City and UEFA settle - 5 things we've learned

So a settlement was reached and City have been punished.

Here are five things we've learned, or had confirmed, by the whole sorry episode:

1. FFP is clandestine

One of the most telling aspects of City's statement was the reference to transparency.  The cause of City's "failure" to comply with the regulations seems to be one of detail and interpretation.  They clearly believe they have worked closely enough with UEFA for a shock outcome to have been avoided.

Now we can (as some have) blame City's advisers for screwing up, but If UEFA were genuinely committed to helping clubs comply, they could surely have coached City towards compliance.  The club's statement talks of their "good faith" and "collaboration" and they clearly feel this hasn't been reciprocated. You could be forgiven for thinking UEFA wanted to catch City out, take its pound of flesh, and placate the baying hordes of the G14 old guard.  I'm sure such cynicism would be misplaced, though.

2. The "spirit" of the regulations should now be clear to everyone

We were told to expect that UEFA would not only ensure compliance with the regulations, but with their "spirit".  As the stated aims of FFP boil down to financial responsibility i.e. preventing clubs getting themselves into a mess, a la Portsmouth and Leeds, it's difficult to reconcile the level of punishment with that spirit.  The club has never, in its entire history, been in a more safe and stable financial position.  Equally, UEFA told us that a club's "direction of travel" would be considered in any punishment.  City can illustrate rapid movement towards a position of profit and have clearly resisted the temptation to make big splashes in the transfer market, their deals dwarfed by those for Falcao, Neymar, Bale and even Mata and Ozil in the past year.  So what exactly is the spirit of FFP again?  

3. The legal basis for FFP is flaky, at best

FFP is currently subject to legal challenge.  The lawyer in question not only challenges the legal basis for the regulations themselves but also the sanctions dealt to City for supposed breach.  This article sums this up rather nicely.  Expect further developments.

4. In PR terms, City are between a rock and a hard place

There were plenty of fans excited by the prospect of City rolling out the lawyers and blowing UEFA out of the water.  The reason City have chosen not to do this is probably no reflection on the strength of their legal case, as the above suggests.  A victory in the courts would first require City to become the enemy of UEFA and of all the established, powerful footballing brands across Europe, many of whom, including Messrs. Wenger, Woodward and Rummenigge have come out in the last few days to reiterate their support for FFP.  The Abu Dhabi "project" was as much about building reputation and relationships as it ever was about trophies and the prospect of pushing against all of those footballing bodies, not to mention their commercial partners and their huge collective fan base, was deemed too great a price to pay for the avoidance of these sanctions and the ongoing constraints FFP will bring. When people tell you that FFP is supported by the overwhelming majority of clubs, it's worth remembering that swimming against the tide can come at great cost.  

5. Journalists appear to be slowly getting it

Whilst many a journalist and pundit continues to roll out the established clichés around "the importance of only spending what you earn" and the need to prevent "financial doping" without any actual analysis of FFP, there is a growing number for whom the penny is beginning to drop.  I suspect Lord Samuel, for so long a lone voice of reason over orange juice and croissants on Sky's Sunday Supplement, is allowing himself a wry smile as, one-by-one, his colleagues in the written press begin to publish articles criticising FFP.  Maybe it's because City are becoming part of the furniture, or because of a deeper mistrust of Platini stemming from his role in awarding the World Cup to Qatar.  Who knows?  But we've seen articles like this and this and this from writers whose condemnation of FFP was conspicuous by its absence during its formative stage.