this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

Soccer (Closing)

157 readers
1 users here now

This community is being retired in favor of !football@soccer.forum.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

There's a rule clubs owned by the same owners cannot be in the same UEFA competition, and Girona and Manchester City are both owned by the same football group owned by a Qatari. So, would Girona not be allowed or would neither be allowed? Or would they be given an exception like RB Leipzig and RB salzburg?

top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FuckRSIashSoccerMods@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago

If they can get away with 115 charges they can get away with having their feeder club play in the UCL. Depressing but true.

[–] CoryTrevor-NS@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago (3 children)

They would do some bureaucratic tricks to make sure both participate.

A few seasons back both Energy Drink FC teams were not only in the same competition, but even in the same group.

So if that was allowed, I don’t see any issues with any of these types of situations in the future.

[–] National-Exam-8242@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago

Energy Drink FC… I love it

[–] DiskoPunk@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago

There was some creative restructuring of the ownership model with the RB clubs.

[–] Significant-Shame760@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago

I used to manage both club in fm for tough fixtures, these fxkers are doing that irl

[–] titowW@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Toulouse and AC milan, leipzig and salzbourg all play in european football despite having the same owners. They can definetly if they are willing to change their administrative structure.

[–] Sick_and_destroyed@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Toulouse and AC Milan have the same owner but they don’t play in the same european competition so it’s allowed.

[–] TheEmpireOfSun@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago

But potentially they can easily play in same competition but nobody will stop them anyway. Same applies for Brighton and Royale Union already, dirty cheaters.

[–] mylanguage@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago

They were already cleared no?

[–] BoosterGoldGL@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago

Neither are owned by a Qatari btw…

[–] itibz@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Milan + OGC Nice -- same owners but both allowed this season, so...

[–] throwawayguy755@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Mate mayb check out your facts before making a claim…. They are not the same people.

[–] CommissionOk4384@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago

They meant Toulouse but yeah

[–] itibz@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

My bad got mixed up between Toulouse & Milan

And on the other side Ineos (owners of Nice) were interesting in buying a minority stake in United. But the point stands re- multi club ownership and participation in UCL

[–] throwawayguy755@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago

No problem…honest mistake. In the case of Nice and United… seems Ineos would owe nice while Ratcliffe who is an individual would have a share in Utd which is a way around.

However, you are right about multi club ownership, it’s up to UEFA to stop this but however it’s all about money and city will find a way:

[–] GregGraffin23@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago

Brighton & Union are both in the EL so it looks that way

[–] julianblackonsight@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago

I think they'd get away with it the same way Manchester City have gotten away with the 100+ violations of FFP.

[–] thegreendog4@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago

Or maybe they will allow Girona and not City to compete

[–] palsana@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago

Why not, as long aw MC doesn't qualify

[–] Narwhal1986@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago

A little payment to the UEFA executive pension pot would resolve any potential issue

[–] FrayedTendon@alien.top 1 points 2 years ago

Its City. They'll get away with it.