City and Financial Doping | Charged by PL with 130 FFP breaches | Hearing begins 16th Sep 2024 | Concluded 9th Dec 2024 - Awaiting outcome

GoonerBear said:
This is what I don't get. They say they haven't broken any rules. So let's believe them. In the space of what, little over a decade / 15 years, they went from near relegation candidates, to dominating English football winning 6 from 7 leagues, with multiple domestic cups along the way.

A perfect example that with rich owners, but more importantly a great strategy, you can grow organically within the rules, and become successful within the rules, to the point you dominate the game. So what the problem here, they should actually be held up as a perfect case study here, so why are they so up in arms now.....yeah something isn't quite adding up here like!
Click to expand...

My understanding is their current legal action relates to new rules voted in only in the past year, meaning they aren't protesting over anything in place during the time they built their success, only over the fact they won't be able to repeat the process going forwards. So it also shouldn't have any bearing on the charges which pre date the rules relating to the legal challenge.

They've been called up on charges for (allegedly) breaking the existing ffp rules, and now their work around to avoid breaking them has also been made against the rules, so I think it makes perfect sense for them to suddenly be up in arms about it, because their choice is either challenge the new rule changes or face being less successful.

Their discrimination argument only makes sense if you think that sponsoring yourself with your own money isn't giving you an unfair advantage in the spirit of ffp rules, which it (obviously) is. So I reckon what it hinges on is if the PL have been allowing other similar or comparable nonsense by other clubs, or have demonstrably directly targeted the rules in some way at City, which again its pretty obvious they have.

I don't think there's a good guy in all this unfortunately. It's just bickering over which unfair process is the less dubious.
 
Florida Man said:
Fundamentally, democracy is the rule/dictatorship of the majority over the minority. "Tyranny" is just a cynical way to put it, especially by City's side, and has been a term in use since the 1700s by political theorists.
Click to expand...

Democratic Dictatorship? :confused:
 
thisisnottaken1 said:
That’s unfortunately true about English/British people in general. The UK has nowhere near the revolutionary spirit as continental European countries like France do.
Click to expand...
I could not believe that in England most of the land is owned by nobility. You basically can’t by land. I cannot understand how English people is okay with that.
 
The thing that's missing from this whole discussion is that this is the most obvious / stupid way they could've funelled money into clubs and this one specific loophole is the thing that's closing. There are so many creative ways that have already been tried by other clubs and I'm sure City are in on the action and there's no comment about how to prevent those.

When Mbappe and I think CR7 / Messi got offers from the Saudis (and I think even from PSG), they were promising them all sorts of perks beyond just their wages. Business shares after their retirement, high profile administration posts etc.

Chelsea had Saudi investment in Clearlake capital. A totally legit way for the Saudis to protect their investment would be to funnel money from the Saudi league to Chelsea by buying players at inflated values. Who's to say what a fair value for a player is?

There were some rumors that Newcastle got Trippier on a discount because the rest of the money came as part of a totally unrelated to football contract between the Atletico owner and the Saudis.

There's the whole situation with Pep's brother having a share in Girona FC.

Ultimately the whole damn thing is corrupt and there's not a lot that can be done.
 
noodlehair said:
My understanding is their current legal action relates to new rules voted in only in the past year, meaning they aren't protesting over anything in place during the time they built their success, only over the fact they won't be able to repeat the process going forwards. So it also shouldn't have any bearing on the charges which pre date the rules relating to the legal challenge.

They've been called up on charges for (allegedly) breaking the existing ffp rules, and now their work around to avoid breaking them has also been made against the rules, so I think it makes perfect sense for them to suddenly be up in arms about it, because their choice is either challenge the new rule changes or face being less successful.

Their discrimination argument only makes sense if you think that sponsoring yourself with your own money isn't giving you an unfair advantage in the spirit of ffp rules, which it (obviously) is. So I reckon what it hinges on is if the PL have been allowing other similar or comparable nonsense by other clubs, or have demonstrably directly targeted the rules in some way at City, which again its pretty obvious they have.

I don't think there's a good guy in all this unfortunately. It's just bickering over which unfair process is the less dubious.
Click to expand...

Ah OK, thanks for the correction.
 
It’s funny how many neutrals have gone from not really caring, to wanting City kicked out the league with the release of this news. Nice one Abu Dhabi.
 
noodlehair said:
My understanding is their current legal action relates to new rules voted in only in the past year, meaning they aren't protesting over anything in place during the time they built their success, only over the fact they won't be able to repeat the process going forwards. So it also shouldn't have any bearing on the charges which pre date the rules relating to the legal challenge.

They've been called up on charges for (allegedly) breaking the existing ffp rules, and now their work around to avoid breaking them has also been made against the rules, so I think it makes perfect sense for them to suddenly be up in arms about it, because their choice is either challenge the new rule changes or face being less successful.

Their discrimination argument only makes sense if you think that sponsoring yourself with your own money isn't giving you an unfair advantage in the spirit of ffp rules, which it (obviously) is. So I reckon what it hinges on is if the PL have been allowing other similar or comparable nonsense by other clubs, or have demonstrably directly targeted the rules in some way at City, which again its pretty obvious they have.

I don't think there's a good guy in all this unfortunately. It's just bickering over which unfair process is the less dubious.
Click to expand...

The spirit of FFP is keeping the status quo at the top. What’s so good about a Corporatocracy? Besides it being good for you in the short term.

For example, Nike sponsors someone and nobody else is allowed to spend. It’s not like Nike’s money is ethical either. Sweat shops etc. I’m not sure what is worse a corporate mule or state owned club.

I think City may well have a case of racism, discrimination and xenophobia against their owners. A lot of it stems from jealousy and return on investment pressure from key stakeholders like Nike and Sky.
 
Worst club in the world, officially. Ever. Not even close
 
GoonerBear said:
This is what I don't get. They say they haven't broken any rules. So let's believe them. In the space of what, little over a decade / 15 years, they went from near relegation candidates, to dominating English football winning 6 from 7 leagues, with multiple domestic cups along the way.

A perfect example that with rich owners, but more importantly a great strategy, you can grow organically within the rules, and become successful within the rules, to the point you dominate the game. So what the problem here, they should actually be held up as a perfect case study here, so why are they so up in arms now.....yeah something isn't quite adding up here like!
Click to expand...
This is it 100%
Apparently having to wait to dominate everything was not acceptable and so they cheated and sped things up by a decade or so.
This truly is the nuclear option and I don’t think it’ll work out as they intended.
Any relationship with the PL and the majority of other clubs is in the gutter and will be as long as city owners stay in place.
It might take a while but in say 5 years time I think we’ll see that they have flushed x billion down the gurgler and city will be permanently expelled from the PL .
As others have said I’d be in favour of other teams refusing to play or putting out reserve sides against them and making a mockery of the whole thing (it is already that I know). Let them “win” whatever, none of it will matter and it never ever has.
 
NotThatSoph said:
It's a pretty common phrase. Tocqueville, Burke, etc.
Click to expand...
Your erudition is clearly beyond reproach, and I love your contributions, but this is overlooking the possibility the poster might be aware of this. In which case, their point still has legs.
 
The Purley King said:
This is it 100%
Apparently having to wait to dominate everything was not acceptable and so they cheated and sped things up by a decade or so.
This truly is the nuclear option and I don’t think it’ll work out as they intended.
Any relationship with the PL and the majority of other clubs is in the gutter and will be as long as city owners stay in place.
It might take a while but in say 5 years time I think we’ll see that they have flushed x billion down the gurgler and city will be permanently expelled from the PL .
As others have said I’d be in favour of other teams refusing to play or putting out reserve sides against them and making a mockery of the whole thing (it is already that I know). Let them “win” whatever, none of it will matter and it never ever has.
Click to expand...
The best part about City is that the UAE funded it to sportswash their reputation with excellence etc. and have actually only ended up further associating themselves with corruption, fraud and dodgy business dealings; the very reputation they are trying to escape.

Ironic.
 
Giggsyking said:
Click to expand...

Something that’s concerning me is that it’s “more than half” of teams which suggests it’s likely 11 or 12. There’s a key number, 14, which is required when voting on anything significant and I can’t help but think that for whatever reason we are not at that number yet and that could prove decisive if action beyond’s fines and sanctions is recommended by the EPL. If we were at that number I think the journalists would be making that connection already.
 
I don't see how they can win this...and they're basically admitting guilt with it at the same time.

Hope they're feeling that the inevitable is coming.
 
This was a premeditated attack on the league when the Premier League were already stretched with legal battles. This is a bad time for the league, the relationship between the league and its "champions" is at an all-time low.

Man, I'm so glad we beat them cheats in the FA Cup final. I think the FA were too, judging by the volume of content they have put out around United's victory.
 
Fortitude said:
This is the scourge the league let in and bedded down with. Now, they’re trying to destroy the fabric of the game as we know it.

Let’s see how the media treat them for this. It’ll be the biggest indication yet that they’re in cahoots if they entertain this scandalous behaviour.
Click to expand...
Exactly, the premier league and the government are culpable of this, i read somewhere that the government pressured the premier league to let the Saudis buy Newcastle which in turn forced the premier league to introduce the ATP rules.

Greed, facilitated buy oil rich Middle Eastern nations that own football clubs will destroy football as we know it but they won’t give a feck as long as they can buy the next big thing and essentially cheat their way to titles and I’ll doubt the media will say feck all seeing as they’re bosses are probably owned by the same people.
 
Interesting. Hopefully, this is the beginning of the end of state ownership in football. Either that, or it's the death of football. Fairly high stakes case, this one.
 
RoyH1 said:
Absolute monarchy owned sports washing project having a hard time understanding the concept of a democratic vote
Click to expand...
That’s it. Lawyers trying to advise a client who knows only obedience
 
Let's just hope that common sense prevails.

Keep your f*cking dirty oil money. Create your own middle eastern league and play with no rules. Please don't ruin centuries of history with your greedy and egoistic agendas. State ownership NO TY.

F*ckwits.
 
jigen said:
FFP is clearly illegal. You can't stop an owner from putting his money into his company.
Click to expand...

By this logic I can buy a mobile phone network, issue all contracts at £1 per month with the latest handset for free, wait for my competition to go out of business, then raise prices back to normal and be the only mobile network on the market. The huge losses deliberately sustained in stage one were just me ''putting money into my company'' after all, how can it possibly be illegal?
 
Wengerista said:
By this logic I can buy a mobile phone network, issue all contracts at £1 per month with the latest handset for free, wait for my competition to go out of business, then raise prices back to normal and be the only mobile network on the market. The huge losses deliberately sustained in stage one were just me ''putting money into my company'' after all, how can it possibly be illegal?
Click to expand...
He/she joined the Caf today, about 15 minutes after the story excl broke.

And despite that coincidence and one single anti FFP comment, apparently they’re a Chelsea fan.
 
I think this has finally broken blue moon, very hard to think you are innocent of something when you’re simultaneously suing the league to change the very thing you’re supposedly innocent of.
 
They just simply want to be allowed to be crooked and play by their own rules. It would be the best thing for British football if City get exactly what they deserve. The fighting every step of the way says it all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.