Will Financial Fair Play make football a fairer game? At the end of the 21st century, it has become more common for wealthy oil sheiks to buy clubs and invest large sums of money. This leads to great injustice and dominance for these clubs in the transfer market. Therefore they acquired a new rule called Financial Fair Play (FFP). This prevents a club from spending more money than it earns in revenue. If a club violates the rule, it leads to severe sanctions such as being banned from playing in the Champions League or even fighting for titles. If a club cannot have financial liabilities, only clubs with a good budget will be able to spend money. As a result, the rule will only widen the gap between rich and poor clubs. Furthermore, the acquisition of this rule will lead the owners to illegally invest money in the club so that they can cover the expenses. To avoid all this they must eliminate the rule. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay First, FFP will make it harder for small clubs to compete against big clubs. UEFA introduced the rule to give all teams equal opportunities, but the reality is that the big clubs, the ones that have dominated for a long time, will continue to dominate. Ensuring Financial Fair Play will make it more difficult for smaller clubs to compete. Because if they can't lend money to banks, revenue will only come from sponsorships, ticket sales, television broadcasts and advertising. Indeed, a large club like FC Barcelona, ​​which already has a large global fan base, earns much more money from television broadcasts, ticket sales and advertising spots than, for example, a club like Chelsea FC. (Mourinho, 2015). Therefore they can maintain independent investments. While clubs that don't have such a large fan base will have less money to invest in. In other words, the gap will only widen. Second, FFP shows no regard for high taxes, so countries that have high taxes will have a harder time affording wages. Another argument against FFP is that the rule shows no respect for high-tax countries. Jacques Messeca writes in his article, A Comparative Approach of the Tax and Social Burden in European Football, on evershed.com (2014) that this issue will be a big problem for FFP in the future and for the countries involved. This creates a great injustice for clubs in those countries where they have high taxes as much of the revenue will be lost. Paris Saint Germain is a club located in France. Recently the club was bought by a rich oil sheik. The club had many difficulties with FFP precisely because France is a country with high taxes. Since the rule shows no regard for this, the club has to pay almost double the salary for the players to receive the same salary that other players in other countries receive. On the other hand, financial fair play will provide a fairer game, which leads to that every club will have the same opportunities. Firstly, the adoption of the FFP rule will prevent rich oil sheiks from pumping money into the club and will make football a fairer sport according to the rules. This means that every club will have the same opportunities. Furthermore, having their own revenues from sponsorships, ticket sales, television broadcasts and commercials, clubs will not be able to buy expensive players and will have to build a strong youth system. Furthermore, the owners will provide money to the club illegally. To be honest, the teams will have the same opportunities on the pitch. But on the other hand, this will not stop wealthy owners from filing.