Málaga are currently fourth in the Spanish League, as you can see from the table below. That is quite some achievement given the turmoil of last summer.
But now Uefa has said that the Qatar owned club is to be banned from European football for one season. This ban could be extended for a second season if it misses its deadline of March 31 2013 to pay its debts.
| Club | Pld | Pts | W | D | L | F | A |
| Barcelona | 17 | 49 | 16 | 1 | 0 | 57 | 19 |
| Atlético Madrid | 17 | 40 | 13 | 1 | 3 | 37 | 17 |
| Real Madrid | 17 | 33 | 10 | 3 | 4 | 41 | 17 |
| Málaga | 17 | 31 | 9 | 4 | 4 | 28 | 12 |
The statement on the Uefa website makes it clear that the ban starts from next year (which is why their current placing in the table is interesting). If they don’t make the top six this season the ban stays in place for any qualification for Europe (Europa or Champions League) within the next for years.
Also by 31 March 2013 the club has to prove that it has no overdue payments for football clubs or employees and/or social or tax authorities.
Additionally Málaga have got a fine of €300,000 although this is nothing when compared either to the 25 million that will be earned this year from the Champions League. Indeed given the fact that the club has Qatar as a backer, it mean the revenue from one oil well for two seconds.
This has been Málaga’s first qualification for Europe as it was taken over by Sheik Abdullah Bin Nasser Al-Thani who invested huge sums in players. But in the summer all communication broke down with the owner and money to pay players and retain Santi Cazorla dried up.
Málaga is one of the billionaire clubs that we considered in the series
The FFP regulations on limiting club losses have only just started to kick in, but it is interesting that the part of FFP that is active – paying your debts – is bringing forth action from Uefa. Of course that doesn’t mean that Uefa will stand up to Manchester City and Chelsea but it is a sign that there may be action on the way.
Eight other European clubs have also been punished in the latest round of action. Two Bucharest clubs (Dinamo and Rapid), the Serbian club Partizan Belgrade, plus two from Croatia: Hajduk Split and Osijek, all have a one-year ban from European competiion within the next three years if they miss the March 31 deadline to settle debts.
All of the clubs were also fined €100,000 each.
So not paying your debts on time to clubs, players and the taxman, will get a club banned from Europe. Now we just have to see if breaking the other part of the rules will result in any action.
The Billionaire Files:
- How governments are taking over football
- This is a moment that Arsenal should spend a little cash. £100m anyone?
- If trophies were on offer, where would you draw the line?
- Arsenal to play in blue and white at home next season
- How football is being taken over, and the dangers that are emerging
- As the billionaires take over football clubs, Fifa urges “direct action”
- Usmanov and Kronke – what a deal would mean for each of them
- The billionaire clubs – their owners and their success
The thing is will it be acceptable to FFP for the Qatar owners to put their hand in their loose change pocket in order to settle the debts or do the debts have to paid out of the clubs self generated income. If the former what’s the point of it all.
I would like to see the rules adhered to but not so sure, particularly where the big money clubs are concerned.
Mick,
Or could they be paid from sponsorship of page 11 of the Matchday programme for one game?
This will work unless rich owners are allowed to turn debt into equity thus wiping out the debt. I am still unsure how that works.
Mick
That is spot on. My fear exactly.
Stuart
They could try and get round that with associated companies of a clubs owner not being aloud to sponsor a club.
However, I can’t see it happening.
Goverments cant control banks, EU cant control countries, UEFA to rule Football Clubs?? Makes me laugh. FFP will never work. Malaga a easy target. Man City, Chelsea seems to be ok for UEFA.
Man U, Real Madrid, Barcalona, AC Milan etc… Uefa are picking on the small kids, Malaga has brought a new lease of life into La Liga this season. They have just beaten Real Madrid, they are ahead of the team that has been doing its best to be up there with the big boys in Valencia. Malaga shouldn’t the last of these bans. However although I lie Malaga and I admire how what they have achieved, this should be an opportunity for us to sign Isco. He is the beating heart of the Malaga squad and they wouldn’t be where they are now without him. £20 million should be enough.
I have read this site for a while and believe you are intelligent gooners so can someone explain the way Chelsea have turned debt into equity?
@Dom at 11:31 am
“£20 million should be enough” 😆
Wow! anymore gems like that one?
I think we should offer £19.99 million and the rest made up to £20 million on an appearances basis…My word the wisdom of some posters goes some way to sating my desire for answers…
@Will at 11:33 am
Abramovich has turned Chelski’s debt into equity. He can do whatever he likes….
@Dom, I have been banging on about Isco for a while now, He has the potential to be top player. When I first heard Arsenal were talking to Malaga I was hoping for Isco’s arrival or at the very least Toulalan I did not foresee the arrival of Cazorla.
@Marchand, Governments can’t control banks, what planet are you living on.
EU cannot control countries? Bet a whole nation of Greeks would disagree with you.
When a competition organiser approaches the EU for clarification on its rules you can be sure their serious. Remember UEFA are not a football governing body like FIFA and the FA. They are in the process of setting the rules for the future of their tournaments.
Georgaki-Pyrovolitis- I know he did, i am asking how that works.
They claim them will take into account situations like the Chelsea equity…we shall see. They will not touch the big boys yet, but if they go for PSG, things will start getting interesting.
Curious, why does their final placement determine the length of the ban? Can anyone explain this? Seems like UEFA could just give a straightforward ban and be done with it. Seems unnecessarily complicated.
Whoops, did a re-read. Found where I was confused…. carry on.
.
only an opinion….but!!
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/johan-cruyff-on-why-arsenal-should-never-1502106
Mandy Dodd
Great link, well spotted. I don’t have the stomach to read anything the Mirror/Sun/Daily Mail and their like write but I have to say, I’ve seen a few articles this season offering support for AW, great to see.
Sorry, massively off topic but C’MON SWANSEA, C’MON VILLA!!!! 🙂
Nice job Swansea!
@Mandy
Nice link. I enjoyed that!
Why the comparison with City and Chelsea? They have minimal if any debts at all.
Unfortunately – regarding the question posted at the end of this post – NO. The FFP is a regulation, a law, and in order to understand the way to interpret it (when unclear), one must look into the historical background of that law. And we all know what Platini was talking about – not curbing the spending of mega rich clubs, per se – but preventing the situation of clubs over spending, which will lead into players not getting their salaries, debts being unpaid, etc. So the Malaga example is actually, for me, a proof the likes of KGB and Man-Oil will not get much more than a slap on their wrists. This unfortunate realization leads me to the conclusion, that whoever thought that reaching 2014 will benefit us (who are never in the red zone) – was either being naive, or worse – misleading. Mind you: not because UEFA is corrupt and “did not mean” to make life harder for the likes of Chelsea, Man City and PSG – but because fundamentaly the purpose of the FFP was not a “antitrust” legislation (such as salary cap) but rather a “workers / debtors benefit” legislation.