Manchester United Talk banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,699 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
BRUSSELS, Jan 22 (Reuters) - Europe's top soccer clubs and the game's European governing body UEFA have started preliminary discussions on curbing the amount of money that can be spent on player transfers or wages, sources familiar with the talks said.

The European Club Association (ECA), which represents the continent's leading clubs such as Manchester United, Real Madrid and AC Milan, has proposed clubs should only be allowed to spend around 51 percent of their revenue on transfers or salaries.

An upsurge in the cost of buying players -- highlighted by Manchester City's reported 110 million euros ($145 million) failed bid for AC Milan's Kaka -- combined with huge salaries prompted the move as the global financial crisis bites.

"Talks are at a preliminary stage, but there is a view that clubs can not sustain this situation in the long term," one ECA source told Reuters on Thursday.

"The issue is due to be discussed at a meeting of the ECA's general assembly next month."

A senior UEFA official confirmed the governing body "was looking seriously at the proposal".

World soccer body FIFA, UEFA and the European Union have also expressed concern over the influx of money from billionaire owners from outside Europe who have recently taken large stakes in clubs, particularly in England.

In November, EU sports ministers mulled the possibility of a pan-European financial regulator for sport but decided instead to press FIFA and UEFA to introduce stricter financial rules for clubs and leagues. "If we fail to act, then the EU will," the UEFA official said.

Under the ECA proposal, revenue would be determined as money received only from ticket sales, sponsorship, merchandise and television income. It would not include any financial investment by owners or major shareholders.

"Any money from shareholders, or billionaire owners would be invested into the infrastructure of the club, such as building or renovating the stadium or investing in youth development such as an academy," the UEFA official said.

However, there are concerns that smaller clubs who cannot accumulate large revenues from ticket and television sales may suffer from the ECA proposal.

"One option would be to give such clubs a derogation for a couple of years to give them the chance to attract investors and sponsors," another ECA source said.

"This is all part and parcel of the negotiations."

Any deal with UEFA would only affect clubs involved in European competitions, such as the Champions League and UEFA Cup, and further discussions would also be needed to have any agreement enforced on a domestic level.


I take it as positive and long overdue.

If successfully pushed through, it would make players more affordable to buy and to upkeep by ending all these crazy and unthinkable transfer fees and wages, and hopefully flushes out the money-grabbing agents too. And let's hope it would possibly impact ticket prices to make it more affordable for the majority of working-class fans.

On the other hand, it may also mean a better level playing field out there, not for the smaller clubs though but for the bigger ones due to the 51% constraint imposed. It may thus change the current scene dominated by the elite few FOREVER and allow the second-tier clubs every opportunity to leap-frog them too. Would that be really alright and welcomed by the fans from the elite clubs like us?

Any thoughts?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,730 Posts
I mentioned this the other day on my Gordon Taylor thread he mentioned Uefa were looking to change the rules to stop the likes of City ruining the game of football.

It would be a move I would support alot of clubs would say that is selfish but to protect the game we love it needs to be done and fast !!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,207 Posts
Potentially better than just a 'cap" which is standard figure.

this cap would be based on a club's revenue - not loans or donations.

Meaning a sheikh can't come in and loan the club 100mil to buy a player ;)

this should hopefully bring down players' salaries which had been threatening to escalate to financially unsound levels.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,699 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
red dave said:
I mentioned this the other day on my Gordon Taylor thread he mentioned Uefa were looking to change the rules to stop the likes of City ruining the game of football.

It would be a move I would support alot of clubs would say that is selfish but to protect the game we love it needs to be done and fast !!
It may thus change the current scene dominated by the elite few FOREVER and allow the second-tier clubs every opportunity to leap-frog them too. Would that be really alright and welcomed by the fans from the elite clubs like us?


A bit tricky on that I must confess. :p

But I guess the majority of the fans should be the prime consideration rather than the honours of the club?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
601 Posts
i wished the kaka bid went through, it would have been a disaster for city because its not money and players that bring success its players and the club that win success. it would have been a joy to see city waste their money and allow the world to see monopoly is just a game, it can be all over soon. Ask abrahmovic and crespo.
 

·
I aim to Misbehave
Joined
·
6,371 Posts
Interesting...

Just how much this helps the little guys remains to be seen, since what a small club gets for selling their star player, the giant clubs get for a televised game, so...

but it's nice to see that the clubs are FINALLY admiting there might be a problem if you don't limit tranfers and wages.

I thought that was pretty clear 8 years ago, when Figo traded Barça for Madrid, but hey, better late than never!!!
 

·
MUT all-time great
Joined
·
21,962 Posts
Glad that if it goes through, its based on revenue, while it isn't necessarily fair to spend a billion on someone, the bigger clubs shouldn't be punished for being big.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,730 Posts
piazza said:
Glad that if it goes through, its based on revenue, while it isn't necessarily fair to spend a billion on someone, the bigger clubs shouldn't be punished for being big.

Another well constructed post if this rule came in it wouldnt change the face of Football it would stablise it .

Clubs should get rich off the back of there own success which is gained by good managment .

Brian Clough won the european cup twice with a mediocer club Im not saying a club like hull could win the Champions league but if they worked hard enough they could have success domesticly .
 

·
MUT all-time great
Joined
·
21,962 Posts
red dave said:
Another well constructed post if this rule came in it wouldnt change the face of Football it would stablise it .

Clubs should get rich off the back of there own success which is gained by good managment .

Brian Clough won the european cup twice with a mediocer club Im not saying a club like hull could win the Champions league but if they worked hard enough they could have success domesticly .
Exactly, Clough also bought Keane for 5800 or so from Cobh Ramblers, successful teams are built on great bargain transfers like these. Not spending 75mil on 6 different guys like the bluenoses want to.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,730 Posts
City have it all wrong they mocked us for years for spending money we earned and then when they get some they go all wild !!

Ive got a story that sums up city fans .

I worked with a guy up north manchester mad city fan crazy mad !!

3 years ago they got to the quarter finals of the Fa cup against West ham . He was going crazy in work as if they had won the thing the qaurter finals mad about the quarters ****ing Burnley go to the semi of the Carling and he's going mad about a quarter final.

I couldnt stop laughing they have been so starved of success they look at small things like that like a cup win.

Ive come so close to knocking some City fans out lately I cant stand there opinions because they usually know **** all.
 
Z

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Sporting4Ever said:
Interesting...

Just how much this helps the little guys remains to be seen, since what a small club gets for selling their star player, the giant clubs get for a televised game, so...

but it's nice to see that the clubs are FINALLY admiting there might be a problem if you don't limit tranfers and wages.

I thought that was pretty clear 8 years ago, when Figo traded Barça for Madrid, but hey, better late than never!!!
In England we have a system where the rights to televise Premiership games are negotiated by the league as a whole rather than each club negotiating its own deal. Stoke and Hull get exactly the same as United or Chelsea because the money is spread out equally amongst the 20 clubs in the league. Slightly off topic but I thought it needed clarifying :eek:

With regards to a salary/transfer cap, I really can't see it happening. I'm positive it's against European employment law so any attempts to bring in a system like this will stumble at the first hurdle.
 

·
I aim to Misbehave
Joined
·
6,371 Posts
-zuco- said:
In England we have a system where the rights to televise Premiership games are negotiated by the league as a whole rather than each club negotiating its own deal. Stoke and Hull get exactly the same as United or Chelsea because the money is spread out equally amongst the 20 clubs in the league. Slightly off topic but I thought it needed clarifying :eek:

With regards to a salary/transfer cap, I really can't see it happening. I'm positive it's against European employment law so any attempts to bring in a system like this will stumble at the first hurdle.
for league games, that's fine, wish we had the same here, but since the league doesn't care, and the same company has the rights to pretty much everyone's games till 2018, or something like that, doesn't look like it'll change.

but there's also cup games, and, most important of all, european games...
 
Z

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Sporting4Ever said:
for league games, that's fine, wish we had the same here, but since the league doesn't care, and the same company has the rights to pretty much everyone's games till 2018, or something like that, doesn't look like it'll change.

but there's also cup games, and, most important of all, european games...
I think we have the same system for cup games and Europe too. Obviously the European revenue would only be distributed to the four teams competing. I actually think it's quite generous of the top clubs here to participate in this agreement, because United, for example, would be able to earn far more money if we negotiated our own TV deal.
 

·
The Mexican Boy George
Joined
·
7,601 Posts
as a fan of the game im against the idea, Imo it would lower the value of clubs to have a cap, there would basically be no big clubs anymore because everybody would pay the same amount. But I can see that with the current credit crunch it might not be such a bad idea to stop teams from going out and spending ridiculous amounts of money on a single player.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,207 Posts
migueldadon said:
as a fan of the game im against the idea, Imo it would lower the value of clubs to have a cap, there would basically be no big clubs anymore because everybody would pay the same amount. But I can see that with the current credit crunch it might not be such a bad idea to stop teams from going out and spending ridiculous amounts of money on a single player.
You know.... you need to read the article, Miguel.

The cap is based on a cllub's revenue, so there will be big clugs, because the more revenue you have, the more spedning power your have, but now clubs overextend themselves like they have been doing.
 

·
The Mexican Boy George
Joined
·
7,601 Posts
RedForceRising said:
You know.... you need to read the article, Miguel.

The cap is based on a cllub's revenue, so there will be big clugs, because the more revenue you have, the more spedning power your have, but now clubs overextend themselves like they have been doing.
In that case than im for it but I dont like the whole salary cap idea.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,730 Posts
-zuco- said:
In England we have a system where the rights to televise Premiership games are negotiated by the league as a whole rather than each club negotiating its own deal. Stoke and Hull get exactly the same as United or Chelsea because the money is spread out equally amongst the 20 clubs in the league. Slightly off topic but I thought it needed clarifying :eek:

With regards to a salary/transfer cap, I really can't see it happening. I'm positive it's against European employment law so any attempts to bring in a system like this will stumble at the first hurdle.
So how is it possible to have a salary cap in Rugby league then ZUCO Wigan were docked points for breaking it the other season.
 

·
He wipes front to back
Joined
·
27,654 Posts
And i am sure that the big clubs would find ways around this to ensure they get the cream still .

As long as tv is prepared to pay such huge sums to show the game players will cash in .

What is needed is for a big drop in viewing figures to make the advertisers question the value of adverts around big games .

It is still possible for a great manager backed by his board to perform way above expectation .
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top