Arsenal v WHU: a journey in interesting times

Another day, another match.

Emma, Drew and I have decided to extend our trip to London a little for this one, going first to the British Museum to see the Vikings before taking in the game which should be pleasant indeed, not least because it gives me another chance to bore everyone stupid with my thought that if only the Vikings had defeated Alfred the Great then we would now have a very different, and a lot more lively, country in which to live.

Why can’t we choose our own history?

(Stops, suddenly realising he sounds like a character out of the novel he’s currently writing and quickly moves on).

So, another meeting opposite Northampton Town’s Sixfield Stadium, and onwards south to Finchley Central.

And so to the news…

Ivan Gazidis has spoken up for all of us has questioned the fact that Hull C and ourselves has each got 25,000 seats for Wembley on 17 May.   That means 24,000 of those of us who went to the semi final will be disappointed.

In the final 20,000 tickets will go to volunteers.  Now if you have read this blog off and on you may know that I do try and speak out for non-league football, and write about the need for much more investment to stop the pathetic little turnips who think it is funny to double the rent on council owned football grounds.

So those who do work hard for grassroots football need their rewards, but I am not sure this is it.

It somehow assumed that they are little children who will relish a day out, rather than people who give a huge amount to their local community.  I can understand the honour of being invited to a garden party in Buck House after a lifetime devoted to the Red Cross – that seems good – although probably no more than a good starting point to reward such selfless devotion.   But a cup final ticket for a lifetime in football?  No, its the wrong reward.

Then there are the 17,000 Club Wembley seats already taken up.  As Mr Gazidis said, “The balance in the FA’s allocation system is not right. Arsenal have approximately 45,000 season-ticket holders and 150,000 members, many of whom come to games. They all give us their loyal support throughout a season but with the FA Cup final allocation at 25,000 there will be many disappointed Arsenal fans who have supported the club home and away for years, who will be unable to get a ticket to this historic match.”

Arsenal plan to show the FA Cup final live at the Emirates Stadium.

So what else is in the news?  Well, FFP creeps closer.

Uefa will rule against Manchester City’s finances shortly – I think it is decided this week and announced next monday.  There might be a bit of last minute horse trading but it looks like 20 clubs have been singled out including Man City and PSG, and will get some sort of penalty.  But the horse-trading has started, so they might still weedle their way out.

The most likely sanction is not a banning order from the Champs League but a banning order from undertaking transfers inwards – which is why the Fifa action against Barcelona has attracted so much amongst the creative intellect of Untold.  (I just made “creative intellect” up).

There have also been reports around that Uefa is ditching any notion of fines, since by definition money is no object, so it all begins to fit together.
Arsenal, Manchester U, and Chelsea are all in the clear – although Man U might not be an issue given their place in the league.  Tottenham and Everton are also both clear it seems.  Chelsea may not be so lucky in one year’s time when the level of allowable loss drops further. They have benefiting from the profits declared last time around, but I can’t see them repeating the trick.
Everything with Manchester C depends on how Uefa sees the £350 million sponsorship deal with Etihad.  FFP rules require transactions with companies already linked to the club or owner to be at market value.  So if Uefa has worked the market value to be, say, £200m then Manchester C are £150m over the limit.

PSG are in a worse state since they get £167 million a year from the Slave State Tourism Authority.

If either club claim the punishment is unfair the matter goes at once to the “adjudicatory chamber” which is the appeal panel.  If the findings are too lenient (eg Manchester C is not thrown out of the Champs League), other clubs (for example the club in 5th place in the Premier League) can appeal also.  Full details will be released on May 5.

Interesting times.

9 Replies to “Arsenal v WHU: a journey in interesting times”

  1. hope they get sanctions and not fines.dat would show dat uefa are serious with the ffp rule.and going off topic,can u please tell me the last time arsenal lost a penalty shoot out.thanx

  2. Haven’t Chelsea tried to indemnify themselves against FFP by buying loads of decent players and then selling them on for profit? An example being Mata. They probably have a squad big enough to cope with selling some of their better players and still be able to buy the odd great player.

    Or is this incorrect?

  3. I think that the last penalty shoot-out which we lost was against Bradford in the League Cup last year.

  4. it will be very interesting indeed. i think if uefa was to give out incoming transfer bans that would make for a very interesting summer! the inflation that these clubs give to the market makes it very hard for teams not fueled by outside money. teams like arsenal, dortmund, etc…would be in very good positions to buy players that otherwise they might be priced out of….

  5. Yeah like selling Matic for 2 million and then buying him back for 25 .Great business don’t you think Rupert? Or buying all the best young players around and immediately farming them out on loan to learn the Chelsea way !!!!

  6. highamsparkgunner,

    Don’t you just like it when a fluke incident is cited as the norm by the same set of people who ignore years of history and only bang on about recent poor form. I guess I have just repeated myself.

    By the way, apart from Mata (which was a clear and unadulterated aberration) when was the last time that Chelsea made a net profit on any player transaction to justify Rupert Cook’s adulation?

  7. Don’t get too excited,all City are getting is a 100,000 fine.Noone will be banned from either the CL or from making transfers.The sponsors and the TV companies who pay millions to UEFA for the CL will insist that all the top clubs and the best players are in the competition.In the world of football, where cash is king, FFP is just a meaningless gesture,a sop to those who whinge at the likes of City,chelsea and PSG.Any club basing its future on a football landscape governed by FFP is misguided and naive.Also,isn’t gazidis on the FA commitee?Funny how the ticket allocation for the Cup Final was never a problem for him before Arsenal got there..It has ALWAYS been like this,its the same for the CL final ,the world cup final and the final of the Euros.I can remember queuing up down Avenell Rd for Cup final tickets back in the day.

  8. I have said on here numerous times that FFP wont be the white charger you are all hoping for.
    Irrespective I will deal with some issues re Chelsea that either you are unaware of, choose to ignore or don’t grasp the impact in terms of FFP.

    First Matic didn’t cost £25 million it was nearer £20& because of the way his transfer from Chelsea was structured it the net cost was below that.

    Next the transfer fees received by Chelsea in season 2013/14 alone will more than cover the £49 million loss (wages at Chelsea continue to drop ok not tens of millions but the reduction is reflected in accounts)Transfer fees paid will impact over a 5 year period although the amortised value of several players now departed (Essien& Mata etc) will see little increase in this area. Also very high paid players like Lampard, Cole & Essien will not feature after this year. Here a sobering thought in 2011/12 Chelsea’s wage bill was £190 million & Arsenals was £124 million. the best estimates are that in the year 2013/14 Chelseas will be about £170 million and Arsenals about £155 million.
    Next. The new Addidas, Samsung & TV deals will bring in at least another £45 million and that’s before the higher CL monies and monies from new commercial partners is factored in.
    Finally lets deal with the players on loan. Yes it shouldn’t be allowed but it is well within the rules.Chelsea didn’t invent this model its how many teams operate !

    Chelsea currently have players that wont make it at Chelsea & who will be sold off for an accounting profit. Just the same at many clubs just more in number at Chelsea

    But at the same there are several that will players like Zuoma, Courtois, Atsu & Tarore that seem to be good enough and their fees are already paid

    There are others that might just make it but if they don’t they will turn a profit such as Piazon & Lukaka

    I don’t particularly like Chelsea transfer policy but as they say targets(FFP) shape behaviour

    I have been told my season ticket at SB will cost the same next season the 4th season in a row no increase. I suspect if FFP was a concern Chelsea would be upping the cost or wouldn’t be subsidising tickets like they are doing at the CL semi in Madrid . So no I don’t expect any issues with FFP at Chelsea

  9. @Bootoomee

    You asked

    By the way, apart from Mata (which was a clear and unadulterated aberration) when was the last time that Chelsea made a net profit on any player transaction to justify Rupert Cook’s adulation

    In season 2013/14 Chelsea sold 3 players for a fee. Bruma £2 million profit, De Bryne £11 million profit & Mata £13 million profit in cash terms £26 million. In accounting terms the total profit is more like £42 million

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *