Quote (zarkadon @ 16 Feb 2020 12:30)

When Juve lost their titles, the 2005 one became vacant (like in France, when OM were stripped of their 1993 title), but Inter were awarded the 2006 one.

The reason the Serie A title became vacant in 2005 was because the runner-up (Milan) was also involved in the corruption scandal, and the league decided that giving it to the third placed team was pushing it too much. In France, the title went void because the tv broadcaster Canal+ lobbied against PSG being awarded the title, due to Marseille fans threatening to massively boycott their Canal+ subscription if their bitter rivals were awarded the silverware, and the league caved to the pressure of the broadcasting company, which was their main sponsor.

Quote (excellence @ 16 Feb 2020 22:39)

ah gotcha, thanks for the insight :thumbsup:

anyways i doubt the 2011/2012 and 2013/2014 titles will be stripped retroactively and awared to the runners up..plus the domestic cups? where do they draw the line? would only benefit United, Liverpool, and Sunderland of all teams so idgaf :lol:

that said blatant financial fraud is an outright crime and against the spirit of the game, while match fixing is against the spirit of the game and could be a crime but is rarely treated as such

it’ll be interesting to see how far this goes. teams who missed out on UCL or got relegated as a result of this - do they have grounds to sue for financial damages instance?

Quote (dro94 @ 16 Feb 2020 22:36)

Clubs like Real Madrid are massive because of factor conditions that allowed them more money and resources than rival clubs. Big clubs are big clubs because they were bankrolled better than other teams which allowed them to grow at a faster rate. Now it's all about stopping other clubs from doing so because we've had first mover advantage.

Quote (zarkadon @ 17 Feb 2020 00:42)

Clubs like Madrid (and Barcelona, Juve, Bayern, etc)... grew thanks to good management pretty much since the amateur era, when little to no money was involved.

Quote (zarkadon @ Feb 16 2020 10:42pm)

Clubs like Madrid (and Barcelona, Juve, Bayern, etc)... grew thanks to good management pretty much since the amateur era, when little to no money was involved.

Quote (B4al @ 17 Feb 2020 01:40)

*cough Franco

Quote (dro94 @ 17 Feb 2020 10:26)

Money was involved, just to a lesser extent...and a little bit of extra money got you further back then. If it was all down to good management and not money you'd see massive clubs in areas of low populations and spread out across the country fairly evenly.

Quote (zarkadon @ 17 Feb 2020 11:55)

Madrid won titles before Franco. In fact, Madrid had won two of the 7 league titles disputed before the civil war, and it took them 20 more years to win another two. Also, if we look at the Copas, Madrid won more in the period before Franco than during the 40 year dictatorship.

Madrid was already a huge club in Spain, like Atlético, Barcelona and Athletic were at the time... and they all got there mostly through their efforts and fan support.

Quote

Soon, after Millonarios' return to Colombia, the Barcelona directors visited Buenos Aires and agreed with River Plate, the last FIFA-affiliated team to have held the his card for the transfer of Di Stéfano in 1954 for the equivalent of 150 million Italian liras (according to other sources 200,000 dollars). That was when a head-to-head match between the two Spanish rivals for his purchase was born. In Christmas 1952, Di Stéfano still contracted with Millonarios, returned briefly to Buenos Aires, where he was even making plans to abandon football and start a business as Argentine league was still not professional.

FIFA expressed a favourable attitude towards Barcelona about the issue, sanctioning the contract of the player to the blaugrana. However the Spanish Football Association blocked the transfer. FIFA appointed Armando Muñoz Calero, former president of the Spanish Football Federation, linked to Francisco Franco, as mediator. Calero decided to let Real Madrid play the seasons 1953-1954 and in 1955-1956 and in Barcelona the years 1954-1955 and 1956-1957. The agreement was approved by the Football Association and their respective clubs. Although the Catalans agreed, the decision created various discontent among the Blaugrana members and the president who was forced to resign in September 1953.

As his first few games were unimpressive, Barcelona sold Madrid their half-share, and Di Stéfano moved to the Blancos signing a four-year contract. Real paid 5.5 million Spanish pesetas for the transfer, plus 1.3 million bonus for the purchase, an annual fee to be paid to the Millonarios, 16,000 of salary to the Argentine with doubled bonus compared to his teammates, for a total of 40% of the annual revenue of the Madrid club. This fact contributed greatly to the rivalry with the Catalan club. Before the arrival of Di Stéfano, the club of the Spanish capital was neither the largest club in the country, nor the largest in the city: Real Madrid did not have a great football tradition, in fact had won only two championships, while Barcelona and Atlético Madrid were six and four respectively.

Quote

During the 1950s, however, these rules were circumvented by Real Madrid who naturalized Alfredo Di Stéfano and Ferenc Puskás. Di Stéfano, Puskás, Raymond Kopa and Francisco Gento formed the nucleus of the Real Madrid team that dominated the second half of the 1950s. Real Madrid won their third La Liga in 1954, 21 years later since 1933, and retained its title in 1955. In 1956, Athletic Bilbao won their sixth La Liga title, but Real Madrid won La Liga again in 1957 and 1958. All in all, Barcelona and Real Madrid won 4 La Liga titles each, with Atletico Madrid winning two Ligas and Athletic Bilbao winning one during this decade.

1960s–1970s: Real Madrid Superiority
Real Madrid dominated La Liga between 1960s-1970s, being crowned champions 14 times.[15] Real Madrid won five La Liga titles in a row from 1961-1965 as well as winning three doubles between 1960-1980. During the 1960s and 1970s, only Atlético Madrid offered Real Madrid any serious challenge. Atletico Madrid were crowned La Liga champions four times in 1966, 1970, 1973, and 1977. Atletico Madrid also finished second place in 1961, 1963 and 1965. In 1971, Valencia won their fourth La Liga title, and the Johan Cruyff-inspired Barcelona won their ninth La Liga in 1974.

Quote (B4al @ 18 Feb 2020 12:15)

Madrid was a notable club before Franco, true enough, but any opposition, especially the catalan and the basque areas were shattered to pieces in his regime.
Di Stéfano, one of your greatest legens, played a preseason friendly for us (if i am not in the wrongs here, should have signed for us), the signing for madrid is at the very least murky.

Would go as far as to say that Franco was instrumental in at least 5 champions leagues you're so, so proud of.

People often underrate his involvement "hey, he had other stuff to do", but even the smallest intervention can have a huge outcome on the progression of a club.



Source - catalan (obviously) dominated wikipedia.

Quote

A reader Diago from London sent the following correction to the e-mail help list.

The article edited in your wonderful webpage brings some false information on the time Di Stefano signed for Real Madrid over Barcelona. While some politic hate over Barcelona is the reason given, Di Stefano himself explains in his own biography "Gracias, Vieja" (Thanks, Old Lady - referred to the ball). He had a contract with River Plate but Argentinean players went on a strike over the contracts with the league clubs. He was at the time playing for Millonarios in Columbia and his contract with River expired. Barcelona agreed a fee with River and kept Di Stefano in Barcelona for some months while trying to unblock the problem. Real Madrid agreed the transfer from Millonarios. Di Stefano, at the time, couldn't be bothered where to play as long as he did play. When Real Madrid sorted the transfer, Barcelona claimed the player was his and the Government suggested sharing him between the clubs. Barcelona refused. And the rest is history

I have suggested that he add the information himself. Capitalistroadster 09:32, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

The information provided regarding Di Stefano's transfer to Real Madrid is ludicrously biased, and uses as sources 1) an xtratime football forum (??) and a barcelona supporter's fanpage. Is this supposed to be taken seriously? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sufjanav (talk • contribs) 11:31, 7 December 2005.

The 3rd source is "Soccernet". I guess that you aren't complaining about that one. If you have contradicting sources or proof that this is wrong, then please change the article. Sebastian Kessel Talk 21:04, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


It would seem to me that the first two "sources" completely delegitimize the 3rd, whatever it may be.

This article is strongly biased. We'll take care of it in the next days. Please do not try to modificate its information without a proper source. I will use History books for it, and I expect a more reliable source than a few football forums. Thank you. Spooki 21:53, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to this page for clearing off some myths about Franco´s regime supporting Real Madrid in the forties and fifties and playing a vital and anti-Barcelonista role in the DiStefano affaire. Despite some historical and hysterical Barcelona´s victimism the single truth is that DiStefano´s signing for Real Madrid was due to internal disputes in Barcelona´s management board and mainly to the player poor performances in the three friendly games he played while in Barcelona. In the early fifties Barcelona enjoyed strong support from Francoism in the form of some of the best Hungarians players (Kubala, Kocsis and Czibor) being given the Spanish nationality along with generous subsides to film anti-communist propaganda (Los ases eligen la libertad) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.109.39.50 (talk) 10:01, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


'under the pressure of Franco's governement' : what the hell does this mean. I have heard Di Stefano explaining the history of his transfer to Real Madrid and some documentation of the 50's. I can say the following things : 1 - Di Stefano was transfered to Barcelona by River Plate 2 - Di Stefano was transfered to Real Madrid by Millonarios 3 - It was decided by the football federation he must play in both teams (one year Barcelona, one year Real Madrid and so on) 4 - Finally Barcelona ressigned to the player that was acquired by Madrid (paying some money to barcelona)


The section about Di Stefano move to Real Madrid is highly innacurate, incomplete and entirely based in a single source, the book Jimmy Burns: Barca, a people's passion a book written by a self confessed Barça fan which cites its information straight from the Barcelona FC website and several Barcelona fan forums. In the book Mr. Burns makes no efforts whatsoever to interview any Real Madrid officials or Mr. Di Stefano himself in regards to this matter. It is incomplete because entirely skips "The Lima Agreement" the main cause for the dispute and the confusion with the players rights, names erroneously Millonarios as the club contacted by Barcelona originally when it was in fact River Plate to which Barcelona paid 2 million pesetas as downpayment of a total 4 million agreed upon, as it figures in Spanish mercantile records, which Mr. Burns failed to research and which can be obtained from the RFEF archives with relative ease [1] [2] [3]

Quote (zarkadon @ 18 Feb 2020 14:07)

The thing with wikipedia, is that the information should be sourced, and you should also check the Discussion tab. The information you link isn't sourced, and if you look at the discussion tab, there's an argument about the information being biased, wrong, and taken from places like barcelona fan forums and a book about Barcelona's history (which is why most sources have been removed, even if the text still stands pending revision):



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Alfredo_Di_St%C3%A9fano

You're article about rules being circumvented are out of context (what rules?) and, again, unsourced (wikipedia isn't a source, it's information that is supposed to be sourced, and you should be able to check the direct source at the bottom of the article by making click on the source numbers spread around the text).

Do you even know about the Kubala transfer to Barcelona? He had a FIFA ban for refusing to play for his national team and deflecting from the communist regime, but Barcelona signed him irregularly and the Francoist regime gave him an automatic citizenship, so they could use him for anti-communist propaganda... he was Barça's best player during the 50's and the reason the club dominated at the beginning of the decade. The government never issued such big favours to Real Madrid, so so much for your silly conspiracy theories. If Barcelona were too stupid to research which team had the rights to Di Stefano's ownership and made a deal with the wrong South American club, then they are themselves to blame.

Here's the document that gave Kubala nationality, just days after touching Spanish soild for the first time in his life: https://www.boe.es/datos/pdfs/BOE//1951/178/A03031-03031.pdf

Quote

"Gracias, Vieja" (Thanks, Old Lady - referred to the ball). He had a contract with River Plate but Argentinean players went on a strike over the contracts with the league clubs. He was at the time playing for Millonarios in Columbia and his contract with River expired. Barcelona agreed a fee with River and kept Di Stefano in Barcelona for some months while trying to unblock the problem. Real Madrid agreed the transfer from Millonarios. Di Stefano, at the time, couldn't be bothered where to play as long as he did play. When Real Madrid sorted the transfer, Barcelona claimed the player was his and the Government suggested sharing him between the clubs. Barcelona refused.And the rest is history

Quote

In the early fifties Barcelona enjoyed strong support from Francoism

Quote (zarkadon @ Feb 17 2020 09:55am)

Madrid won titles before Franco. In fact, Madrid had won two of the 7 league titles disputed before the civil war, and it took them 20 more years to win another two. Also, if we look at the Copas, Madrid won more in the period before Franco than during the 40 year dictatorship.

Madrid was already a huge club in Spain, like Atlético, Barcelona and Athletic were at the time... and they all got there mostly through their efforts and fan support.



Well having access to a larger population to create a fanbase is indeed a factor, but I can't see how that can be avoided.