It is well established that Uefa’s financial fair play (FFP) rules are both very complex and open to the interpretation that the football governing body wants to put on them. Hence, there is plenty of scope for any punished club to challenge them in court, particularly if the punishment was as onerous as exclusion from the Champions League.
It is well established that Uefa’s financial fair play (FFP) rules are both very complex and open to the interpretation that the football governing body wants to put on them. Hence, there is plenty of scope for any punished club to challenge them in court, particularly if the punishment was as onerous as exclusion from the Champions League.
Recently we looked at the plea bargain arrangement which, presumably, allows clubs to get off with a lighter punishment in return for pleading guilty. This makes it easier to operate a scheme that involves more than 700 clubs, albeit some of them relatively obscure ones in the smallest European countries.
However was, as noted before, the devil is in the detail. Another club has ten days to challenge the deal. So if Uefa struck a deal with Manchester City, Jose Mourinho could get the hump (which he is doing regularly with City anyway) and extend his mind games by challenging the ruling.
Up to now, it has always seemed that the range of sanctions were either too severe or too light. The nuclear option of excluding a club from the Champions League could hurt Uefa as much as it hurt the club. However, a fine would not affect a wealthy club very much and might represent a good use of their money.
However, Article 29-1, sub-section g (yes, it is that complicated) has been modified in the last month. The wording is very convoluted, but basically it is a salary cap for offending clubs. So if you were £10m over your FFP limit, you would have to take out of your Champions League squad a player whose total compensation was £10m. So for Real Madrid that could mean Gareth Bale on £200,000 a week or five squad players on a mere £40,000 a week.
This quite an effective punishment. However, I still think it is all going to end up in court. You can just hear learned counsel saying, ‘In respect of Article 29-1, sub section (g), could Your Honour turn to Document 728 in respect of the compensation of Mr G Bale.’