Thread by @lovefutebol

Not commenting on any particular cases, but just a few points on the evolution and development of UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play, because it's useful to discuss from where the impetus for licensing (and a desire to operate within certain financial constraints) came.

The first discussions regarding licensing were held as early as 1999, not instigated by UEFA itself, but a number of professional clubs requesting that sort of regulation be created to combat common problems within the game at the time (e.g. stadia, youth development, finance).

UEFA created 2 studies in parallel: whether to introduce a club licensing system, or a salary cap. For several reasons, including developing a necessary legal framework (difficult) & comparability of club financial data, the licensing system became the preferred option.

The pilot for Club Licensing was launched in eight UEFA member associations in 2001, including the (English) Football Association, modelled on what are the now familiar pillars of licensing - sports, infrastructure, administration, legal and finance.

That pilot informed the first edition (v1) of Club Licensing, approved by UEFA's ExCo in 2002. To give clubs time to prepare, financial criteria were to be met over three phases, those being:
i) For the 2004-05 season
ii) For the 2006-07 season
iii) Date was to be confirmed

Through that phased implementation, UEFA provided clubs - and necessarily national associations as licensors - with sufficient time to meet implementation dates. Here's an example of the financial criteria clubs were required to meet for phase one.

The first licensing decisions to not approve the participation of clubs in UEFA competitions who had otherwise qualified on the basis of sporting merit were subsequently made in 2004 for the 2004-05 season.

It should be noted here that the concept of Financial Fair Play has been included in official UEFA documentation since the very first edition of the Club Licensing Manual. Here's excerpts for v1 (2002) and v2 (approved by UEFA's ExCo in 2005).

And once again, version 2 of the Club Licensing Manual was subject to a phased implementation process. Whilst approved in 2005, its implementation was to be applied for the 2008-09 season onwards, including some enhanced financial criteria (such as no overdue tax payables).

In 2008, UEFA replaced the v2 Manual with the Club Licensing Regulations. The FFP concept is mentioned again, whilst implementation for certain criteria was phased from 2010, 2011 & 2012 (the latter in relation to such things as breakeven requirements, acceptable deviation, etc).

In both 2009, with the formal FFP model approved at the ExCo, and 2010, with the updated UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations, we begin to see Financial Fair Play included more largely in UEFA documentation, but the principles themselves existed prior to this.

Indeed, the 2010 CLFFP largely replicated several specific sections of the 2008 Regulations, and in relation to an FFP discussion, largely in relation to arts. 57-63, inc 58 (breakeven requirement); 59 (monitoring period); 60 (breakeven result); 61 (acceptable deviation), etc.

So in essence, whilst FFP arguably loomed large in the public conscience and media only from roughly 2011 onwards (image via Google Trends below), certain key criteria were well known to clubs and established as early as 2008, even if not yet known by that specific phrase.

And indeed, it's useful to remark here that if the criteria themselves were published in 2008, then they would likely have been in discussion with internal and external groups/consultees for a certain period of time prior to that.

And I think what you can see through the development of licensing is UEFA consulting with a range of external parties and groups, from pilots to full implementation, including such entities as the European Club Association, & in the creation of the Club Financial Control Panel.

It has been remarked upon elsewhere, but on its foundation the CFCP included Brian Lomax (founder of Supporters Direct), Egon Frank and Brian Quinn (both economists by profession), Yves Wehrli (a media and sports lawyer), and Umberto Lago (an accountant/business professor).

And through its evolution (a "living document", if you will) and its phased implementation approach, UEFA - again presumably in consultation with external parties - seems to have demonstrated a willingness to understand realistic timescales for implementation and adherence.

So whilst it might be reasonable to criticise some of CLFFP's architecture (and which is very much beyond my expertise, but notably is approved by the ECA), there's much merit in the gradual, phased, deliberative, consultative nature by which it's developed.

As a final point, I feel at licensing's heart lie some simple q's where any answers are hard to shape:
- What should football's landscape look like
- How should clubs be run
- How do we want to watch
- How do we develop players and coaches
- What should be the community benefit