Un articolo da oltreoceano, da una cultura diversa, ma con spunti interessanti.
December 3rd, 2011 | Author: Shawn
I think one of the most ironic terms in European football is “Financial Fair Play” – and highlights the corruption in European football and the lack of a movement to change it. The basis of the proposition says this: for a team like Manchester City to outspend opponents and lose money is unfair but for a team like Real Madrid to outspend opponents and not lose money is fair. Why is breaking even the barometer of fairness? Surely it is unfair if you spend tenfold your opponents whether or not you lose money? I think Michel Platini needs to open a dictionary and look at the definition of fairness (I doubt the definition will read: “Barcelona and Real Madrid with all the TV money and Valencia selling their best players and unable to compete”). In fact I think the definition of “Financial Fair Play” for most sensible people is everybody spending the same amount. If anything is should be called “The UEFA Break Even Solution”.
The are two other problems with the financial fair play rule:
1) teams sometimes lose money over a calendar year even if they aren’t Manchester City or Chelsea or Malaga or PSG – we live in bad economic times and many businesses go through a year with a net loss. To bar them from Champions League play will only further damage the club, which will not be able to sustain that loss. For example, what if Valencia, who develop players like Juan Mata, David Villa and David Silva and yet have to sell them on anyway because they are enduring a period of financial hardship – should they be barred from UEFA Champions League if they suffer consecutive seasons of net loss?
2) UEFA is now meddling into the affairs of European clubs. The best way to get spending in control is to make teams accountable in their own domestic leagues. There needs to be a conference of the European leagues where things are voted upon, not UEFA members who don’t represent the leagues but represent people with their own vision. It is not the Champions League that faces the “unfairness” of big spending clubs, as there numerous clubs that are breaking even that are competing in the tournament – it is the domestic leagues that face the challenge of the lavish spending owners. So it should be the domestic leagues that deal with the problem.
I would actually like to see a “Football Referendum” where fans get to vote on propose changes offered by a coalition of Presidents from all European leagues.
I will go on the record now and say I don’t think a salary cap will work. While it does work in North America spectacularly well in leagues like the NFL or NHL (and even in soccer with MLS) where every team has the chance to be competitive, there is too much of a gap in revenues between certain teams in Europe. For example, you cannot create a cap for both Manchester United and Bolton. Similarly you cannot have a salary cap with Real Madrid and Real Zaragoza in the same league.
The same issue goes with Major League Baseball, where the Yankees and Marlins coexist in the same league. The MLB system is one which I think would work great in Europe, with a few tweaks. It consists of taxing the teams that spend over a certain point and distributing that to the other teams.
I have three versions that work as alternatives to Financial Fair Play: One involves a luxury tax system and one involves a cap to individual salaries only. The third solution revolves around the key area of financial imbalance: the transfer fee.
(continua a leggere sul sito http://www.tfcblog.ca/2011/12/03/alternative-financial-fair-play-rules/)