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

The same team did spend £120 million on Joao Felix to be fair.
 
Rob said:
Aged 24, scoring 11 and assisting 9 in 36 games, most of them coming on as a substitute.

I don’t think it does, no.

They won’t get it of course, but that’s another matter.
Click to expand...
From what I could find he started 31 of the games in the league, but still decent output considering he "only" played 2600 minutes, and not being the focal point of the attack.

70m fee probably a bit high, I would've guessed at around 60m but I don't think it's that outrageous.
 
SER19 said:
Id want us to spend that on him at maximum too. Crazy figure for an ordinary looking player. Not terrible looking stats at a completely dominant and cheating city side, but his argentina record is more representative. Never once did I feel concerned about him against united, despite there being games where it looked like most of their team was a risk.
Click to expand...
Yeah must say I kind of feel similar about him. When he just joined them and scored/assisted quite regularly from the bench or when he did start (from what my memory recalls anyway!), he seemed to be developing into a top player for them but since then, I’ve not felt the same about him.
 
Dave Smith said:
Why do people keep saying The FA?

City aren't being tried by The FA. They're being tried by the PL whose rules are made up by the clubs who are the 20 shareholders of the PL. It is also the reason why City have ran scared of this one.

Firstly, City have done their best to limit the discussion of the case in the press - which is the real reason why it has not had as much coverage as people would expect - and they've got so desperate they've even asked for 'legal hearings with the PL'. Anyone remember this:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...against-premier-league-over-sponsorship-rules

Well since that finished the PL has republished it's rules a few days ago with zero changes, so the liklihood is that City's legal argument did not win.

That argument was also never likely to win if people actually understood how the PL operates.

Unlike The FA - a non-for- profit organisation - the PL is a purely capitalist organisation that is run in a 'membership club format' (think golf club.) Unlike The FA, which has a very ingrained old boys club set up, with close ties to the Government/monarchy. The PL is purely about the self interest of the member clubs. So, unlike the FA who can be influenced/pressured politically the PL only really gets influenced by status and money. Or put another way, do you think the likes of the Glazers, Henry, PIF, Clearlake and Korenke are going to care more about foreign investment into the UK or increasing the value of their asset/status by having a more successful PL club (which will happen if they kill off City)? I know what I believe.

This is also before we even get to the fact the PL actually went ahead and charged City when they could've easily have brushed it under the carpet after the UEFA case imploded and how moronic they're going to look if City get off lightly.

For me, the only way City get out of a serious punishment is if they cam find a real and legitimate legal technicality that isn't some colloquial football one. Could that happen, for sure. However, it isn't going to be some timed barred sh*t this time.
Click to expand...
Smart post
 
Dave Smith said:
Why do people keep saying The FA?

City aren't being tried by The FA. They're being tried by the PL whose rules are made up by the clubs who are the 20 shareholders of the PL. It is also the reason why City have ran scared of this one.

Firstly, City have done their best to limit the discussion of the case in the press - which is the real reason why it has not had as much coverage as people would expect - and they've got so desperate they've even asked for 'legal hearings with the PL'. Anyone remember this:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...against-premier-league-over-sponsorship-rules

Well since that finished the PL has republished it's rules a few days ago with zero changes, so the liklihood is that City's legal argument did not win.

That argument was also never likely to win if people actually understood how the PL operates.

Unlike The FA - a non-for- profit organisation - the PL is a purely capitalist organisation that is run in a 'membership club format' (think golf club.) Unlike The FA, which has a very ingrained old boys club set up, with close ties to the Government/monarchy. The PL is purely about the self interest of the member clubs. So, unlike the FA who can be influenced/pressured politically the PL only really gets influenced by status and money. Or put another way, do you think the likes of the Glazers, Henry, PIF, Clearlake and Korenke are going to care more about foreign investment into the UK or increasing the value of their asset/status by having a more successful PL club (which will happen if they kill off City)? I know what I believe.

This is also before we even get to the fact the PL actually went ahead and charged City when they could've easily have brushed it under the carpet after the UEFA case imploded and how moronic they're going to look if City get off lightly.

For me, the only way City get out of a serious punishment is if they cam find a real and legitimate legal technicality that isn't some colloquial football one. Could that happen, for sure. However, it isn't going to be some timed barred sh*t this time.
Click to expand...
Excellent post. I couldn't put it any better, the premier league know it is dead if the PL top clubs ( United Arsenal Liverpool ) walk away.
 
Ish said:
Yeah must say I kind of feel similar about him. When he just joined them and scored/assisted quite regularly from the bench or when he did start (from what my memory recalls anyway!), he seemed to be developing into a top player for them but since then, I’ve not felt the same about him.
Click to expand...

Seems Gabriel Jesus went the same way.
 
Wait, people don’t rate Alverez?
 
I still don't understand why these scumbags are allowed to keep competing when refusing to hand over their financial documents.

Pretty stupid that the PL doesn't have some kind of rule in place that says if you don't hand over your financial reports, you're automatically disqualified until you do so.
 
Don't understand the fuss.
£60M sounds about right for a young decent striker.
 
SER19 said:
70m for alvarez :lol:
Click to expand...

Huge mistake for whoever buys him at that price

Incredibly overrated player because of two things:

1. He can look like a world beater because he has good ball striking, and makes good runs in behind for a team that dominates their opponents in every game, so he's often able to find himself with the ball in a lot of space. Also works hard and seems to have a good mentality, but his biggest strengths are not nearly valuable enough to make him a world class player.

2. Because he's won basically everything at a young age.
 
Rojofiam said:
Huge mistake for whoever buys him at that price

Incredibly overrated player because of two things:

1. He can look like a world beater because he has good ball striking, and makes good runs in behind for a team that dominates their opponents in every game, so he's often able to find himself with the ball in a lot of space. Also works hard and seems to have a good mentality, but his biggest strengths are not nearly valuable enough to make him a world class player.

2. Because he's won basically everything at a young age.
Click to expand...

Good summary
 
fe33er said:
I’m not sure where you get that from.
Click to expand...

Basic analysis.

You can find many players on the market with Álvarez's qualities who can perform on the same level as him if you put him into a well-oiled machine like City. Rashford on the other hand is a rare combination of power, pace, ball striking, carrying, x factor, etc. there aren't many inside forwards as good as him around, and even fewer that aren't already playing for big clubs.
 
Rojofiam said:
Basic analysis.

You can find many players on the market with Álvarez's qualities who can perform on the same level as him if you put him into a well-oiled machine like City. Rashford on the other hand is a rare combination of power, pace, ball striking, carrying, x factor, etc. there aren't many inside forwards as good as him around, and even fewer that aren't already playing for big clubs.
Click to expand...
Stop it please. Alvarez might not have a better top ceiling than Rashford but he will turn up every week and contribute to the side. Rashford doesn’t have a lot to his game, runs down back alleyways and is not a team player. When he turns up he can provide moments of magic but that is rare.
Alvarez has plenty of time on his side to develop and money aside i’d swap them without hesitation. Alvarez probably turns up to training every week as well.
 
Rob said:
As crooked as they are, 70m doesn’t sound ridiculous for a player like Alvarez.

Annoyingly good signing.
Click to expand...
Bouremouth are quoting £65mil for Solanke. Who would folk rather have ? Solanke or £5 mil more for Alvarez?

Besides it's par for course for city. Did the same with Ederson and the Saudi club that wanted him. We don't want you to go, but if you want to then the buying club will have to pay a heafty premium.
 
Rojofiam said:
Basic analysis.

You can find many players on the market with Álvarez's qualities who can perform on the same level as him if you put him into a well-oiled machine like City. Rashford on the other hand is a rare combination of power, pace, ball striking, carrying, x factor, etc. there aren't many inside forwards as good as him around, and even fewer that aren't already playing for big clubs.
Click to expand...
:lol: rashford. Did you watch him last season. You couldnt miss him as he walked around the pitch barely breaking a sweat.
 
Do people not rate him or something? I thought he was meant to be an outstanding talent
 
You must log in or register to reply here.