Could UEFA strip Malaga or PSG of a Champions League title?

March 14, 2013

With Malaga and Paris St-Germain in the last 8 of the Champions League, questions have been raised about the impact of potential FFP punishments on the Qatar owned clubs’ campaigns. Both are very much the ‘bad boys’ of FFP and it is interesting to explore what might happen to the clubs if either win the current UEFA Champions League campaign.

Paris St-Germain look likely to fall-foul of the rule relating to the Break Even requirement which requires clubs to balance their incomings and outgoings. The club have been overspending and look set to fail the initial test by around £200m. Although the club will technically come close to breaking-even over the first Monitoring Period (covering seasons 2011/12 and 2012/13) it will only be achieved through the huge inflated deal with the Qatar Tourist Authority.   For reasons that I explored here and here, it is very likely that, the QTA deal will be deemed to be what it is: an artificial deal aimed at injecting cash into the club as a way to get round the FFP Break Even rules.

For PSG, The key punishment to consider is UEFA's ‘sanction 9’ which is “the withdrawal of a title or award”. This punishment was added to the rule-book during 2012 – it isn’t just a hangover from earlier rule-shaping but is something deliberately and specifically introduced by UEFA fairly recently. Crucially this suggests that UEFA can now envisage a scenario when the punishment will be of use.

So, how could this affect PSG?  

The decision on FFP compliance takes place according to the following timetable produced by UEFA.

UEFA's slide It isn’t particularly easy to read but we can see that the final decision on club licensing for the First Monitoring Period takes place between December and April (the pink box). 

By December this year, it is possible that PSG will be the reigning European champions. Given that they are set to fail the Break Even test, UEFA’s independent panel (CFCB) are obliged to give PSG one or more of the available 9 punishments (see foot of this article for the punishments).  Such is the scale of the overspend that it is quite possible that they would receive a ban from competing in the  2014/15 Champions League. It is also entirely possible that the panel will also invoke sanction 9 ‘withdrawal of title or award’.   PSG could well be viewed as having carried out their successful Champions League campaign with a wage spend brazenly in breach of the rules.  In simple terms, ‘financial doping’ – and as we all know drug cheats can expect to be stripped of their medals and banned from future competitions.  For PSG, FFP could be rather like having a drugs test shortly winning their medal. In this scenario, David Beckham would be asked to send his medal back to UEFA.

Should PSG fail the Break Even test when it is carried out in December 2013, UEFA will also have to look at the other available punishments. They can withhold prize money but interestingly could also throw a club out the Champions League – the sanction of ‘disqualification from competition in progress’. So irrespective of whether they win the Champions League in May, PSG could find themselves thrown out of next year’s competition half-way through the campaign (i.e. the 2013/14 campaign). That would create a real shock, but if UEFA want to ‘throw the book’ at PSG, they have the available punishments to do so.

Clearly this would be the worst-case scenario for PSG - and there is a considerable element of speculation here on how the rules may or not be applied. However,the fact that the rules are in place and that UEFA General Secretary Infantino recently used the 'cheat' word to describe PSG's approach, should at least give them cause for concern.  The CFCB panel that determine the punishments are independent from UEFA and have shown that they are not afraid to punish and exclude clubs.

The Malaga position is also interesting. In December the CFCB panel banned Malaga from next year’s UEFA competitions due to ‘overdue payables’ (i.e. funds owned to other clubs, or overdue tax).  Malaga were also threatened with another year’s exclusion and need to report back to CFCB in March (the results should be out fairly soon).  However, crucially for the club, Malaga were not thrown-out of from current Champions League campaign. This suggests that they will not have any further sanction should they actually win the competition (they will probably pass the Break Even test).  If they were to win the competition in May, Malaga would not be able to defend their title. This would be an interesting ‘first’ for UEFA.

 

Liverpool – large cash injection from owners required under FFP rules

March 10, 2013

Liverpool recently reported a £40.5m loss the 2011/12 season (the first year of the initial FFP Monitoring Period).  I have attached a table summarising the accounts, together with a projection for the next accounting period.

Not being a Liverpool supporter, I am grateful for the assistance of Mike Donald (@mdonald1987) for his help in pulling the above together and providing information on events at the club.

The good news for Liverpool fans is that the club appears to have turned a corner. B...


Continue reading...
 

Paris St-Germain 'find' €125m to help them Break Even

March 7, 2013

If UEFA wanted to find one club to illustrate the concept of ‘financial doping’ it would probably point to Paris St-Germain. 

Although the club hasn’t posted formal accounts for two years* they have had to provide figures to the DNCG [the organisation that oversees club accounting on behalf of the Ligue de Football Professionel (LFP)].  DNCG publishes the account information and I have attached the relevant page for PSG for the year ending June 2012 (with my highlights and translation of...


Continue reading...
 

Time to call clubs to account

March 6, 2013

Premier League clubs are resorting to increasingly devious actions to bury bad financial bad news. Comparatively few fans are skilled at analysing club accounts so rely on journalists to interpret their team's financial results for them. However, clubs realise that if there is bad news to presented in the accounts, they can avoid the unwelcome glare of media and fan attention by timing their release so the news is not fully reported.

Recently Aston Villa released their annual accounts (another...


Continue reading...
 

Wage and the Premier League scaled table

February 10, 2013

Recently, the www.sportingintelligence.com website produced a Premier League table drawn to a scale where every point was given the same vertical scale. This type of graph is know as a Cann Table and a website dedicated to them can be found here. The website www.experimental361.com also produced some very attractive charts showing the tables in this visual format.

The spending constraints recently voted in by Premier League clubs are essentially designed prevent club debts by tackling escalati...


Continue reading...
 

Premier League clubs adopt spending constraints

February 7, 2013

Premier League clubs have voted to introduce spending constraints.  I will cover-off the changes over the next few days and look at any anomalies within the rules – however, at the moment much of the information is still to reach the public domain.  The Premier League’s communication of the new rules can be round here.  For now, it is interesting to look at how the Premier League executives managed to  get the rules over the line.

If you look on the Premier League’s website, the one term...


Continue reading...
 

UEFA introduces a new 9th FFP sanction - PSG beware

January 30, 2013

I have been supplied with an internal UEFA document that is not currently in the public domain - it provides information on the FFP process and punishments that are not widely available. I am grateful to Diego, on twitter @Tifbilanciato  who runs the website http://tifosobilanciato.it for the 'heads-up'. Diego's site carries a large number of english articles and is a library of footballnews and references - well worth following on twitter.

The pdf presentation below was produced by UEFA for t...


Continue reading...
 

Paris St-Germain attempt to circumvent FFP rules

December 21, 2012

French newspaper Le Parisien reported that Paris St-Germain have signed a huge sponsorship deal with the Qatar Tourist Authority. The four-year deal is said to be worth E150m this season, rising to E200m in the final year of the arrangement.  The deal is also reported to be back-dated so that the club will receive the full E150m this season, even though deal has only just been announced.

PSG are 100% owned by the Qatar Sports Initiative (QSI), which is in turn owned by the Qatar Investment Aut...


Continue reading...
 

Manchester City's 2011/12 accounts - the Devil is in the detail

December 16, 2012

Back in May, I published a projection on whether Manchester City were on track to meet the FFP criteria. Now that the club’s financial results for last season have been released, it seems a good time to revisit the original projection and look again at the club's FFP challenge.

On Friday, City officially announced a loss of £99.7m for the season 2011/12. Interestingly, many journalists were not impressed that the figures were released late on a Friday afternoon in an apparent, though fairly...


Continue reading...
 

Time to draw a line under state sponsorship of football clubs

November 28, 2012

Two of the Premier League's top clubs are sponsored by airlines based in the UAE.  Arsenal are sponsored by 'Emirates air line', based in Dubai, whilst Manchester City are sponsored by 'Etihad airways' based in Abu Dhabi.


By way of background, the UAE is roughly the size of Ireland and is a federation of seven emirates (equivalent to principalities), each governed by a hereditary emir with a single national president. The constituent emirates are Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Ajman, Fujairah, Ras al Khaim...


Continue reading...