Michel Platini clamps down on clubs in debt

[the wes 7,212]

Michel Platini has two messages to impart to the all-conquering English as Chelsea and Manchester United prepare for the season's final collision in Moscow. One is to the fans: the Uefa president trusts that, having been afforded the privilege of using their match tickets as visas, they will create a carnival atmosphere (to which they might reply that being made to trudge to Russia is provocation enough to sulk)

The other is infinitely more significant and welcome. Platini is determined to do something about the economic jungle that, while allowing England's top clubs to build the most glamorous and successful squads in Europe, leaves our game vulnerable to opportunist owners from abroad.

When Platini spoke to me in Manchester last week, he was at pains to stress there was nothing anti-English in the long campaign he envisaged against debt, an enemy of footballing fairness once described by the former Uefa chief executive Lars-Christer Olsson as "economic doping".

And in truth Platini would be doing the English football community a massive favour if his attempts to clip the wings of the foreigners who have found it such succulent prey - for example Roman Abramovich, who could bankrupt Chelsea by withdrawing a mere fraction of his investment, and the Glazers with their wad of largely borrowed dollars at United - are given the political support they need from both football federations and governments across Europe.

More and more, debt can be seen as one of football's worst influences. It creeps up while our eyes are closed, as I was reminded a few years ago after Dundee, the club dearest to my heart, reached the Scottish League Cup final. We had players such as Claudio Caniggia, the Argentine World Cup finalist, whose wages an average home attendance of about 4,000 clearly could not pay. Later the club nearly folded and, though relegation ensued, it was far less shameful than the realisation that our trip to Hampden Park had been fraudulent in the sense that Dundee had got there by overcoming rivals whose books were balanced. The reflection that Rangers, who beat us, were even deeper in debt seemed irrelevant. That season no longer lives in the memory because, in effect, we cheated.

Platini, asked if the word could be used in the context of today's English dominance (not wholly unprecedented, for less than a decade ago Real Madrid were scaling Europe's heights on borrowed money) puffed his cheeks and replied that it might be a little strong. "There have always been some clubs, and some countries, with more money at their disposal than others," he said, "and I have no problem with that. The problem occurs when the clubs who run up huge debts always win - and that we must stop. Some clubs, and some leagues, have asked us to. We are preparing a plan that will encourage clubs to reduce their debts and give us clear, clean competition."

The initiative to which he referred can be assumed to have come from countries such as France, which Platini most gloriously represented in the European Championship of 1984, and Germany, which also has strict rules against debt; it is understood that Bayern Munich's Karl-Heinz Rummenigge, against whom Platini played at the game's highest levels, has complained that his club, four times European champions, now feel they are fighting rivals from England, and to an extent Spain and Italy, with one hand tied behind their back. The issue was aired in Manchester at a meeting of Uefa's Professional Football Strategy Council, a body bringing together clubs, leagues, federations and players which was Platini's brainchild when he took over from Lennart Johansson last year.

Club Value(£m) Debt(£m) Man United 919 551 Real Madrid 656 177 Arsenal 612 263 Liverpool 536 348 Bayern Munich 468 0 AC Milan 407 0 Barcelona 400 28 Chelsea 390 0 Juventus 260 13 Schalke 240 115

If the strategy council resolves to eradicate debt, Uefa's executive committee will endorse it and only clubs with balanced books will be licensed to play in the European competitions. It is difficult to imagine any sensible criteria which - if we hypothetically apply them to the here and now - would not oblige Abramovich to write off at least £500 million of his fortune and the Glazers to repay the American banks.

So there are going to be some interesting discussions with the Premier League. Each of the top four has a debt that would have been inconceivable even in 1992, when it began. If you add them together, you have a figure well over £1 billion - equivalent to at least two years' television revenue for all 20 clubs. Arsenal, to their credit, are the odd man out in that Arsene Wenger balances the footballing books and their debt is entirely related to the new stadium; Liverpool, like United once-exemplary, are also now owned by Americans and heavily in debt to banks. Yet the strength of their squads obliges others to spend in an effort to keep up. Even Newcastle, owned by the extremely rich Mike Ashley, struggle to compete, as Kevin Keegan's anguished cries the other day emphasised. It is no way to run a league and Platini said: "My concern is for football's image. I have to defend the values of the game against a relatively small number of people whose philosophy I do not share.

[Fulham Broadway 16,977]

Source ?????

Couple of points there - nice we dont owe any money at all, unlike the other Big Three. From that perspective, bring it on Platini -it'd mean Man Utd, Liverpool and Arsenal would be banned from Europe till they sort out their finances.

Man Utd . OK Club is worth £919 000 000 allegedly, but the Glazers borrowed to buy it and owe £551 000 000. They're on a 'Buy to Let' Old Trafford trip, if they cut and run the club could be well and truly fucked.

[BlueLion. 21,491]

And that would be such a shame.

[the wes 7,212]

Source = www.telegraph.co.uk

[nikno 1]

Source ?????

Couple of points there - nice we dont owe any money at all, unlike the other Big Three. From that perspective, bring it on Platini -it'd mean Man Utd, Liverpool and Arsenal would be banned from Europe till they sort out their finances.

Man Utd . OK Club is worth £919 000 000 allegedly, but the Glazers borrowed to buy it and owe £551 000 000. They're on a 'Buy to Let' Old Trafford trip, if they cut and run the club could be well and truly fucked.

It's Manchester United - the club would be bought up within seconds of the Glazers putting it on sale, their too big a name.

Edited May 20, 2008 by nikno

[Fulham Broadway 16,977]

It's Manchester United - the club would be bought up within seconds of the Glazers putting it on sale, their too big a name.

You're probably right, unless they had a dip in form, but whoever took it on would have to plug the £600 000 000 +interest hole left by the Glazers.

Until that happened the club would be owned by creditors and banks, who wouldn't hang about before stripping the assets and selling them off. ie the name, players etc.

[bombayblue™ 55]

manutd getting fucked, now that is worth being a national holiday..