to contest it.