However the thing is If there was no repercussion to unethical payment, I would be all for it.
There is a difference in Arsenal doing the unethical bit & City/PSG doing the unethical bit.
Those clubs have the means to bypass the regulation using backchannels.
Take Neymar’s transfer, If Arsenal got Neymar, 200m would be accounted in FFP regulations. However PSG had the backchannel in form of Qatar eventually deeming Neymar a free transfer.
In that scenario, Arsenal will fail to comply with FFP.
A visual analogy for you -
Chelsea, City, PSG, Everton, Monaco, Barca, Real Madrid have all sorts of backchannels to get away with.
To indulge in creative accounting, we need backchannels. As an Asian, you would know about Hawala.
Chelsea David Luiz transfer fiasco, City Etihad sponsorship, PSG Qatar, United bebe transfer fiasco, Jorge Mendes Falcao transfer manipulation. We don’t have means to pull that off.
Ofcourse not all transfer would need that, but we would still need to stretch the regulations and as observed last year with Calum Chambers transfer; one slip up & we would have no argument if the hammer falls on us.
There is a reason why non sugar daddy clubs are risk averse.
West ham almost got punished for purchasing Mascherano & Tevez, Barcelona & A. Madrid were transfer banned, because they had no way to delegate the blame away from purchasing underage foreign talents.
Since there is a chance for the club to suffer, I cannot demand the club to not be by the books.