Chelsea & Man City risk Euro ban

  • Thread starter Thread starter BBC Sport
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 20
  • Views Views 2K
B

BBC Sport

BBC Sport News Headlines
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
8,519
Reaction score
0
Points
0
sGG8E.jpg


Two of English football's top-four clubs could be excluded from European competition in future after failing new guidelines being introduced by Uefa.

More...
 
LMAO @ City, money obviously can't buy you everything then. Looks like it could possibly be 5th and 6th pinching the spots then..?
 
Unfortunately it won't happen. City can spend big for another window or two because the regulations only come into effect at the end of the 2012/13 season (so clubs would be banned from 2013/14) meaning they've got 2 years to sort their finances out..

I also doubt that UEFA would have the balls to exclude them from Europe even if they did fall short of the regulations.
 
Im sure they would find a way around it, they've got the money to get the lawyers to find loopholes.
 
Chelsea wouldnt have spent 70+million in January if this was going to happen. Clubs will have a loophole round these new regulations, as they say rules are made to be broken.
 
Joss said:
Unfortunately it won't happen. City can spend big for another window or two because the regulations only come into effect at the end of the 2012/13 season (so clubs would be banned from 2013/14) meaning they've got 2 years to sort their finances out..

I also doubt that UEFA would have the balls to exclude them from Europe even if they did fall short of the regulations.
Click to expand...

The rules actually come into effect in the summer transfer window. They take the accounts from over 3 years so the first year anything can be done (punishments etc.) would be 2012/13. Thats why Chelsea bought torres last window, not in the summer.
 
i think everybody already knows this, why the **** are BBC doing more news reports on it? nothing else more interesting to report about?
 
Pretty useless news. Everyone knows that City and Chelsea wouldn't make it..AT THE MOMENT! But all the clubs that wouldn't make it have a few years time to balance the books.

And im sure Chelsea and City will not be spending the same amounts they did before. But i dont think UEFA has got the balls to ban top teams. It would cost themselves too.

And if you look at the quotes in the article. Everyone believes that none of the english clubs will have problems with this. And that City owners spoke with Platini and they said their happy with thse rules. So i dont really see why this would be an big issue.
 
Last edited:
Madridista CR7 said:
Pretty useless news. Everyone knows that City and Chelsea wouldn't make it..AT THE MOMENT! But all the clubs that wouldn't make it have a few years time to balance the books.

And im sure Chelsea and City will not be spending the same amounts they did before. But i dont think UEFA has got the balls to ban top teams. It would cost themselves too.

And if you look at the quotes in the article. Everyone believes that none of the english clubs will have problems with this. And that City owners spoke with Platini and they said their happy with thse rules. So i dont really see why this would be an big issue.
Click to expand...

lol. You think UEFA wont ban top teams. Oh you so silly.
Unless they have a massive change of heart, and stop this rule from being implemented, or scrap it when it is implemented, then they have to ban top teams that don't make the cut.
And the teams that aren't going to make it atm, Chelsea & Man City, are going to struggle to make it. Specially Man City. Unless Man City are creating a commercial empire, winning Cup's or getting huge sponsorships, their massive wage bill will hurt them. Same goes for Chelsea, but Chelsea already can get 2 of them :)
 
They'd have no hesitation in banning top English clubs. Platini doesn't hide the fact he hates how many top English clubs are in Europe. Remember Chelsea losing in the Final and Platini being so pally with the winners? He hates how successful English clubs are. Fact
 
If City were to ever be in trouble due to these regulations, you can expect a handful of **** arab companies sponsoring them with some more oil money. Not gonna happen any time soon. Chelsea would be more of the same.
 
Lets get this right here, Chelsea announced losses of 70million on the day we spent 70million. Would the club be that stupid to risk not getting into Europe?? The 70million losses that the club announced didnt include sponsorship deals and Chelsea are still on the market to sell the naming rights of Stamford Bridge. Like i keep saying people Uefa made this rule so it will have more holes in it than a Swiss cheese and the top clubs will have the best people behind the scenes looking for loopholes and you can bet they have found some.
 
CJACKO11 said:
Lets get this right here, Chelsea announced losses of 70million on the day we spent 70million. Would the club be that stupid to risk not getting into Europe?? The 70million losses that the club announced didnt include sponsorship deals and Chelsea are still on the market to sell the naming rights of Stamford Bridge. Like i keep saying people Uefa made this rule so it will have more holes in it than a Swiss cheese and the top clubs will have the best people behind the scenes looking for loopholes and you can bet they have found some.
Click to expand...

The same club that desperately cut its wage bill in summer? To the detriment of their playing staff.
 
Puddz said:
lol. You think UEFA wont ban top teams. Oh you so silly.
Unless they have a massive change of heart, and stop this rule from being implemented, or scrap it when it is implemented, then they have to ban top teams that don't make the cut.
And the teams that aren't going to make it atm, Chelsea & Man City, are going to struggle to make it. Specially Man City. Unless Man City are creating a commercial empire, winning Cup's or getting huge sponsorships, their massive wage bill will hurt them. Same goes for Chelsea, but Chelsea already can get 2 of them :)
Click to expand...

Well maybe. But i think that commercial empire is spot on :D

Sheikh has got good relationships...and will surely find huge sponsors. The commercial revenue has increased very much already.

If you would take a look at Bluemoon forums there is an Las Vegas thread...there is huge things going on at Eastlands.

Tbh..i dont think City will struggle. People would like to think that but will they still think so after 2 years? Too early to discuss this...let's see after 2 years how it's going for City and the other clubs.
 
Joel` said:
The same club that desperately cut its wage bill in summer? To the detriment of their playing staff.
Click to expand...

We cut our wage bill to save money and because we thought our youth players were ready for the step up which maybe was a year premmature. I expect us to cut the wage bill again this summer.
 
CJACKO11 said:
We cut our wage bill to save money and because we thought our youth players were ready for the step up which maybe was a year premmature. I expect us to cut the wage bill again this summer.
Click to expand...

And why do you think you're doing that, I mean, apparently you're not the slightest bit worried about the new FFP rules. Your argument that you've spent £70m this January is silly. You can earn back £70m in a few years of a good CL run etc. Cutting your wage bill, however does prove that you're bothered about the rules; since it's a fixed cost for the club and will consistently hurt your finances, rather than a one off investment in players (Which ideally will generate profit in the long run).
 
Joel` said:
And why do you think you're doing that, I mean, apparently you're not the slightest bit worried about the new FFP rules. Your argument that you've spent £70m this January is silly. You can earn back £70m in a few years of a good CL run etc. Cutting your wage bill, however does prove that you're bothered about the rules; since it's a fixed cost for the club and will consistently hurt your finances, rather than a one off investment in players (Which ideally will generate profit in the long run).
Click to expand...

Basicly the bottem line is this story is bollocks. Like i say we needed to cut the wage bill anyway because we had the largest in the PL and we thought the younger players were ready but they were not.
 
CJACKO11 said:
Basicly the bottem line is this story is bollocks. Like i say we needed to cut the wage bill anyway because we had the largest in the PL and we thought the younger players were ready but they were not.
Click to expand...

Not really, this story is just old, you needed to cut the wage bill becuase of financial reasons, make no mistake about that, i put an article about it up some months back, your spending is based on you reaching CL next season, that's why he has gone for the large one-off fees, but overall Chelsea hugely needed to cut the bill to get through the rulings in future, and you are still sailing close to the wind
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

FMBase

Beta

Resources

Back
Top