In amongst all the derby previews in today’s press are two excellent pieces by City supporting Guardian writer David Conn, where he interviews Khaldoon al Mubarak in Abu Dhabi.
Khaldoon responds to criticism of City’s spending being a danger to football:
“I could accept the argument if we were artificially building up the club through debt”
“That produces a destructive end result; we have seen that happen. But in our case, the club will be in the healthiest position because there is no debt. We have funded it through equity [permanent investment].
“I believe what we are doing is a fair way to inject competition into football, without debt.”
This is confirmation of what we already know, but which a lot of City’s critics choose to ignore. He goes on to respond to the plans being put forward by Michel Platini to curb the freedom of owners to invest in clubs:
“The argument that this is unhealthy suggests that the big clubs, which make the most money, must remain the big clubs, that the status quo must remain.
“Is Mr Platini saying that only Real Madrid and Barcelona have the right to be competitive in La Liga?”
This is precisely the problem with the plans. Platini has always said he wants to make European football fairer, but it seems that the only changes he can get the big clubs to agree to, are ones that don’t threaten them. Hence the ‘financial fair play’, linking expenditure to revenue, is ok for the likes of Milan who have a high turnover. He appears to be playing on these clubs fear of City’s spending to get an agreement to his changes.
There seems to be a denial of the problems these rules will cause in stopping clubs like City challenging those established in the Champions League. The silence from Uefa and Platini on this is becoming increasingly apparent.
Khaldoon confronts it head on:
“I appreciate the argument about having so much money.
“The way I answer it is: Yes, this is a club, but it is a business too, and in business, you are there to compete. And we are striving to build the club the right way, with respect for its heritage, and the fans.”
The second article looks at how the ownership of City is part of the move to promote Abu Dhabi and it’s values. Conn firstly describes how this push is part of the state’s policy. The level of expenditure is awesome, and makes the investment in City seem almost trifling.
Interestingly, the purchase of City was initially a private venture by Sheikh Mansour who is a football fan, but with the global media attention that has followed, City are now viewed as part of the plan to promote Abu Dhabi itself. Could this mean the people in Abu Dhabi will be even more determined to see City being successful and having a positive presence at the centre of world football? It is hugely exciting to think so.
The money being spent on City is still considered an investment, that will prove it’s worth if City are established as a top European club. Then there is the fan side. According to Khaldoon:
“Sheikh Mansour is a huge football fan. There is an enjoyment, a pleasure, which comes from owning it.”
“There is a pure, football, emotional side to it, and a big business side, too. I think what attracted Sheikh Mansour was the great football journey, but also there is a business sense, that we can create a franchise, a business, over years, which will create value and reap a long term return.”
There’s a further two parts to this interview to be published by The Guardian.
The FA have confirmed that Emmanuel Adebayor is suspended for three matches after being found guilty of violent conduct in the game against Arsenal.
He’ll miss the games against Manchester United, Fulham (Carling Cup), and West Ham.
Chief Executive of the Premier League, Richard Scudamore has announced new rules for both squad sizes and financial reporting which have been agreed by all 20 Premier League clubs and will come into play next season. On the face of it, they make sense and should not adversely affect City.
New squad rules
The squad rules bring in a cap of 25 players over the age of 21. Within this 8 must be home-grown. Therefore up to 17 can be players over 21 who have come from abroad.
A home-grown player is defined as one who has spent three seasons with an English or Welsh club prior to their 21st birthday (or the end of the season in which they will be 21).
Clubs can have as many players under the age of 21 as they like.
Of City’s current first team squad (excluding loan players) listed on the official site, those who would be classed as homegrown and over 21 would be: Given, Taylor, Lescott, Bridge, Onuoha, Richards, Barry, Ireland, Wright-Phillips and Bellamy. A total of 10 (thereby exceeding the minimum of 8).
The number of other players over the age of 21 would be: Sylvinho, Garrido, Toure, Zabaleta, de Jong, Kompany, Petrov, Adebayor, Benjani, Robinho, Santa Cruz and Tevez. A total of 12 (thereby under the maximum of 17).
City’s squad would therefore be 22 players (3 under the limit).
Surprisingly, Weiss and Johnson are the only players listed in the first team squad under 21 (at the beginning of this year). They would also be classed as home-grown and eligible to play.
The rule is an attempt to stop bloated squads and encourage clubs to bring players through Academies. The intention to encourage clubs to get more young players making the transition from youth sides to the first team is a good one, and City have recently made a step in this direction with the appointment of Brian Kidd.
There is plenty of scope within these figures for clubs to continue buying the best foreign talent they can afford which, like it or not, is necessary if you’re going to be challenging in Europe. Another key point is there is no restriction on the nationality of players who would be considered home-grown. ‘Foreigners’ such as Given, Ireland and Weiss would all qualify. This will enable clubs to continue the controversial practice of picking up promising youngsters from abroad, though it wouldn’t be a surprise to see Uefa and Fifa tightening the rules on this shortly.
Richard Scudamore:
“It’s not in the club’s interests to stockpile players. It will make buying home-grown talent more attractive.
“We’re not going down the route of a nationality test but what this will mean is that you just can’t buy a team from abroad.
“We think it will give clubs an extra incentive to invest in youth. We think that one of the benefits will be that it will help the England team.”
New financial rules
Clubs will be required to submit independently audited accounts each season. They will also need to submit future financial information to act as an early warning system should any club be taking undue risks. Clubs that fail in this and fall into difficulties could then be subject to financial controls relating to limiting transfers and player salaries.
Scudamore states:
“At all times the board of the Premier League will be applying a test which basically says this: can the club fulfil its fixtures, pay off its creditors when they are due and also to meet obligations to the Premier League’s contracts and partners?
“If the board believe a club is at risk of not meeting those obligations, it has to then step in and agree a budget for the running of that club.”
Clearly these rules are to prevent the kind of financial mismanagement that has been going on at West Ham and Portsmouth, and previously Leeds. In a direct way it shouldn’t affect City in the slightest.
However, by bringing in sensible financial rules that safeguard clubs, the Premier League lessens the argument for the new rules that Michel Platini is trying pass at Uefa. The detail of Platini’s plans have still not been agreed or announced, yet we know he has the desire to link expenditure to income and ban ‘sugar daddies’ from giving money to clubs. This controversial idea, which without being paranoid is clearly aimed at City, could cause significant problems for the ‘City project’. On the face of it, it has many flaws and seems ridiculous, and I’ll address these in another article.
For now City should be grateful to the strong leadership of Scudamore in implementing sensible ideas that should bring greater financial stability to the Premier League without undermining it in any way.
Gerry Sutcliffe, Sports Minister:
“I welcome the Premier League’s introduction of a home-grown player quota for squads and its implementation of strengthened financial reporting rules.
“These moves will encourage clubs to develop and bring through young talent and help ensure clubs are financially stable.”
Jeremy Helan is still trying to establish in the French courts that the pre-contract he signed as a 13 year old with Rennes is invalid. According to The Independent, the case has now reached a French labour tribunal after being rejected by the French League commissions and the French Olympic Committee.
The disputed pre-contract stated that a two year contract would be triggered if Helan represented France while at the Clairefontaine academy. He did, skippering the under-16 side. Speaking yesterday, the Rennes technical director, Pierre Dreossi, stated:
“We had a meeting with Manchester United and they made us an offer about this player.
“We discussed the offer once but United [realised the position] and said: ‘It is not possible to make a deal with you as you do not want to sell.’ They said, ‘fair play,’ and it was closed but the player went in secret to Manchester City.
“Our letters to City said it was not possible to sign him as he was our player. City have played him anyway but they can’t. It’s forbidden. He has a contract with us and can’t have a contract with two clubs. We told them that.”
Apparently letters were sent to City’s George Davies (City’s solicitor), Garry Cook, and Khaldoon al Mubarak. However, City are currently sticking to their guns according to The Independent:
City remain confident that they acted entirely within the bounds of football law in the new case. Legal advice was sought on the validity of the original contract, which Hélan signed at the age of 13 before heading for the French Football Federation’s (FFF) famed Clairefontaine academy, and the response is understood to include the conclusion that it was void on at least three grounds.
What these grounds are, remains unknown. As I said yesterday, City would look to be ok if Helan wins his latest legal case, but given he has already lost two, this can hardly be said to be a given.
If he loses the case, then City may be in trouble as FIFA and Platini seem to be cracking down on the big Premier League clubs while they seek to pass new regulations on the movements of young players.
One thing to bear in mind is that the Kakuta case, for which Chelsea have just been found guilty, dates from 2007. Dreossi himself said that the Heron case may take years to resolve. If during this time City looked like losing, could we just use our wealth to come to a financial settlement with Rennes, and get them to drop the charges?
It may not be the most ethical solution, but it would surely be better for City than a transfer ban.